On Fri, 13 Feb 2015 14:00:07 +0000, Ian Malone wrote: > Actually, a question I have about this is how it will impact people > trying to become maintainers. When I last checked (it may have > changed) the only way to do that was to create a new package. That isn't the only way to become a packager. And it hasn't changed for a very long time: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Category:Package_Maintainers -> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/How_to_get_sponsored_into_the_packager_group Submitting a new package is just _one_ of multiple ways to find a sponsor, since it is an opportunity to demonstrate that you know packaging. > Typically that will be a package you're interested in getting into > Fedora which may be non-trivial and benefit from someone more > experienced doing it, or it might be somewhat arbitrarily chosen if > you want to help maintain an existing package. Again: we all need to start somewhere. There are enough people, who build software from source tarballs or who create private updates of existing src.rpms and who open bugzilla tickets requesting version upgrades. *That* could lead to becoming a co-maintainer. A bit of interest provided. Nowadays it is so much easier to contribute. You could still submit patch files via bugzilla, but it is to much more convenient to get direct commit access to the package and co-maintain it with other people. Provided that you are not pissed off by Fedora's guidelines or anything else related to Fedora. > So, is that implicit test (can you package according to the > guidelines?) going to become easier? Not every packager in the packager group can package "according to the guidelines" either. Don't think that all of them are 100% perfect packagers, who know all of the guidelines and who never do packaging mistakes. > Is it necessary to then have a > second level of approval before you can work on core packages if you > started on a non-core package? Should becoming a maintainer become a > bit more decoupled from the process of actually preparing a package? > This doesn't really affect the proposal at hand, but it would be useful to know. > More interesting would be whether packagers in an "outer ring" would be willing to improve their packages once mistakes are found? Even if that made it necessary to think about solutions and spend more time on those packages? Random fire'n'forget builds in a public Fedora repo would be something that would scare me. -- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
