On Mon, 12 Feb 2007 14:52:23 +0100, Goede, J.W.R. de wrote: > I'm glad people agree, now it would really help if people > would stop asking @redhat.com people to open-up as if this > is a unilateral thing, things need to come from two side > both from the @redhat.com people and from us. > > Hence I would like to see other FE contributers to join my > offer to help out @redhat.com with specific bz id's or > specific packages which which the @redhat.com people feel > comfortable opening up / could really use help with. There's a long thread about that on one of the community's internal lists. Eh? What? -- Yes, a lot of things about the Merge are unknown and planned in closed circles. Joking aside! The community doesn't have an internal list. But to me it is no surprise that external fedora lists are no success, when essential communication about Fedora seems to be internal to Red Hat. Moving packages from internal cvs at Red Hat to Fedora Extras cvs is not everything. Moving (and closing down) some lists ought to happen, too, as we are caught in a redundant web of lists, where it is cross-posted again and again because nobody knows whom to reach in what place. Package ownership in Core doesn't seem to be clear in all cases either, as some maintainers have already expressed that they wish to give a package to somebody else. It is only a matter of time before the community will learn what packages in the merged set of packages will be orphaned unless somebody from the community picks them up. -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
