On Sat, Dec 20, 2008 at 7:17 AM, Patrice Dumas <pertusus@xxxxxxx> wrote: > Maybe the idea was to replace "Experienced packagers" by provenpackager > group members? If so it should really be done. And it is not a small > change, because the provenpackagers group is much bigger than the > "Experienced packagers" group (though the SIG stuff allows for > interpretation here, and there could be people considered to be > "Experienced packagers" because they are in a SIG, though they are not > provenpackagers). So the discussion of the size of 'provenpackager' has come up many times to FESCo. What we were considering (but AFAIK haven't done yet) is calling for voluntary removal of folks from 'provenpackager' who were seeded in the group but don't need the access. There are 281 people in the group today. I'm prepared to send a group e-mail out to this effect. I'd like to try the first option and see where it gets us, but are there any other options in the eyes of the community that would work? We really want provenpackager to work the way that it was originally intended. Another option has been re-seeding the group with only sponsors as was originally proposed, however I'm sorta on the fence about that one. What do folks think? -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
