On Thu, 26 Apr 2012 10:45:53 +0200, MR (Matthias) wrote: > On 26/04/12 09:45, drago01 wrote: > > Well the idea was that a sponsor is a trusted packer so why would he > > "demolish all packages"? > > IMO the bar for being a provenpacker shouldn't be that high. Having > > more manpower (as in people that can fix things globally) should be > > something we want .... > I fully agree! > > Yes, we trust our packagers(!), and I'm not aware of any "demolishion"! That's because we don't expect any packagers to run wild in git or koji. Sponsorship of new packagers is not about trying to prevent people from getting access to do something malicious, but simply an attempt at only providing access to people who won't need too much hand-holding during their future package maintenance work. It doesn't make much sense to approve anybody, who will be overwhelmed with the first version upgrade in git, with the first bug report in bz, with the first build problem in koji, and so on. Especially not, if it's a person that does not contact the sponsor/mentor to ask for help, but leaving the project silently. Some sponsors do monitor new sponsoree's commits for some time, but that is not substitute for real communication about Fedora Packaging. > To become a proven packager, you have to request becoming one and have > to motivate, why someone should promote you. Looking at fesco protocols > it looks like this barrier is pretty high. There were a few proven > packager requests denied in the past. Which is no surprise actually. The number of packages somebody has adapted (either via orphans in pkgdb or own submissions) is less important than the actual capability to handle those packages including API/ABI breaks and the activity related to bug-fixing and/or bugzilla<->upstream collaboration. -- Fedora release 17 (Beefy Miracle) - Linux 3.3.2-8.fc17.x86_64 loadavg: 0.16 0.09 0.07 -- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
