[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

Re: closing out old bugs of unmaintained releases

On Wed, 2008-01-09 at 09:39 +0100, Michael Schwendt wrote:
> On Wed, 09 Jan 2008 07:16:22 +0100, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote:
> > On 08.01.2008 22:53, David Woodhouse wrote:
> > > Perhaps one option would be for non-programmer packagers to team up with
> > > a programmer/sponsor to take on the task of package maintenance? 
> > 
> > Don't put more bureaucracy or hurdles in the way. That won't scale and
> > will frustrate people and some will feel a second-class citizen
> Not just that, it is completely unrealistic to hope that there would be
> enough volunteers to fill the "programmer/sponsor" role.
That's true, but my answer is different than yours: I feel the current
sponsorship/tutor/mentor model is dead, because the infrastructure and
the packaging workflow are not in a shape suitable for such a model to
work out and because some "maintainers" are unwilling to team up.

> > What
> > IMHO would be good instead of what you outline: groups of people (SIGs)
> > a package-monkey can contact if he needs help to fix or improve
> > something needs programming skills.
> Is it necessary to increase complexity of the Fedora Project's structure
> by adding lots of small SIGs like that?
Why not? They collect people with common interests. IMO, a good thing.

But, as the perl-sig issue (JPO AWOL) in late last year demonstrated,
the real issue which is preventing such groups from working out on
collaborating on package maintenance, is Fedora's infrastructure 
(esp. ACLs).


[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]