RFC: fedora-devel-announce

[Axel Thimm]

On Wed, Jun 06, 2007 at 04:05:24PM -0500, Josh Boyer wrote:
> On Wed, 2007-06-06 at 21:53 +0200, Axel Thimm wrote:
> > On Wed, Jun 06, 2007 at 02:12:05PM -0400, Jeremy Katz wrote:
> > > On Wed, 2007-06-06 at 14:02 -0400, Warren Togami wrote:
> > > > Request for Comments before we do this.
> > > > 
> > > > Purpose
> > > > =======
> > > > This list is intended to be an INFREQUENTLY used announce-only list. 
> > > > Whenever there is something important that developers should know about, 
> > > > those subscribed to this list should be able to easily follow changes 
> > > > within the development project.
> > > > 
> > > > Posts are moderated by <multiple people in FESCO>.
> > > 
> > > If we do this, we should kill fedora-maintainers.  Since the above was
> > > the original intent of -maintainers and why it was separated off from
> > > fedora-devel-list.
> > 
> > My feeling on the development of -devel and -maintainers 
> 
> That's the whole problem.  Everyone has a different interpretation of
> what list is for what and nobody really knows what's "right" because to
> some degree everyone's definition makes sense.  "Enforcement" of list
> use is complicated for that same reason.
> 
> Sorry Axel.  That isn't a specific attack at you.  Just using your words
> to highlight the general problem.  Please don't take offense.

No problem, everyone has a different perception of reality. And indeed
I articulated my POV to induce an analytic discussion on content of
the lists instead of just deciding on merging or not.

Someone (not me ;) should seriously analyse the topics of fedora-devel
and -maintainers, check their relationship and objectively identify
what is the discrepancy of the de jure and de facto split of topics
and either document practice (good) or enforce a different model (less
good, but also an option).

Aside from topics one also needs to take different target groups into
account (maybe that's even the higher priority than topics). Again my
personal perception, which I think could also be considered
historically attestable is that -maintainers is more populated with
packagers reflecting Fedora Extras days, while -devel has the more
dedicated bunch of full-time developers that really drive core
development in Fedora and has a legacy membership base of people
involved with Fedora Core. For example I wouldn't expect "My package
foo does not build, help me" on -devel and also no discussion on
kernel patches (which now happens on its own list, but for example's
sake ignore this new list's existance) or xorg modularization on
-maintainers (other than feeding in the resulting output, which would
now go to fedora-devel-announce).

Both groups overlap to some extend and the line is very blurry, but if
one want to spot the differences I think that's the way to think about
it.
-- 
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/20070606/c7306fb3/attachment.sig>