On 27.06.2007 18:26, Brian Pepple wrote: > [...] > You want something to be discussed? Send a note to the list in reply to > this mail and I'll add it to the schedule [...] The EPEL SIG in its yesterday meeting discussed something that FESCo likely explicitly should discuss once: There are some EPEL maintainers that want to see some packages in EPEL that are owned by other people. The EPEL contributors are willing to maintain those packagers theirselfs in EPEL if the Fedora owner doesn't want to -- but they don't want to step on anybody toes, so they normally ask the Fedora maintainers first. Some don't answer; we likely need some kind of semi-official way to get those packages into EPEL anyway. The comaintainership-proposal has some things about it already (e.g. the Fedora maintainer can't say "no, I don't want my package to become part of EPEL" iirc), but a standard-procedure might be best for all. I'd suggest something like this: ---- If a EPEL maintainer wants to get a Fedora package into EPEL he should checks the ContributorStatus document, located in the wiki at http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/EPEL/ContributorStatus If the Fedora maintainer of the package issued to not participate in EPEL then the EPEL maintainer can request the branch directly via the standard procedures (e.g. via bugzilla currently; best to CC the Fedora maintainer, so he knows that the package is maintained in EPEL as well). If it's unclear if the Fedora maintainer of the package participates in EPEL then the EPEL maintainer should just mail the Fedora maintainer and ask him for his plans for EPEL in general and the package at hand. If there is no answer within seven days the EPEL contributor is free to request the EPEL branch (CC the Fedora maintainer here as well). If the Fedora maintainer sooner or later wants to participate in EPEL then the EPEL maintainer of the package should hand primary per release maintainership back to the Fedora maintainer (and become comaintainer, if interested) ---- Does that sound sane and acceptable for FESCo (and of course those reading this mail)? Sure, one week if a short timeframe, but EPEL should be known by know and at least have updated http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/EPEL/ContributorStatus ; I'd further like to have some quick procedure, because everything longer then one or two weeks would slow EPEL down; and, as written, the Fedora maintainer can get his package back later if he wants. CU thl -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
