Packaging quality, assistance.

[Thorsten Leemhuis]

Hans de Goede schrieb:
> Thorsten Leemhuis wrote:
>> On 09.05.2007 14:45, David Woodhouse wrote:
>>> How about a tracker bug for each SIG?
>> Well, we never defined in more detail how Packaging SIGs should work.
>> Maybe we should create a small set of guidelines that all SIGs follow,
>> to get such questions answered once and for all and a common "look and
>> feel". I think we should do that, but don't care enough to do it myself
>> ATM. And we'll get the usual yelling "to much bureaucracy" or "that's
>> should be the decision of the SIG itself" of course...  ;-)
> A tracker bug sounds like a good idea actually, other then that not too much 
> rules please. (/me starts yelling: "to much bureaucracy"). Seriously, the Games 
> SIG works well, really well if you ask me,

Well, you mentioning the Games SIG got me to this: We IMHO need
guidelines for proper communication so non-SIG-Members are at least a
roughly aware of doings and decisions from the SIG.

Because that's what IMHO a big problem with the Games SIG. I'm
subscribed to a whole lot of fedora mailing lists, but I did not
subscribe to fedora-games-list. But as I package games even I would like
to know at least the most important things the Games SIG does or decides
-- changes to the games specific "Packaging guidelines" for example or
even a "we still exists, are healthy and got xyz new games into Fedora
in the past weeks" now and then.

IOW: A *short* monthly status mail to fedora-maintainers would be nice;
such posts would likely get included in the FWN. So that way you not
only keep non-SIG members up2date about the happenings; you also get
publicity and maybe find new packagers to join the SIG.

> but I wouldn't want to make what we
> do compulsory for other SIGs. Like wise I know the KDE SIG has weekly IRC 
> meetings, if that works for them fine, but it doesn't sound like something 
> which I envision the Games SIG doing soon.

Agreed.

> But as said a tracker bug, where SIG people can put themselves in the CC, and 
> where packagers needing help can add there bug, sounds like a good, clean and 
> simple plan. This same bug could be used by bug reporters who think a bug 
> warrants the SIG's attention.

+1

CU
thl