Thorsten Leemhuis wrote:
On 19.02.2007 10:47, Hans de Goede wrote:
The new parts look good, I still see little value in the:
"=== Don't (co-)maintain too many packages ===" and
"=== Other aspects of co-maintainership ===" pieces, they make the
whole document way too long to read with little added value IMHO.
I think they are worth it. I want to get new contributors into the
project and that is the first step into this direction for a alternative
way. Sponsorship doesn't scale endlessly.
It doesn't work already anymore. Just imagine *me* wanting to start
getting involved today (if I wouldn't have started years ago) -- I would
not know what to package as everything I use or I'm interested in is
packaged already. But I could start as a co-maintainer for another
package, without access to the buildsystem and observed by the primary
maintainer.
But if you have a better idea to get new people involved and grown up in
Fedora Packaging lang: tell us, as I really think that's hardly needed,
as otherwise we have a "open" Fedora (Core) sonn, that's only open to a
small group (~300 people) of formally Extras packagers, but still closed
to the rest of the world, as it doesn't find a way in. That would be
nearly no improvement.
I don't object to the message, but I feel an vision piece like this,
about how things should be, doesn't belong in a guidelines document, no
matter how soft/hard the guidelines in the document, the vision piece of
it doesn't give much guidance and thus belongs in a seperate document.
About there not being much interesting stuff left to package, I
disagree. I can still give a long list of somewhat pupolar games missign
(glchess for example) and currently I'm working on packaging
cross-compilers for the avr microcontroller and the gp2x handheld. But I
agree that it would be usefull to have a different entry path. The
problem here is, that most of us are currently maximally loaded with FE
"work", thus if we get co-maintainers we (I) don't want that to cause
any additional work, the concept of co-maintainers should lower the
actual workload of the primary maintainer. I myself would like to see a
couple of people who will be able to take a bunch of the more simple
packages of my hand, and that I then become the co-maintainer, watching
over their shoulder for a while to catch any grave mistakes.
Regards,
Hans
--
Fedora-maintainers mailing list
Fedora-maintainers@xxxxxxxxxx
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-maintainers
--
Fedora-maintainers-readonly mailing list
Fedora-maintainers-readonly@xxxxxxxxxx
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-maintainers-readonly
