On Thu, Apr 26, 2012 at 12:58:59PM +0100, Nelson Marques wrote: > No dia 26 de Abril de 2012 12:40, Adam Williamson > <awilliam@xxxxxxxxxx> escreveu: > > On Thu, 2012-04-26 at 12:18 +0100, Nelson Marques wrote: > > > >> 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. > > > > This seems like a specific case of weirdness and nothing worth drawing > > general conclusions from. Why not just describe the specific situation > > here and see if it can be resolved instead of phrasing it as if it were > > a single example of a general problem? > > BZ718430 > So reading that with the meat seeming to come from here: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=757352#c5 it looks like Simon has been working on packaging what you were working on but hadn't gotten to submitting it for review yet (because he found problems with licensing that needed to be resolved). I don't read what he said in his comment as saying that he did not want you to work on your package.... Now... here's what I think the current process is supposed to look like. Simon's replied to the Fife bug saying that he's done some work on trying to package UH but maybe doesn't realize that you've already got an attempt at packaging it under review. Next comment from you could be: Hey Simon, I have also attempted packaging for UH and have a review request open for it here: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=718430 We've resolved some of the licensing concerns already but I'm not sure if we found and addressed the one that you're pointing out. I'm not a packager yet but I'd like to be. Would you be willing to review my package and give feedback on your current work? If you're a sponsor or would be willing to mentor me as a comaintainer of the UH package once it passes review then we could get a lot more done between the two of us. Thanks! So the big question is -- where did this break down? How can we update our documentation to guide people in this direction? -Toshio
Attachment:
pgp2a2bpm3Wwy.pgp
Description: PGP signature
-- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
