New Package Process
Ed Hill
ed at eh3.com
Wed Apr 27 19:40:08 UTC 2005
On Wed, 2005-04-27 at 15:10 -0400, Elliot Lee wrote:
>
> We /have/ to have someone who is ultimately held accountable for making
> the package work. That's all the package maintainer is. How they get the
> work done (by themselves, through collaboration, etc.) is up to them. I
> agree that encouraging collaboration is good, but that needs to be done
> without compromising the leadership function of the maintainer.
Yeah, this seems fundamental. So, to keep some level of quality in the
process (creating packages that almost all work), does it follow that:
- a maintainer can only properly handle so many packages and
so many reviews of others' packages
- lint-like tools and all-around better automation can help
but they simply *cannot* replace attentive and clue-full
reviewers and maintainers
- to scale, new maintainers will *need* to be trained and
this training process probably deserves as much attention
as the automated tools, etc.
Or am I way off-base?
Ed
ps - As a packaging newbie, I can attest that the documentation
for packaging is damn sparse. And I made a huge mistake by
not spending enough time reading all the existing spec files
which, in retrospect, is perhaps the best way to see how
things can (or ought to be) done.
--
Edward H. Hill III, PhD
office: MIT Dept. of EAPS; Rm 54-1424; 77 Massachusetts Ave.
Cambridge, MA 02139-4307
emails: eh3 at mit.edu ed at eh3.com
URLs: http://web.mit.edu/eh3/ http://eh3.com/
phone: 617-253-0098
fax: 617-253-4464
More information about the fedora-extras-list
mailing list