Upstream developers mainting there own package in Fedora and nothing else
 

2008/5/5 Michael Schwendt <mschwendt@gmail.com>:

On Mon, 05 May 2008 12:36:49 +0200, Hans de Goede wrote:



> > If you agree with an upstream developer on maintaining a package in Fedora,

> > either alone or with you as co-maintainer, does it matter how you do it?

> >

>

> Well there always is this problem of someone becoming malicious, I guess if

> someone really wants to he can easily just follow the normal process, so do a

> couple of new packages and a couple of reviews, but this is lowering the

> barrier to entry, which I'm fine with, but I atleast want others to know about

> this and shout "NOOO" before continuing with this.



That belongs into my [very] old series of queries related to "sponsor

responsibilities", which is still unanswered because it's a complex

topic. All the burden is on the shoulders of the sponsors. It's completely

up to their judgement whom to sponsor, whether to interview a new

contributor prior to approval, whether to collect and compare personal

information retrieved from web search engines, whether to insist on seeing

a demonstration of packaging skills during review of several packages,

whether to serve as a proxy for a newbie packager, whether and when to

trust somebody from the other side of the world, and so on. And still a

contributor might become hostile after months and delete group-writable

files in cvs under the umbrella of a "sorry, fat fingers" excuse. Then

it's the sponsor's duty to repair the damage.



[The new FAS is not nice to sponsors either. They need to load the

full cvsextras members list and search for the account to sponsor.
Hm...sponsor or administrator of an related group should see on its welcome FAS's page
members who requested sponsorship from its "todo queue".




Something that resulted in time-outs the last two times I did it.

For sponsors, there doesn't seem to be a list of people you sponsored.]



--

fedora-devel-list mailing list

fedora-devel-list@redhat.com

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



--
Xavier.t Lamien
--
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/XavierLamien
GPG-Key ID: F3903DEB
Fingerprint: 0F2A 7A17 0F1B 82EE FCBF 1F51 76B7 A28D F390 3DEB
--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list

Upstream developers mainting there own package in Fedora and nothing else
 

On Mon, 2008-05-05 at 10:27 +0200, Hans de Goede wrote:
> Hi All,
>
> After the sponsor discussion we recently had, I decided I've been neglecting
> the sponsoring and went and took a look at the FE-NEEDSPONSOR queue.
>
> One of the reviews this has got me involved in is fpm2:
> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=444830
>
> This review is special as the upstream developer is submitting the package, and
> he has stated that for now he has no interest in doing other Fedora work.

Our policy has always been: For a package to be part of Fedora, it must
be maintained as part of Fedora. It's completely irrelevant whether this
person is upstream or whether somebody else volunteers.

I for one consider cases like the one you describe above to be "drive by
submissions", and consider playing nice to them to be counter productive
to Fedora.

Ralf


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

Upstream developers mainting there own package in Fedora and nothing else
 

2008/5/5 Michael Schwendt <mschwendt@gmail.com>:

On Mon, 5 May 2008 13:26:00 +0200, Xavier Lamien wrote:



> > [The new FAS is not nice to sponsors either. They need to load the

> > full cvsextras members list and search for the account to sponsor.

>

>

> Hm...sponsor or administrator of an related group should see on its welcome

> FAS's page

> members who requested sponsorship from its "todo queue".



Is that just a guess? Or are you a sponsor and have sponsored somebody

like that?


All you have to do it's to click on the requested group and then upgrade the user from sponsor button (only available for unapproved membership) .
That's what i'm actually do.







Here, that list only shows 5 new accounts and not the one I was searching

for. Further, if you click the account name to load the account details,

there is no "sponsor" button anywhere. It can only be found in the full

group view.

yeah; i think that you will wish to have a "sponsor" button in your "todo queue" or in the account page of the requested user, to avoid to* browse all the group list.

This could be an improvment for fas2.






--

Fedora release 8 (Werewolf) - Linux 2.6.23.15-137.fc8

loadavg: 1.63 1.81 1.59



--

fedora-devel-list mailing list

fedora-devel-list@redhat.com

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



--
Xavier.t Lamien
--
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/XavierLamien
GPG-Key ID: F3903DEB
Fingerprint: 0F2A 7A17 0F1B 82EE FCBF 1F51 76B7 A28D F390 3DEB
--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list

Upstream developers mainting there own package in Fedora and nothing else
 

Michael Schwendt wrote:

>> And now I'm wondering what others think of this and if maybe we should
>> get some kinda special procedure for this?
>
> My first thought was "do we really need policies for everything"?
>
> Can't we just say that the sponsors have permission to approve accounts
> so new contributors may join and get productive?
> If you agree with an upstream developer on maintaining a package in
> Fedora, either alone or with you as co-maintainer, does it matter how you
> do it?

big +1

-- Rex

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

Upstream developers mainting there own package in Fedora and nothing else
 

On 2008-05-05 02:41:42 PM, Xavier Lamien wrote:
> yeah; i think that you will wish to have a "sponsor" button in your "todo
> queue" or in the account page of the requested user, to avoid to browse all
> the group list.
> This could be an improvment for fas2.
Ah, good point - could you file a ticket at
https://fedorahosted.org/fas/ for this and any other FAS improvements?

Thanks a lot,
Ricky
--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list

Upstream developers mainting there own package in Fedora and nothing else
 

>>>>> "HdG" == Hans de Goede <j.w.r.degoede@hhs.nl> writes:

HdG> This review is special as the upstream developer is submitting
HdG> the package, and he has stated that for now he has no interest in
HdG> doing other Fedora work.

That's fine; if I came across such a ticket, I'd simply sponsor the
person. I simply didn't see it. It's probably better if they can get
a real co-maintainer, though.

In the future, sure, the maintainer containment stuff works great for
this. But we simply can't wait for it to appear.

- J<

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