Linux Archive

Linux Archive (http://www.linux-archive.org/)
-   Fedora Development (http://www.linux-archive.org/fedora-development/)
-   -   PackageMaintainers/Policy/EOL pages and FESCo responsibilities (http://www.linux-archive.org/fedora-development/194448-packagemaintainers-policy-eol-pages-fesco-responsibilities.html)

Patrice Dumas 11-16-2008 04:20 PM

PackageMaintainers/Policy/EOL pages and FESCo responsibilities
 
Hello,

I think that the PackageMaintainers/Policy pages should be under FESCo
responsibility, such that
* they are updated when policies are updated
* new policies are added

FESCo should not necessarily take care of the actual writing, but at
least oblige packagers who proposed a new policy that was accepted to
update the Policy page, and similarly when a policy is changed.

I think that FESCo should also oblige Infra/Releng/documentation/BugZappers
(and other similar groups) to modify the Policy pages when they introduce
changes that modify policies. I don't know how exactly is FESCo aware of
what changes in other groups, but at least should try to act such that
packagers are aware of policies that are important for them. This could
simply be redirections to pages maintained by those other groups.

Examples of policies that may be (or not) missing are release notes,
bugzilla handling, features. And PackageMaintainers/MaintainerResponsibility
should certainly be a policy too.



Of course FESCo is somehow responsible for all that is in the wiki, but
for policies it is even more important since these are meant to be
mandatory things.

However, currently the Policies pages are in a very bad state, which is
pretty bad, in my opinion, for new packagers, especially those who don't
read through all that goes along in fedora-devel-list.

--
Pat

--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list

Kevin Fenzi 11-23-2008 09:07 PM

PackageMaintainers/Policy/EOL pages and FESCo responsibilities
 
On Sun, 16 Nov 2008 18:20:41 +0100
pertusus@free.fr (Patrice Dumas) wrote:

> Hello,

Sorry for the delay here. I meant to reply to this sooner.

> I think that the PackageMaintainers/Policy pages should be under
> FESCo responsibility, such that
> * they are updated when policies are updated
> * new policies are added
>
> FESCo should not necessarily take care of the actual writing, but at
> least oblige packagers who proposed a new policy that was accepted to
> update the Policy page, and similarly when a policy is changed.

I would agree. Perhaps we can address it at the next meeting.

> I think that FESCo should also oblige
> Infra/Releng/documentation/BugZappers (and other similar groups) to
> modify the Policy pages when they introduce changes that modify
> policies. I don't know how exactly is FESCo aware of what changes in
> other groups, but at least should try to act such that packagers are
> aware of policies that are important for them. This could simply be
> redirections to pages maintained by those other groups.

Yes, as that page is now.

> Examples of policies that may be (or not) missing are release notes,
> bugzilla handling, features. And

True.

> PackageMaintainers/MaintainerResponsibility should certainly be a
> policy too.

Yes, although I don't know if that was finished and formally
approved...

> Of course FESCo is somehow responsible for all that is in the wiki,
> but for policies it is even more important since these are meant to be
> mandatory things.
>
> However, currently the Policies pages are in a very bad state, which
> is pretty bad, in my opinion, for new packagers, especially those who
> don't read through all that goes along in fedora-devel-list.

Agreed. I removed the kmod section there as it no longer applies.

> Pat

kevin

--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list


All times are GMT. The time now is 08:49 AM.

VBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO ©2007, Crawlability, Inc.