----- Original Message ----- > From: "Nelson Marques" <nmo.marques@xxxxxxxxx> > To: "Development discussions related to Fedora" <devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > Sent: Thursday, April 26, 2012 2:18:50 PM > Subject: Re: Proposal for revitalizing the sponsorship process for packaging > > No dia 26 de Abril de 2012 01:08, Stephen Gallagher > <sgallagh@xxxxxxxxxx> escreveu: > > On Wed, 2012-04-25 at 22:43 +0000, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" wrote: > >> > >> Why not just drop the sponsorship process and just raise the > >> barrier of > >> entry for the packaging process instead? > >> > >> Like having to have been a comaintainer for atleast one release > >> cycle > >> then completed x many reviews in the next etc. ( essentally what > >> you > >> propose there just without the "sponsor" ) and finally you are > >> maintaining your own package or if we drop that outdated ownership > >> model > >> we have in place are free to roam "free" in the packaging > >> community and > >> assist when ever, where ever possible... > > > > This approach completely disregards the very common example of "I'm > > an > > upstream maintainer of a cool project. I want to package and > > maintain it > > for Fedora." Under your approach, they'd first have to become > > involved > > in other projects before being allowed to add their package. This > > is > > unacceptable and would basically guarantee that no upstream would > > willingly involve itself with Fedora. > > I was asked by a upstream to maintain a package for Fedora due to the > high demand it has from Fedora users, unfortunatly I backed down from > the proposal for several purposes: > > 1) Someone claimed to own the package since 2009, but there's no > packages at all available on Fedora (weird huh ?); Upstream confirms > that they never got any information about this. > 2) For newcomers the review process takes way to long... Not long > ago > a 3 year old request was approved... I have pending reviews for > nearly > a year... > > For this situation in particular, upstream is providing Fedora/RHEL > RPM's through a competitors service, openSUSE Build Service. This is > by far not elegant at all :) > > The review process needs to be faster... And I go further... On my > dayjob we mirror a lot of stuff from EPEL which is mainly the only > repository we have trust with. We have people available to maintain > other packages on EPEL, and some of my colleagues are even part of > upstream in many cases (perl modules, java stuff, etc)... But we > can't > contribute to EPEL for example with reviews that take countless time. > Currently we're preparing yet another public repository with our own > packaging and enhancements because reviews take a huge ammount of > time... Though this contributions would be mainly aimed to EPEL which > is what we use. Well, if you are at least 2 guys you can do reviews for each other and the speed of the review will depend on you two only. I can ensure you that a number of people act this way. Find a number of people having similar interests as you and help each other to speed up the thing. Alex > > I find hard to become a packager for Fedora specially when there's > already background experience with another vendor. > > NM > -- > devel mailing list > devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel -- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
