Plan for tomorrows (20070517) FESCO meeting

[Toshio Kuratomi]

On Thu, 2007-05-17 at 18:42 +0200, Axel Thimm wrote:
> On Thu, May 17, 2007 at 11:01:48AM -0500, Tom spot Callaway wrote:
> > On Thu, 2007-05-17 at 11:56 -0400, Peter Jones wrote:
> > > Christopher Blizzard wrote:
> > > > On Thu, 2007-05-17 at 10:31 -0500, Tom "spot" Callaway wrote:
> > > >> All we're really trying to do is make good packages. We've tried
> > > >> really
> > > >> hard to make guidelines that lead to good, clean,
> > > >> maintainable-long-after-you-are-dead packages.
> > > >>
> > > > 
> > > > I hear what you are saying and I understand.  What I'm saying is that
> > > > there's a fine line between making good packages and going over the
> > > > edge.  So in your example, documenting is good.  But if you end up with
> > > > an exception process?  I think that probably crosses the line.  Dispute
> > > > resolution, maybe.  But I just worry that we're going somewhere we don't
> > > > want to be.  Not sure how to properly put this into words.
> > > 
> > > I'm totally in agreement that an exception process isn't somewhere we 
> > > want to go.  Arbitration when there's a dispute causes less impedance to 
> > > actually getting things done, while still achieving the same goals.
> > 
> > But we're not even aware that there is a dispute, when people just
> > decide not to follow the guidelines. There is no "Packaging QA" group,
> > constantly auditing spec files.
> 
> This would still be the same issue if guidelines would tunr into laws
> with exception policies. "If no one sees the crime, there was no
> crime."
> 
> This thread seems to have been spawn by some explicit example of a
> packager consciously violating the guidelines. But some of us don't
> know what the example is. Could you post in some URL? Maybe the issue
> is not solved by turning guidelines into stone, but by something else.

Top of thread:
https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-maintainers/2007-May/msg00351.html

Where it starts to get "interesting":
https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-maintainers/2007-May/msg00459.html

-Toshio
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: <http://listman.redhat.com/archives/fedora-maintainers/attachments/20070517/b247e40d/attachment.sig>