Why is the fedora.us (Fedora Extras) repository growing so slowly??

[Warren Togami]

Jaap A. Haitsma wrote:
> Michael,
> 
> Don't you think that a "bit of noise" on for instance the fedora-test 
> mailing list (if that's ok with RedHat) would help.
> Many people read that list and the probability of somebody interested in 
> helping out therefore will increase.
> 
> Jaap

Every once in a while I have been doing exactly as you suggest with 
certain packages that I thought several people would be interested in, 
but in most cases I get almost ZERO responses.

https://bugzilla.fedora.us/show_bug.cgi?id=520
For example on more than two occasions I have mentioned powernowd, which 
I believe would be extremely beneficial to any laptop owner.  When used 
with the 2.6 kernel cpufreq_userspace interface, it allows dynamic CPU 
speed adjustment based upon current load.  It has been tested to work 
well with Athlon and VIA processors, and should theoretically work fine 
with Intel SpeedStep too if cpufreq works with your laptop.

Packages will sit forever in fedora.us QA if nobody bothers to even 
comment on them.  And it is not useful to only say "It builds and runs 
fine for me."  as this says nothing about spec file correctness and the 
security of the included sources.  People that want to seriously 
contribute to package development and QA must show that they actively 
follow each point of the http://www.fedora.us/wiki/QAChecklist and 
consistently give good advice more than several times in order to build 
trust.

I am working on some ideas for fedora.us QA policy changes that should 
speed the publication of certain packages without lowering the bar of 
security requirements.

One example of a loosening of requirements might be:
http://www.fedora.us/pipermail/fedora-devel/2003-December/002370.html

Warren