Proposal: Repository Community Collaboration Statement

[Rahul Sundaram]

Thorsten Leemhuis wrote:
> Tim Jackson schrieb:
>> Rex Dieter wrote:
>>
>>> Tim Jackson wrote:
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------
>>>> Repository Community Collaboration Statement
>>>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>>> +1000000!  Fantastically awesome, imho.
>> Thanks for the support Rex. But is there really nobody else who is
>> interested in this or has any comments? Either way? From either EPEL or
>> other repos? I won't be offended if everyone thinks it's a waste of time
>> and energy, but I was hoping that it might offer a positive way forward
>> and any constructive comments are welcome.
> 
> I'm actually a bit unsure myself about that and was watching what
> comments show up before commenting myself.
> 
> My biggest concern: I think a "Repository Community Collaboration
> Statement" nothing that should be specific to EPEL. On the Fedora-site
> it should be signed by Fedora itself, to cover both Fedora repos and
> EPEL. Thus FESCo or the Board is likely the better place to go. As Rex
> is in both Committee's he's maybe a good person to poke ;-)

Yep. Individual maintainers shouldn't be asked to sign on a document 
like this. We have to make a project wide policy on this. It is just 
common sense guidelines. There is nothing inherently EPEL specific about 
third party repository collaboration.

On Fedora excluding EPEL most of the active maintainers of third party 
repository are already working with the project (atrpms, freshrpms, 
kde-redhat etc) and there is a separate effort to have rest of the 
packages that don't fit into Fedora's legal requirements into a single 
third party repository too.

A similar situation for third party repositories for EL would be very 
good for both contributors and end users. If third party repos have very 
different policies, it should be transparent to end users what the 
target audience and level of collaboration is.

Rahul