On Fri, 2007-05-04 at 12:24 +0200, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote: > My 2 cent: Fedora needs both maintainers and packagemonkeys (as you call > them). > > Packagemonkeys (and in my interpretation of the term) can do lots of > good work IMHO: > > - package apps > - update them now and then > - making sure they work well > - look at bugs > - fix the trivial bugs > - forward bugs upstream > > E.g. they can do relative easy kind of maintenance work without even > know a programming language. Thus they are helpful for the project as a > whole and can do some "easy tasks" while real "maintainers" with more > skills can concentrate on the stuff that harder to fix or realize. > > In the end we might have an overall better distro with lots of packages. > And with a bit of luck a lot of packagemonkeys become real maintainers > over time. You could be right. But they _MUST_ file the bugs seeking assistance where required. > P.S.:Packagemonkey sounds bad and we should not use the term IMHO. It's a term which is precisely suited to the task. Nobody seemed to offer a better one last time I asked. I like monkeys. > Anyway, just in case anyone wonders: I consider myself as a package > monkey, as I never found time to learn programming properly :-/ I also consider myself a package monkey, for certain packages. I'd like to get rid of bluez-*, for example, since they seem to be more and more based on dbus, about which I am entirely clueless. -- dwmw2 -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
