FC4 state of affairs and FC5

[Rahul Sundaram]

Hi

>Never the less, this does pose a question:
>These packages were available since the end of July. It too them a month
>and a half to enter -testing. We have no idea who users quit using FC
>due to this bug.
>  
>
You seem to be over estimating the reach of such bugs.

>How can the yet-to-be founded FC foundation help external contributers
>(Such as Mr. Adams) get their fixes into the system faster?
>  
>
There is no need to way for a foundation for such things. Users or 
developers can report such issues in bugzilla. Precise and helpful 
information will probably result in a quicker fix


>Second, how can the project facilitate the transfer of information,
>read, telling people that there's an available test fix in -testing, and
>that they should give it a try.
>(Assuming that most people, including myself, stay clear of -testing
>unless they really have to)
>  
>
You can subscribe to fedora-test list and setup filters for such 
announcements

>Another example:
>The python-gtksourceview has been solved in rawhide.
>There's no information about the fix (Read: what was the fix; what was
>changed; etc) in the bugzilla entry.
>  
>
The changelog will be included with the package update. rpm -q 
--changelog <package> will provide you this information


>Though I have no experience in Python, I'm willing to spend time trying
>to check if it can be back-ported to FC4.
>However, without the required information (about how the bug was
>solved); with no access to cvs (to see the change logs), there's nothing
>I can do.
>  
>
You do have read access to cvs and cvs commits lists

http://cvs.fedora.redhat.com/
http://mail.gnome.org/mailman/listinfo/cvs-commits-list

>Again, I'm well aware that the FC foundation is severely under-staffed.
>This is more of a reason to help external contributers help.
>
The staff count of FF is purely speculation on your part but more 
participants are welcome anyway

regards
Rahul