Re: concept of package "ownership"

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

 



2010/7/3 Michael Schwendt <mschwendt@xxxxxxxxx>:
> On Sat, 03 Jul 2010 03:40:57 +0200, Kevin wrote:
>
>>
>> It is part of the Fedora Objectives:
>> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Objectives
>> to "be on the leading edge of free and open source technology". Given that,
>> it is completely unacceptable to not upgrade software to the current release
>> in Rawhide (within a reasonable timeframe, of course we're all not available
>> 24/7) unless there's a really good reason to (in which case that reason
>> ought to be given in the bug report asking for the upgrade!), especially
>> when upstream is asking for their software to be upgraded.
>>
>> So the maintainer's decision (assuming there even WAS a decision rather than
>> just lack of time or worse) goes against Fedora's Objectives and so it's not
>> OK to say that it should just get accepted.
>>
>> We should really be more aggressive about allowing to upgrade other people's
>> packages in Rawhide if the maintainers don't do it within a reasonable
>> timeframe and don't document any good reason not to do the upgrade.
>
> Ridiculous. :( The way you've phrased it doesn't meet the "be excellent"
> guidelines IMO. There is nothing "completely unacceptable" or "against
> Fedora's objectives" with skipping certain upstream releases. And I hope
> that nobody will become "more aggressive" or try to force me (or other
> packagers) to upgrade packages. I don't want anyone among the Fedora
> contributors to be "aggressive" in any way when talking to me or when
> trying to make me do something.
>
> As a user or fellow packager [or upstream developer], you are free to
> suggest upgrades in a bugzilla ticket. And hopefully you evaluate the new
> release to examine it for changes compared with the previous release in
> Fedora, so you can give a rationale for your upgrade request. If you meet
> resistance, you'll have to live with that or return with a competent
> mediator.
>

I'm fully agree with you, but there are some maintainers who don't
respond on bugzilla at all or for a very long time. They may be still
active on koji, but they don't respond even when you attach a
patch/spec to solve known issues or request for co-maintainership.
Obviously, they cannot be defined as nonresponsive package
maintainers, so we have no process/policy to treat those packages.

I filled dozens of reports in bugzilla to request for updating long
unmaintained packages(more than 3 years) several months ago, no
packager respond yet.

Regards.
Chen Lei
-- 
devel mailing list
devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel


[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[Index of Archives]     [Fedora Announce]     [Fedora Kernel]     [Fedora Testing]     [Fedora Formulas]     [Fedora PHP Devel]     [Kernel Development]     [Fedora Legacy]     [Fedora Maintainers]     [Fedora Desktop]     [PAM]     [Red Hat Development]     [Gimp]     [Yosemite News]
  Powered by Linux