On Mon, 21 Oct 2013 18:08:09 +0200 Michael Schwendt <mschwendt@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Mon, 21 Oct 2013 09:52:32 -0400, Matthew Miller wrote: > > > > A few years ago we've been much better at talking about things and > > > coming to a conclusion. Nowadays I have the feeling "the > > > community" is fragmented too much. With some people avoiding > > > mailing-lists like the plague, some people lurking on IRC only, > > > other people preferring web based forums, others addressing > > > topics in personal blogs or during hallway meetings (and similar > > > face-to-face situations). > > > > I have this same feeling. I think we need to fix it; do you have any > > thoughts or ideas as to how? > > If people hate email lists in general (or the number of messages > posted to them), it cannot be fixed. > > As a first step, I suggest clearing up the intended usage of "devel" > list. There's too much traffic on that list. 792 messages so far in > October. Even if one uses filtering, the recurring task of skimming > over the devel list folder is tiresome, since it's not the only list > one is subscribed to. Not even meetings logs are posted to > devel-announce list, however. Good idea. What items could we move to announce that would be more useful for folks that don't have as much time/energy to skim the main list? fesco meeting agenda/minutes? (note that this would be weekly, so increase the announce list a good deal) Any other things that would be better as announcements? > The intended usage of "test" list has always been a problem. Once in a > while, somebody points that out, but there's nobody (no leadership) to > work on a change actively. Is it only for Test releases or also for > Rawhide? Its description is vague. Is there not any "testing and > quality assurance" for non-Test releases? Well, it's always been clear to me... test list is for any branched/rawhide issues. How can we improve the summary? Or does anyone disagree that that is the target? > Why doesn't the "packager" group doesn't have an own list? Why is the > description of the "packaging" list so brief and vague? Is it just me > who cannot tell when to choose which list? [ This mailing list > provides a discussion forum for RPM packaging standards and practices > for Fedora. ] What would the 'packager' list talk about? 'packaging' is about current and changing packaging guidelines (ie, a list for the FPC). > > Where is a list that devotes to managing the Fedora Project and its > multitude of policies and procedures? Such as the sponsorship process. > The description of the "advisory-board" list is vague. Should it have > been used for this thread instead of "devel"? I would say that is the devel list. > > Does FESCo still use a non-public list? There is a fesco private list, but it's very rarely used. In the past it's been for things like someone saying they won't make the next meeting or the like. Personally, I would prefer to just get rid of it. > What about the FPC? Are they limited to their IRC meetings? Why don't > they talk about anything on "packaging" list? > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging_Committee#Discussions > [ Discussion and decisions can also take place in the packaging > mailing list. ] They do/have in the past? I don't know why they haven't recently.. > Who is in charge of defining the sponsorship process? FESCo. > Who believes the current process doesn't work? At least a few folks on this thread I guess. > Does leadership think > it doesn't work? Or is it only a few (frustrated?) package > submitters, who don't want to attempt at contributing a single review > in several months? Not sure. I can only speak for myself, but I think we could do better... the long delays where people aren't sure they should be doing anything aren't good. > > In packagersponsors' trac I see sponsor request notification mails > flying by, and becoming a co-maintainer even is one documented way to > get sponsored. That part of the process works. In the review queue, I > see that some submitters _do_ visit other tickets and comment on > them, trying to learn about packaging for Fedora. > Currently, I don't think much is wrong (or not working) with the > sponsorship process. However, I'm not sure devel list is a good place > for new contributors to get in contact with other packagers and > potential sponsors. For example, there ought to be a list where > advertising submitted review requests is officially permitted. This list should be fine for those, IMHO. kevin
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
-- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
