Jesse Keating wrote:
On Sunday 03 June 2007 09:27:50 Hans de Goede wrote:
Thats not entirely fair. There is a loots of traffic on the maintainers /
developer lists and much of the needed information is hidden deep down in
subject wise only semi or irrelevant threads. There have been little clear
announcements of changes, and when they were there the info was far from
complete.
Every new procedure that I initiated I tried my best to start a new thread
with a clear subject on the matter. I see the same things from others, such
as "Pushing updates for Fedora 7" thread. This is probably one of the most
maddening thing lately, so much complaint about communication with no
suggestions on how to make it better.
I think the big problem here is time, the merge has been rushed and good
documentation has been suffering from this.
Ideally when new tools like koji and bodhi get introduced, first some proper
documentation and detailed new workflow documents are written (preferably
before making / introducing the tool, to allow discussion). However due to the
time constrains there has been a serious lack of such documents. I'm not saying
that you or anybody's intentions weren't good, and yes mails were send, but
with very much incomplete / incomprehensible stuff in them.
As for the wiki that is currently very much out of sync with how things are
done in the merged world / out of sync with reality.
And you expect us to change it how? For god sakes if you run into a page that
is inaccurate, point it out to somebody, hopefully the person who made it
inaccurate by introducing a new policy. Maybe we need a tracker page
of 'inaccurate pages'. Don't just expect them to be fixed automagically,
point it out to somebody, change it yourself, do something. Don't just grow
more and more frustrated finally bitching about it generically on a list in
the middle of a long thread.
Well when the powers that be make radical changes to the workflow I would
_atleast_ expect them to update:
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackageMaintainers/NewPackageProcess
Which is the primary document to consult when you want to introduce a new
package, yet there is nothing about bodhi in this document.
I do not expect anyone to update all niche pages of the wiki, but is it to much
to ask to update a very important often consulted page like:
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackageMaintainers/NewPackageProcess
When there are workflow changes? Sure in about a week, when I hopefully truely
understand how bodhi works, I could edit it myself. But I would expect the
people introducing such changes to atleast show some minimal effort to keep the
most important pages of the wiki under the PackageMaintainers/ hierarchy up to
date.
Regards,
Hans
--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
