Proposal: Repository Community Collaboration Statement

[Tim Jackson]

I have a feeling I might regret this, but if nobody tries....

I have written up below a proposed simple statement of collaboration 
which ideally a number of interested parties in different repositories 
(EPEL, Fedora, RPMforge, AT etc.) could sign up to.

At this stage I'm interested mostly in whether people like the broad 
principle, rather than picking apart specific wording as I'd rather this 
didn't descend into a discussion about semantics or politics. Basically: 
  is this something that people feel could form the basis of something 
they'd be willing to sign up to? Or should we all just go back to 
arguing about repotags?

---------------------------------------------------------------------
Repository Community Collaboration Statement
---------------------------------------------------------------------
This is a statement signed by a number of groups which produce add-on 
RPM packages for the following operating systems:

- Fedora Linux
- Red Hat Enterprise Linux and compatible derivatives

This statement is not binding and does not by itself compel anyone to do 
anything. Any signatory may withdraw at any time. However the 
signatories have agreed to the principles contained within it and commit 
to working together for mutual benefit.


1. Statement of goals

The signatories have as a high level objective the development of 
packages for the targeted operating systems which are technically sound, 
robust and give an excellent user experience. Whilst acknowledging that 
"mixing repositories" will always be somewhat unpredictable due to 
differing goals and standards amongst signatories, the signatories aim 
to promote informed choice amongst users by avoiding unnecessary user 
inconvenience when switching between competing packages.


2. Acknowledgement of independence

Each signatory is independent and fully entitled to operate in a 
self-sustaining way which does not depend on other signatories. This 
includes all senses but notably infrastructure and policy. This 
Agreement does not override the signatories' own policies, though it is 
expected that signatories will normally make reference to this Agreement 
in their own policies.


3. Acknowledgement of peer status

For the purpose of this Agreement, the signatories agree to act as peers 
and no signatory is considered superior.


4. Main agreements

The signatories agree therefore to promote the following standards 
amongst their contributors:

a)to make reasonable efforts to research existing packages (if any)from
   other signatories before starting to package a certain item of
   software from scratch

b)to make reasonable ongoing efforts to keep competing packages as
   similar as possible, particularly in the sense of RPM dependencies and
   file locations, such that upgrades or migrations between different
   repositories are not unecessarily difficult for users

c)to avoid wherever possible publishing packages which are egregiously
   incompatible with packages from other signatories, without sound
   technical reasons

d)to attempt to collaborate constructively at an intellectual level with
   other signatories and their contributors where reasonably possible,
   particularly where a contributor feels there are specific technical
   deficiencies in existing signatories' packaging; the signatories
   acknowledge that it is better to discuss these differences in an open
   and respectful fashion and try to reach a consensus solution, rather
   than creating incompatible packages.


SIGNATORIES:

[list]

-----------------------------------------------------------------------


Tim