On Tue, Dec 05, 2023 at 11:18:57AM +0100, Vít Ondruch wrote: [snip] > Granted, these are dissimilar to initial Michaels's issue. But how can I be > sure that if I touch some of the packages, I won't be told that they were in > such state for purpose? IMHO all changes should be opened as merge requests in pagure. This gives the regular package maintainers a window of opportunity to review the change before it is merged. If there's no response from the package maintainer after a couple of weeks then a proven packager can go ahead and approve the merge request. Essentially proven packagers can follow the same workflow as anyone else does for contributing to a package that they are not a (co)maintainer of. They just need the extra priv of being able to approve their own MR at their discretion. Pushing directly to git, bypassing merge requests, should not be required in order to achieve what provenpackagers exist to do. At the same time I think it is good to remember that Fedora package maintainers should think of themselves as guardians, not owners, and thus should expect to receive contributions from others, including provenpackagers, doing cleanups to follow Fedora guidelines better. With regards, Daniel -- |: https://berrange.com -o- https://www.flickr.com/photos/dberrange :| |: https://libvirt.org -o- https://fstop138.berrange.com :| |: https://entangle-photo.org -o- https://www.instagram.com/dberrange :| -- _______________________________________________ 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
