Max Spevack (mspevack@xxxxxxxxxx) said: > So let's look at the process for a single package, making its way from > "Core" to "New World": > > 1) Package is reviewed under the current Fedora guidelines. As these > reviews happen, the guidelines that we have are always up for intelligent > discussion. > > 2) Once a package passes review, a couple of things have to happen > a) Current maintainer (someone who is @redhat.com) needs to agree > to a freeze. > b) Current maintaner needs to get a Fedora account. > c) Package's "upstream" is moved from internal CVS and build > system to external CVS and build system (basically Extras) > d) Current maintainer decides if anyone else should have > "maintainer" ACLs at this time > e) Development resumes > > Is that basically the right model? Am I forgetting any major concerns > that have previously been voiced? What steps am I missing? Well, there has been plans of a two-stage merge. For anything that's reasonably on the edges of Fedora (i.e., isn't a dependency of the world), we could do moves before 'the big switch', which would be done in a one-off basis as stated above. However, for the vast majority of packages, there will be a simple drop-dead date where they are moved en-masse. The Fedora account requirements, etc. will all still be there, but it will be a period where we shut down all CVS for a few hours to do this. > I have a few other questions too: > > 1) What is the process for new folks being given "maintainer" access to a > package that is in the New World? I think it's simply a matter of the > current maintainer saying so, and the proper access being given in CVS? > But *who* is the person/persons who actually makes that happen? The maintainer (or a CVS administrator) does that by editing the ACL. > 2) What are we going to call the new repo, from the /etc/yum.repos.d/ > perspective? In fact, my larger question is "what will f7's > fedora-release package look like? One repo to rule... <WHACK>. Sorry about that. Right now we have core, extras, devel, extras-devel, updates, and updates-testing. This would be trimmed to simply release, development, updates, and updates-testing. > 3) How are we going to deal with the worst case scenario, which is > packages that fail review, or for which the current @redhat.com maintainer > doesn't do anything to help prepare for the merge? Pointy sticks, pitchforks, managers? Bill -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
