Plan for tomorrows (20070517) FESCO meeting

[Axel Thimm]

On Thu, May 17, 2007 at 12:22:57PM -0400, Brian Pepple 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.
> 
> How would you suggest we deal with maintainers that outright say they
> choose to ignore the packaging guidelines?

We drop their packages and ban them from rentering Fedora for at least
a full release cycle. We should start with the kernel package as an
exemplary beste before F7 goes gold. ;)

Really, the core packages (core as in most important, not as in Fedora
Core) mostly violate the packaging guidelines sometimes w/o reason
especially in areas which are considered sacred, far more than
guidelines about statics libs or changelogs.

Still we look over it. We kindly suggest that the kernel start proper
versioning and not only for the guidelines' sake (it is also
technically sane to follow upstream versioning which would be in line
with the guidelines).

But if the kernel package maintainers don't want to follow the
guidelines we let them, and just retry changing their minds every
now and then. We won't send in the Package Guidelines Enforment Task
Force (also known as PGETF) to beat them up until they succumb. ;)
-- 
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/20070517/f11127be/attachment.sig>