Packager Sponsors Responsibility Policy

[Kevin Fenzi]

On Fri, 23 May 2008 15:28:21 +0200
pertusus at free.fr (Patrice Dumas) wrote:

> On Thu, May 22, 2008 at 08:26:38PM -0400, Brian Pepple wrote:
> > Hi all,
> > 
> > I'm looking for some feedback on what we've got so far for the
> > Packager Sponsors Responsibility Policy.
> > http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/Schedule/SponsorResponsibilityPolicy
> 
> Overall looks good. There are some technicall bits missing to help
> sponsors monitor the sponsored people.

Agreed. 

> > == Make sure the maintainers you sponsor follow guidelines ==
> > Sponsors should try and keep up with the doings of their sponsored
> > maintainers. Bugzilla has the ability to let you know via email all
> > activity for a given address. Initial sponsored maintainers should
> > have more scrutiny than long established maintainers with a known
> > record of good efforts.
> 
> Here, it would be nice to have an example of how to achieve the 
> 'Bugzilla has the ability to let you know via email all activity for a
> given address.'

- Login to bugzilla.redhat.com with your account. 
- Click the 'account' button at the top. 
- Click the 'email' tab. 
- Enter a , delimited list of users email address(es) in the 'users to
watch' text entry box. 
- Click 'submit changes' 

> > == Fix issues caused by sponsored maintainers ==
> > If one of your sponsored maintainers is unable to fix an issue in
> > their package(s), it's up to the sponsor to step in and make the
> > needed fixes. This might include pushing a security update when the
> > maintainer is unavailable, applying a patch, removing a improperly
> > build package, or other time or security sensitive issue. Note that
> > the maintainer should be shown the fix and how to manage the issue
> > moving forward.
> 
> There are many technical issues here. It would be nice if a sponsor
> could be in initialCC/Watchcommit/commit for all the packages of a 
> sponsored person (and not by package), without needing a manual
> intervention from the sponsored person, and such that the sponsored
> person cannot revoke it. Also it should be easy to give up with those
> acls when the sponsor thinks that the sponsored person is competent
> enough.

Yeah, that would be nice. Pkgdb enhancement it sounds like... 
could you file it? 

> 
> > == Revoking Sponsorship ==
> > A sponsor may elect to revoke their sponsorship of a maintainer in
> > rare and extreme situations. These situations might include: A
> > maintainer that no longer wishes to contribute to Fedora, a
> > maintainer that refuses to follow guidelines, or irreconcilable
> > differences between the maintainer and the Sponsor. In this event
> > it is the responsibility of the Sponsor to orphan the maintainers
> > packages, and do any other needed cleanups. 
> 
> I think that it should be stated that it always have to be explained
> to FESCo.

I think thats a good idea... at that point someone may be able to step
in and work with the maintainer and take over sponsorship (in those
cases where it's just personal differences that are driving the sponsor
to not want to continue with that maintainer). 

kevin

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 197 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://listman.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-list/attachments/20080523/ca45f157/attachment.sig>