On Mon, Apr 16, 2007 at 11:09:02AM -0500, Jon Ciesla wrote: > Ok. This seems rational, especially since you have much of the needed > work done. Have you looked at the bug list from this BZ and assessed what > your packages address and what they don't? I just did. Some parts like x86_64 support are already in, also some mismatching lib issues, the update requests and some crashes. What I know still exists as an issue is printing support, as this doesn't really exists in upstream either. > > On Mon, Apr 16, 2007 at 10:51:39AM -0500, Jon Ciesla wrote: > >> This: > >> http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/Policy/WhoIsAllowedToModifyWhichPackages > >> > >> would appear to give you the go-ahead to make corrections. > > > > You mean the part about "experienced packagers"? While I would like to > > call myself that, the definition on this page doesn't fit, I'm neither > > a release manager, nor a sponsor, nor memebr of QA/Security SIG, nor > > does this package belong to any SIG. > > > >> I'd probably skip the co-maintainership step, and just take > >> ownership after the completion of the AWOL process, assuming Richard > >> doesn't respond. According to the wiki, I can make that request > >> formally on Friday, which will then need FESCO approval, etc. > > > > Let's do it that way then, so nobody can complain. Perhaps even Rick > > shows up until then, and if not, we'll have done the proper procedural > > steps. > > > > FWIW I have ready to submit packages with the latest bits at ATrpms. > > > >> > On Mon, Apr 16, 2007 at 09:33:21AM -0500, Jon Ciesla wrote: > >> >> In the meantime, if you felt so inclined, you could request to be > >> added > >> >> as > >> >> a co-maintainer and start work on it now. :) > >> > > >> > doesn't that usually require consent from the primary maintainer who > >> > seems to be not reachable ATM? Otherwise point me to the steps I need > >> > to take, the > >> > http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/Policy/EncourageComaintainership > >> > doesn't cover that afaics. > >> > > >> >> > On Fri, Apr 13, 2007 at 09:24:26AM -0500, Jon Ciesla wrote: > >> >> >> I've been trying to follow up on some nx bugs, and have had little > >> >> >> success > >> >> >> getting a hold of Richard A. Stout, zipsonic@xxxxxxxxx, the > >> >> maintainer > >> >> >> of > >> >> >> both packages. These are the only two packages he maintains, and > >> >> there > >> >> >> are several untouched NEW bugs. > >> >> >> > >> >> >> If anyone knows how to contact him, > >> >> > > >> >> > The email you quote above is Rick's mail, all right. I've added him > >> to > >> >> > the Cc. If Rick is not available anymore for nx/freenx I would like > >> to > >> >> > pick these up. > >> >> > > >> >> >> please direct him to the AWOL bug I filed 2 weeks > >> >> >> ago:https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=234619 > >> >> > > >> >> > Is that's the procedure how AWOLs are probed? Just curious. > >> >> > > >> >> >> I hope he's out there, I use freenx every day. . . > >> >> >> > >> >> >> Jon Ciesla > >> >> >> > >> >> >> P.S. I assume since f-e-l is being closed this weekend, that AWOL > >> >> >> messages > >> >> >> should now go to f-m. I can edit the wiki to reflect this if this > >> is > >> >> >> correct. > > > > > > -- Axel.Thimm at ATrpms.net
Attachment:
pgpSGs2nt8JNS.pgp
Description: PGP signature
-- 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
