Orphaning package

[Kevin Fenzi]

On Sat, 26 Apr 2008 22:35:37 +0200
alain.portal at free.fr (Alain PORTAL) wrote:

> Le samedi 26 avril 2008, Michael Schwendt a écrit :
> > On Sat, 26 Apr 2008 00:11:33 +0200, Alain PORTAL wrote:
> > > Hi,
> > >
> > > As I get too many conflicts, first with the french translation
> > > team six month ago, second with some Redhat people, today, with a
> > > big head (as several people in the french translation team), I
> > > make the decision to definitevely leave the Fedora Extras Team.
> >
> > Alain, can't these issues with people be fixed instead?
> 
> Unfortunately, I don't think.

Well, we can try... and if not, at least we could perhaps learn from it
and how to make things like this not happen again. 
> 
> No. Unfortunately, my english is to poor to have an intensive
> discussion to explain my anger and all blames I can do to several
> people. But you can get a little idea with these bugs:
> 
> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=139695

Yeah, I don't know what to say there. The maintainer clearly didn't
answer or do anything with the bug. ;( 

> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=197353

Sadly, I do see what happened here... 

The bug never seemed to block any of the review blockers bugs back when
extras reviews were doing that. So, it would never have appeared on
lists of packages to review, etc. :( Also, it shows as assigned, so
anyone who did see it would have assumed it was under review and left
it alone. Was it created assigned to notting? Did you use the template
on the new package review page on the wiki? or just manually created it?

> have a look in the man-pages-fr.spec file to see how often this
> package is update. In addition, I can tell you this package really
> need a review...
> 
> A one year old bug, easy to fix
> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=238070

Yeah. ;( No response from maintainer... 

> And the one that convinced me to get out
> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=443634

It's been reopened. I think it was closed in error, and the people
involved realize that now. 

So, I my thoughts on this: 

- We need to make sure and improve review process so reviews don't get
lost like that. I think a lot of improvement has been made since the
extras days however, since we have the fedora-review flag now, your
review flag would probably have had someone at least comment that it
was assigned, but didn't seem to be under review. 

- We need to work harder to spot where maintainers need assistance and
are not answering their bugs. Triage folks may be able to help there. 

- We need to work harder to identify easyfix bugs and get a group of
people able to go in and just fix them.

- Finally (and just speaking for myself), I would like to stress that I
am happy to listen to concerns or problems and try and get solutions to
happen. At every FESCo irc meeting there is a 'free discussion' period
at the end. On every FESCo scheduling post there is a chance to reply
to the list and bring up issues. Please, let us know where and when
there are problems so we can try and find some solution. 

kevin
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://listman.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-list/attachments/20080426/94207042/attachment.sig>