Thoughts...

[Robin Norwood]

Sorry, I'm probably breaking threading here...my main work laptop went
down, and I managed to fumble a command and lost some mail.

Ralf Corsepius <rc040203 freenet de> writes:
>On Sat, 2007-05-19 at 16:04 -0400, Robin Norwood wrote:
>> Ralf Corsepius <rc040203 freenet de> writes:
>> > ... We would have had opportunities to gain clarity, if you had not
>> > reverted the split.
>> 
>> This isn't actually true.  The modules are still split out. 
>You have effectively reverted the split.
>
>>  The changes
>> were to make the perl-devel require the other split modules, and include
>> the split modules in the default install.
>Exactly this is the reversion - Forcing "module'ed" BR's and R's to gain
>long term packaging stability was one of the prime objectives.
>
>Now, you're allowing people to continue their sloppy (bad) habits.

Yes, I agree, it wasn't as much progress as we wanted.  But it was
sufficiently annoying to some people, that I agreed with the logic that
these changes were too much, too late.

[...]

>> >> For now, at least, list list is low-traffic enough to support the
>> >> SWAT-type activities...we just need to define how we interact with the
>> >> package owners, and get their buy-in/permission/forgiveness.
>> > Well, meanwhile, given how the merger changes Fedora's workflow, I am
>> > not sure anymore if a "SWAT" team can work. Things which had been easy
>> > before (and to some extend could have been scripted), now seem to become
>> > inapplicable ...
>> 
>> I'm not really sure what you mean here...what specific problems do you
>> see?
>You aren't subscribed to maintainers ? Then you'd better be.

I am, but apparently hadn't followed it as closely as I should have.

[...]

>> I had planned to, but was convinced that the disruption to users and
>> developers would be too great.  I probably should've brought you into
>> the discussion, considering the contributions you'd made.  Sorry!
>OSS development is based on "give and take" ... You will have to
>understand that such lonesome and lately communicated decisions drive
>external volunteers away.

And other contributors were equally annoyed that we were making the
change at all.

[...]

>> That's my gut feeling about it - but some people seem to think it would
>> be worthwhile to split out everything.
>
>There likely are more modules which would make sense to be split out,
>but a "split out everything" would be stupid.

I don't see the point, either, but maybe someone will speak up who
advocates it.

>What I think the next steps should be 
>1. Revert your recent changes

For F8, I'd like to do that as early as possible.

>2. Reconsider the *-lib split.

Consensus among various fedora-devel people seems to disagree with you.

>3. Reflect this split to perl-modules.
>..
>n. Check for further split-out candidates.

I agree.

Thanks,

-RN

-- 
Robin Norwood
Red Hat, Inc.

"The Sage does nothing, yet nothing remains undone."
-Lao Tzu, Te Tao Ching