Jason L Tibbitts III venit, vidit, dixit 2023-12-01 22:41:54: > So I've been in this situation, both on the receiving end of nasty flames > because I dared touch someone else's package and having duplicated work > because I didn't check before trying to update something. > > >>>>> Michael J Gruber <mjg@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> writes: > > > So, due to me following my package (notmuch) > > The idea is that it's really the community's package, but you have > indicated that you will take a primary role. That doesn't mean that > nobody else will ever touch the package. Communication is encouraged, > of course. > > https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/packaging-guidelines/#_spec_maintenance_and_canonicity > > > ... and get a reject because someone thought that pushing directly > > without asking or at least notifying the maintainer would be in order: > > This is collaborative maintenance. Occasionally you get ninja'd. It > happens. Certainly it's annoying when it happens but it's not evidence > that anyone did anything wrong. > > If there is something wrong with the work of the maintainer who got > there before you did, then you can always push a revert, bump and build > your own copy. And of course have a discussion with them. > > If there isn't anything wrong with the work of the other maintainer, > then I guess I don't understand. They did something in an honest > attempt to save you the trouble and because of unfortunate timing they > didn't actually save you any trouble. But you aren't in a different > position than if they hadn't tried to help. (Excluding the time it took > to start this discussion, of course.) > > > I am sick of this. Really. I am so sick of this way of stomping on > > each others' feet. > > I can only say that the best thing to do in this situation is to say > "thanks; would you mind sending me a note on [IRC|Matrix|email] in the > future so we don't duplicate effort?" and move on. Surely it's not > worth strong emotions. > > > It's made worse by failing automated notifications, of course. Not > > from pagure about the push nor from koji about the build nor from > > bodhi about the update. > > Now that is a true issue, and perhaps the real underlying issue here. > If you invested time that you didn't need to invest because you didn't > receive a notification that the work had already been done, then that is > problematic. And yes, it would be incredibly beneficial to > collaboration if that were fixed, if only because it would help to > prevent situations such as the one under discussion. But please don't > take that out on the person who had no motivation other than to help you > out. You are all missing the point that this is not about a (co-) maintainer but a proven packager. And that "regular maintainership" is not what this role is for. And it's definitely not what most of them do. Even as (co-)maintainer I see this as team work, at least among those who signal interest. If "main admin" doesn't signal that then what does? But hey, I can learn, such as not to care either. Just push and build where you have access. So much easier. Done with this for now. Michael -- _______________________________________________ devel mailing list -- devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
