[Fedora-packaging] Blocking reviews on to be written guidelines?

[Hans de Goede]

Tom "spot" Callaway wrote:
> On Mon, 2008-03-03 at 10:06 +0100, Nicolas Mailhot wrote:
>> The 'problem' with java packages is that the packaging guidelines have
>> largely been defined outside Fedora (since part of the platform was
>> historicaly closed), and there's been a drive to rewrite history and
>> start from scratch instead of trying to work with the original third
>> party repository to update those rules (if needed).
>>
> Really, the problem is this:
> 
> 1. No one has proposed any serious Java packaging guidelines for Fedora.
> If someone were to take the JPackage guidelines and propose them as the
> Fedora packaging guidelines, it would be a start at least, right now,
> we've got nothing.
> 

Well, we have:
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/Java

But I must agree that that still needs some work. And there also is:
http://www.jpackage.org/cgi-bin/viewvc.cgi/src/jpackage-utils/doc/jpackage-1.5-policy.xhtml?revision=HEAD&root=jpackage

But thats seems somewhat incomplete too.

> 2. The Java packages that we have currently are rather inconsistent on
> how they package, and many of them are badly bitrotted for a variety of
> reasons, so we can't just "keep on doing what we've been doing".
> 

Well, most java packages which I've seen seem to just be copy copies of 
jpackage packages and / or based on the jpackage template, and those looked ok 
(to me).

> Thus, the hold. When someone presents a set of reasonable guidelines for
> Java packages, we'll help knock them into shape and lift the hold. Very
> few of us on the FPC have any Java experience, so we're relying on the
> community with Java interest/experience to fill this void.
> 

Well, I guess one of my first tasks as a new FPC member will be getting the 
java package guidelines into shape then, I'll contact Lubomir Kundrak about 
this, as he seems to be trying to get:
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackagingDrafts/Java
Into shape.

I still believe it would be ok to continue with reviewing java packages on a 
best foot forward notion until the guidelines are finished though. I believe 
that holding packages up for formal reasons like this (other then legal 
formalities) tends to frustrate contributers, and thats the last thing we want 
to do.

Thanks & Regards,

Hans