On Mon, Dec 16, 2024 at 7:22 PM Al Stone <ahs3@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > On 16 Dec 2024 08:08, Stephen Smoogen wrote: > > On Fri, 13 Dec 2024 at 20:33, Josh Stone <jistone@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > > On Tuesday (2024-12-10), the Fedora Engineering Steering Committee > > > (FESCo) met in a private meeting to discuss whether Fedora contributor > > > Peter Robinson should retain his provenpackager privileges. Over the > > > last year, multiple private tickets have been opened with FESCo > > > regarding Peter’s packaging behavior. In particular, on numerous > > > occasions Peter has pushed uncommunicated updates to packages he has no > > > prior relationship with, interfering with those packages’ maintenance > > > efforts. On at least a few occasions, this has resulted in other > > > maintainers being forced to react to these changes with no coordination > > > or notice. > > > > > > > I know that these sorts of matters are hard to deal with, but this entire > > thing comes across more as something from the mythological Star Chamber > > than something I would expect from Fedora. > > Absolutely agreed. I find this sort of behavior by FESCo unacceptable. > Indeed. There are just so many things that are wrong on how this was conducted IMO: * A private trial but a very public sharing of the verdict. * Sharing the decision before having a public summary of the accuser's supposed wrongdoings as a PP and the arguments of the FESCo members / their vote. * The fact that one of the complainers is a FESCo member and was allowed to vote. * That Peter was not given the opportunity to defend himself. > > Yes, Peter is hard to get along with at times, and yes he can be brusque, > > pushy, and grumpier than any mule or cow I have had the 'pleasure' to work > > with, and I have been at the tail end of his tongue multiple times over the > > years in Fedora. Yet in all those years, I have also known that his work > > has been in service of the parts of the project he has been given charge > > of, be it architecture or package sets. Of the many people I have seen > > problems with 'proven packager' he has been the least likely I would > > consider 'dropped from Proven Packager'. > > I have worked with Peter for years; I consider him a friend, so my > opinion is biased. Having worked with software/hardware developers > for several decades, I find him no more rough around the edges than > most anyone in the industry :). Regardless, one does not become PP > without some demonstration of Doing The Right Thing for Fedora, and > that has always, always, always, been my experience in working with > Peter -- not only in Fedora, but at Linaro, and at Red Hat. > Al's comments almost exactly match my thoughts. I consider Peter my friend and I could have some bias too, but in the years that I worked with him I always had the impression that his actions were to improve Fedora. This decision greatly erodes my trust in FESCo and decreases my motivation to contribute to the project. I don't understand what was the goal exactly of making this a public announcement rather than just notifying the decision to the affected person. And I also don't understand what was the hurry to do it before having a public summary to share with the Fedora community. Given that this was the first time that PP rights would be revoked, wouldn't it be better to not act in a rush and try to make the process as transparent and fair as possible? Best regards, Javier -- _______________________________________________ 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
