NX/FreeNX maintainer: AWOL?

[Axel Thimm]

On Mon, Apr 16, 2007 at 11:09:02AM -0500, Jon Ciesla wrote:
> Ok.  This seems rational, especially since you have much of the needed
> work done.  Have you looked at the bug list from this BZ and assessed what
> your packages address and what they don't?

I just did. Some parts like x86_64 support are already in, also some
mismatching lib issues, the update requests and some crashes.

What I know still exists as an issue is printing support, as this
doesn't really exists in upstream either.

> > On Mon, Apr 16, 2007 at 10:51:39AM -0500, Jon Ciesla wrote:
> >> This:
> >> http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/Policy/WhoIsAllowedToModifyWhichPackages
> >>
> >> would appear to give you the go-ahead to make corrections.
> >
> > You mean the part about "experienced packagers"? While I would like to
> > call myself that, the definition on this page doesn't fit, I'm neither
> > a release manager, nor a sponsor, nor memebr of QA/Security SIG, nor
> > does this package belong to any SIG.
> >
> >> I'd probably skip the co-maintainership step, and just take
> >> ownership after the completion of the AWOL process, assuming Richard
> >> doesn't respond.  According to the wiki, I can make that request
> >> formally on Friday, which will then need FESCO approval, etc.
> >
> > Let's do it that way then, so nobody can complain. Perhaps even Rick
> > shows up until then, and if not, we'll have done the proper procedural
> > steps.
> >
> > FWIW I have ready to submit packages with the latest bits at ATrpms.
> >
> >> > On Mon, Apr 16, 2007 at 09:33:21AM -0500, Jon Ciesla wrote:
> >> >> In the meantime, if you felt so inclined, you could request to be
> >> added
> >> >> as
> >> >> a co-maintainer and start work on it now. :)
> >> >
> >> > doesn't that usually require consent from the primary maintainer who
> >> > seems to be not reachable ATM? Otherwise point me to the steps I need
> >> > to take, the
> >> > http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/Policy/EncourageComaintainership
> >> > doesn't cover that afaics.
> >> >
> >> >> > On Fri, Apr 13, 2007 at 09:24:26AM -0500, Jon Ciesla wrote:
> >> >> >> I've been trying to follow up on some nx bugs, and have had little
> >> >> >> success
> >> >> >> getting a hold of Richard A. Stout, zipsonic at gmail.com, the
> >> >> maintainer
> >> >> >> of
> >> >> >> both packages.  These are the only two packages he maintains, and
> >> >> there
> >> >> >> are several untouched NEW bugs.
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> If anyone knows how to contact him,
> >> >> >
> >> >> > The email you quote above is Rick's mail, all right. I've added him
> >> to
> >> >> > the Cc. If Rick is not available anymore for nx/freenx I would like
> >> to
> >> >> > pick these up.
> >> >> >
> >> >> >> please direct him to the AWOL bug I filed 2 weeks
> >> >> >> ago:https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=234619
> >> >> >
> >> >> > Is that's the procedure how AWOLs are probed? Just curious.
> >> >> >
> >> >> >> I hope he's out there, I use freenx every day. . .
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> Jon Ciesla
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> P.S. I assume since f-e-l is being closed this weekend, that AWOL
> >> >> >> messages
> >> >> >> should now go to f-m.  I can edit the wiki to reflect this if this
> >> is
> >> >> >> correct.
> >
> >
> 
> 

-- 
Axel.Thimm at ATrpms.net
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://listman.redhat.com/archives/fedora-maintainers/attachments/20070416/05b91a78/attachment.sig>