Petr Pisar wrote:
> I don't think group responsibility works. The result is every group
> memeber says it does somebody else and then bugs will never get fixed.
Group responsibility has been working fine for KDE SIG ever since its
inception with the Core-Extras Merge in Fedora 7. No matter who the official
primary maintainer is, the core KDE packages are de facto all SIG-maintained
and we all feel responsible for them. I don't see why such a model wouldn't
work for other SIGs nor why we still don't have pkgdb support for this (all
the core KDE packages should probably be owned by a kde-sig group, and a
bunch of KDE-related packages comaintained by the SIG).
> Once you get your packages for free modifications by a group, then you
> cannot expect they do not divert from your packaging standards.
Of course you need to accept some compromises, like in any other team-
maintained code. So it helps to agree on a SIG-wide standard. But I don't
see why this would be a problem for specfiles any more than for upstream
projects, many of which are team-maintained. (In fact, the whole purpose of
the Fedora packaging guidelines is to have a common standard for packages,
but some stylistic issues are deliberately left unspecified there and should
be agreed on in the SIG.)
Kevin Kofler
--
devel mailing list
devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
