On Wed, Nov 8, 2017 at 8:43 AM Peter Robinson <pbrobinson@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Wed, Nov 8, 2017 at 1:27 PM, Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek
<zbyszek@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> I propose simplifying this and opening fedora-release releases to more
> contributors:
>
> 1. Let's drop "upstream" at https://pagure.io/fedora-release and
> make the "downstream" the canonical source of the package,
>
> 2. Allow pull requests in src.fp.o/fedora-release,
I agree with both of these
> 3. With 1 and 2. implemented, it'll be easier for any fedora maintainer
> to suggest improvements to the package (through PRs) and it'll also
> be possible for proven packagers to do changes without stepping on
> the toes of the maintainers and interfering with the separate "upstream"
> repo. Let's agree to allow pps to update fedora-release as necessary
> when the main maintainers are busy.
I don't agree with this, there's often reasons for things and we often
get pull requests that are incorrect and need a couple of revisions.
I think I agree with Peter here. fedora-release is a package that probably *shouldn't* be granted access to provenpackagers.
That said, I think we should probably set a policy in place that releng will quickly merge any changes limited to presets that are acked by a trusted individual such as Zbigniew. We can write up some simple rules for this which would probably boil down to "Must have followed the preset request policy and include a comment pointing to the relevant BZ".
> 4. Release fedora-release quickly, so that when a preset change request
> comes in [1], it can be handled in a few days or a week. (Having such
> requests hanging usually blocks changes to the package in question,
> so it's important to have the resolution of the preset status without
> undue delay.)
There's no reason for that not to happen, and generally most of the
holdups that people perceive here are not actually the maintainers but
issues with the PR or the review of the actual changes being made.
I believe for such a critical package that has the ability to break
the distribution there should be review of the proposed changes.
I suppose the other thing we could try to do would be to separate the presets into its own package, but that seems like unnecessary overhead compared to coming up with a decent review-and-merge policy.
_______________________________________________ devel mailing list -- devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
