On 03/02/2012 03:21 PM, Toshio Kuratomi wrote:
Process looks like this:
* Guidelines updated
* Someone notices that the package does not follow the guidelines (Note that
this step does not require that the Guidelines were updated... the
packaging bug could have been missed during review or been introduced
later).
* That person files a bug.
* If the maintainer chooses to ignore the bug or refuse to fix it then the
matter is escalated.
- In an ideal world, it would probably go to FPC as a "can we change the
guidelines? I have this special case which I don't think you intended."
- In a less ideal world, or in the case where the FPC has already made
clear that they did intend it to apply in that case, it would fall on
FESCo to enforce the decision.
How would fesco enforce the decision? That would depend on the arguments
being made and the maintainer attitude. For instance, if the maintainer
said, I simply don't have time to fix this, "enforcement" would probably
that someone would fix it for them and apply the patch to the spec file.
OTOH, if the maintainer decided that they were going to revert any change
made to the package to fix the issue, FESCo would have to remove the
maintainer from the package and tell them they could not be a committer on
that package for a period of time. They might even remove the packager from
the packager group if the maintainer was uncooperative enough.enough.
Does FPC have any process to measure how many packages are affected by a
single change made to guidelines?
If so is it hard to implement the process I mentioned which hopefully
should keep packages according to guidelines and up to date?
JBG
--
devel mailing list
devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
