Fedora Extras Development Build Report

[Ralf Corsepius]

On Sun, 2005-05-08 at 16:32 +0200, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote:
> Am Sonntag, den 08.05.2005, 15:09 +0200 schrieb Michael Schwendt:
> > On Sun, 08 May 2005 12:13:38 +0100, David Woodhouse wrote:
> > > If the maintainer doesn't have time to fix the problem
> > > immediately, a bug should be filed explaining the problem and _perhaps_
> > > an ExcludeArch: could be added in the meantime.
> > 
> > It is also a matter of lack of interest, lack of motivation, lack of
> > hardware, and lack of knowledge/experience.
> > 
> > A packager, who builds and tests on i386 only, bases his decisions on the
> > test results on this platform. It is really bad if a package, which is
> > believed to be ready, fails to build on an untested platform and blocks
> > the release of an update. [...]

> > We do need the effort of an arch-specific community of developers and
> > users, who help with making their special architecture as strong and
> > supported as i386.

> I ask cause I tried to fix some of the x86_64 problems and often did it
> myself in the cvs -- some of the maintainers might wonder what the heck
> this stupid person (e.g. me) was doing there. I would feel better if
> this work was "official" in some way.

ACK - IMO, the way you have been handling x86_64 problems is the FE
packaging should work. Packaging should be considered a collaborative
effort and must not degenerate to "setup claims".

> With such a group of persons (or even maillinglists extras-ppc and
> extras-x86_64 [yes, I know, we have enough list already so forget the
> last sentence]) the maintainers would know who to contact in case of
> problems they can't solve on their own.

I would prefer to see this thought generalized, i.e. not only with
regard to architectures, but to general "fields of
competence" (Everybody's knowledge is limited, everybody is human and
nobody is omniscient).

> > > If you mean that the maintainer of the Extras package can't be bothered
> > > to do their job properly, then a more suitable maintainer can be found
> > > or the package dropped.
And how do you guarantee 24/7/365 reachability and sustainable development?

Remember, this is supposed to be a project run by volunteers. You can't
commit anybody to do anything, nor can you make anybody liable for
anything - IMO, the only solution is to KISS and to team up.

> Seems i must leave then ;-)
... same here.

Ralf