FESCo Meeting Summary for 2008-03-20

[Kevin Kofler]

Brian Pepple <bpepple <at> fedoraproject.org> writes:
> === Packages w/o guidelines ===
>       * FESCo approved a proposal for the Fedora Packaging Committe
>         (FPC) to determine when guidelines are needed for a type of
>         packages (ex. java), and will hold all such packages from
>         entering the package collection until a basic set of guidelines
>         is approved. *Please note that Java guidelines are up for
>         approval at next week's FPC meeting. 
>               * For: bpepple, dwmw2, tibbs, nirik, f13, warren, spot,
>                 dgilmore 
>               * Against: jeremy 
>               * Abstain: notting, jwb 

It's sad that FESCo is abusing the trust of the contributors who elected them 
by voting for such a resolution, when it's far from clear that Fedora package 
maintainers in general favor this. See for example:
https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-list/2008-March/msg01505.html
https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-list/2008-March/msg01612.html

My point that this allows anyone to hold progress by coming up with a 
bogus "draft guideline" which covers dozens of packages which went into Fedora 
just fine with the generic guidelines (which is exactly what is happening with 
the Java packages now) was not discussed at all either.

And that "Please note that Java guidelines are up for approval at next week's 
FPC meeting." note is just a red herring, while the problem _may_ indeed be 
solved for Java soon (and even that is not sure, most likely the draft will 
have to go through a couple of iterations until it's accepted), there are 
countless of other areas where this problem can come up. For example OO.o 
extensions have been mentioned in the meeting. I was intending to get 
openoffice.org-kde packaged in time for F9, but with the current state of 
affairs it looks like that ain't gonna happen.

Fedora is about showcasing the latest technology, if each time a new technology 
is introduced, we have to wait months to get a packaging guideline for it, and 
all packages using the new technology are blocked on that, where does that 
leave us?

        Kevin Kofler