On 04/26/2012 02:30 PM, Jon Ciesla wrote:
On Thu, Apr 26, 2012 at 6:59 AM, Alec Leamas<leamas.alec@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On 04/26/2012 01:18 PM, Nelson Marques wrote:
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maintaining your own package or if we drop that outdated ownership model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:
[cut]
Still, besides this sad experience, isn't this the kind of cooperation we
should encourage? Now and then those great people with great apps want their
app in Fedora. Instead of saying "Wonderful, welcome", we send them a list
of an actually quite complicated set of requirements to become a packager.
But those people don't want that, they just want their application
packaged. And although they havn't the packaging skills, they know their
app. And that's actually a damned good starting point.
What I'm talking about is to tell these great people that there are two
ways to get their app packaged. One way is to become a packager, and so far
this discussion is about that path,. Obviously, the requirements here are
beyond knowing an app, though.
The other way should be to find, persuade (bribe?) a packager to take care
of the package in cooperation with the developer. As I understand it, there
is no such path today(?) I think it's a pity, because the cooperation
between a developer and a packager is actually a good way of doing it.
I've been asked to package things before, by friends, colleagues,
upstream devs, etc. My response it typically, "Oh, neat, I'd never
heard of that!"<rushes off to make an RPM and submit a review> I
know we have a wishlist, but I'm not sure it's being used by
non-packagers, or packagers for that matter.
Which is fine if you are friend, colleague or an upstream developer
knowing about you. Not all are ;)
Seems that when this happens, it's going the informal way - which is
good. But someone who just tries to read the webpages, will eventually
submit a bugzilla package review request. And in many cases things have
gone terribly wrong then IMHO.
I might be totally out in the blue, but my feeling is that there's a lot
of information on "How to become a Fedora packager" - but very little
about "How do I get my package into Fedora?". If this is true, it might
possibly reflect that this issue havn't been thought of as needed.
Being a newbie I havn't seen the fedora wishlist (but rpmfusions's). The
first thing which strikes me when I check it is that the there's no link
to the person who submitted the request. For me, this is essential -
having a motivated contact upstream makes a difference.
--a
--
devel mailing list
devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
