FAQ Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
» Video Reviews

» Linux Archive

Linux-archive is a website aiming to archive linux email lists and to make them easily accessible for linux users/developers.


» Sponsor

» Partners

» Sponsor

Go Back   Linux Archive > Redhat > Fedora Development

 
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
 
Old 06-01-2008, 05:42 PM
"Rakesh Pandit"
 
Default Request for ownership: zile maintainer not responding

Hello all,

I am requesting for taking over this package as previous maintainer is
not responding:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=447125

Following Non-responsive Maintainer Policy, maintainer was mailed but
he did not responded repeated mails at regular intervals.

GNU zile-2.2.59 is already available.

New Spec file: http://rakesh.gnulinuxcentar.org/zile.spec
New SRPM: http://rakesh.gnulinuxcentar.org/zile-2.2.59-1.fc8.src.rpm

I am very new at packaging(dnrd #445027, ntop #448397) and am looking
for sponsor.

May I go ahead?

--
Regards,
Rakesh Pandit

--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
 
Old 06-02-2008, 05:45 AM
"Debarshi Ray"
 
Default Request for ownership: zile maintainer not responding

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

> Following Non-responsive Maintainer Policy, maintainer was mailed but
> he did not responded repeated mails at regular intervals.

I had sent a couple of mails too but none of the addresses are working.

Cheerio,
Debarshi
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.2.2 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: http://getfiregpg.org

iD8DBQFIQ4d/TMO+PGPUpacRAr0NAJ9rxc/qCZWu0YXLkAPDnp1y5YUK8gCfah5k
d9NKgGAViq9TNrcf410jitw=
=WGeY
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
 
Old 06-06-2008, 06:03 AM
"Debarshi Ray"
 
Default Request for ownership: zile maintainer not responding

Jason,

Please don't close [2] since that is a consequence of the
Non-Responsive Maintainer procedure initiated by [1]. As a result [1]
depends on [2]. The review request is necessary since Zile was last
built for Fedora Core 6 and has not been updated for a long time.

Thanks,
Debarshi

[1] https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=447125
[2] https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=449879

--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
 
Old 06-06-2008, 08:44 AM
Jason L Tibbitts III
 
Default Request for ownership: zile maintainer not responding

>>>>> "DR" == Debarshi Ray <debarshi.ray@gmail.com> writes:

DR> Jason, Please don't close [2] since that is a consequence of the
DR> Non-Responsive Maintainer procedure initiated by [1].

Well, if you want to go making your own process....

DR> The review request is necessary since Zile was last built for
DR> Fedora Core 6 and has not been updated for a long time.

Zile is still in the repo and was last built for the GCC 4.3 rebuild.
I'm not aware of any rule requiring re-reviews of packages which were
have not been removed from the distro. What am I missing?

- J<

--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
 
Old 06-06-2008, 09:48 AM
"Debarshi Ray"
 
Default Request for ownership: zile maintainer not responding

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

Please note that although I filed the initial bug (as required by the
Non-Responsive Maintainer policy) against Zile, the person actually
interested in taking it over (ie. Rakesh) is not an existing Fedora
contributor. Even though the policy page
(http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackageMaintainers/Policy/NonResponsiveMaintainers)
says "If the requester is a not an existing Fedora contributor, he may
still take over a package", it does not mention how that would be
possible. The usual way is to submit a review request and wait for a
sponsor.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.2.2 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: http://getfiregpg.org

iD8DBQFISQaBTMO+PGPUpacRAu3KAKC900K7Pbwtr1DsKyuvtb Wl10f/XACdHj0d
mnTHkDczqqxmCs0IJR3Ejco=
=5cSU
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----


> DR> Jason, Please don't close [2] since that is a consequence of the
> DR> Non-Responsive Maintainer procedure initiated by [1].

> Well, if you want to go making your own process....

See "Old becomes new" on
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackageMaintainers/OrphanedPackages

Now, although the package has not been orphaned, the maintainer has
simply disappeared. I managed to get hold of two email IDs associated
with him (one of them was his FAS ID) and none of them are working any
more.

> DR> The review request is necessary since Zile was last built for
> DR> Fedora Core 6 and has not been updated for a long time.

> Zile is still in the repo and was last built for the GCC 4.3 rebuild.
> I'm not aware of any rule requiring re-reviews of packages which were
> have not been removed from the distro.

If a maintainer disappears without orphaning any of his packages, I
fail to see how the situation is different from this one. The presence
of Zile in the repository is simply an accident as none of us noticed
that the maintainer has disappeared, and possibly Zile did not have
any major bugs filed against it.

On Fedora 8, the most recent build available was tagged .fc6.

Even if it was built for GCC 4.3 during the Fedora 9 cycle, it only
means that the package still builds from source. That is of little
value here because the entity performing the rebuild did not notice
the fact that no human had touched the package sources for such a long
time, and that the maintainer was AWOL.

Regards,
Debarshi

--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
 
Old 06-06-2008, 10:21 AM
Michael Schwendt
 
Default Request for ownership: zile maintainer not responding

On Fri, 6 Jun 2008 15:18:53 +0530, Debarshi Ray wrote:

> Please note that although I filed the initial bug (as required by the
> Non-Responsive Maintainer policy) against Zile, the person actually
> interested in taking it over (ie. Rakesh) is not an existing Fedora
> contributor. Even though the policy page
> (http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackageMaintainers/Policy/NonResponsiveMaintainers)
> says "If the requester is a not an existing Fedora contributor, he may
> still take over a package", it does not mention how that would be
> possible. The usual way is to submit a review request and wait for a
> sponsor.

No, the usual way for new contributors is to find a sponsor.
It doesn't matter how they do it.

Submitting packages for review is just one way to look for sponsors.

--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
 
Old 06-06-2008, 10:24 AM
"Debarshi Ray"
 
Default Request for ownership: zile maintainer not responding

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

> No, the usual way for new contributors is to find a sponsor.
> It doesn't matter how they do it.
>
> Submitting packages for review is just one way to look for sponsors.

What are the other ways?

Cheers,
Debarshi

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.2.2 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: http://getfiregpg.org

iD8DBQFISQ7eTMO+PGPUpacRAsxLAKCrk2/sZb5HK8/Ys5FwPpZfNeNl8gCeMrdy
1X9NNW4SjDhIeNk0RW9AQGI=
=SbBi
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
 
Old 06-06-2008, 10:48 AM
Till Maas
 
Default Request for ownership: zile maintainer not responding

On Friday 06 June 2008 11:48:53 Debarshi Ray wrote:
> Please note that although I filed the initial bug (as required by the
> Non-Responsive Maintainer policy) against Zile, the person actually
> interested in taking it over (ie. Rakesh) is not an existing Fedora
> contributor. Even though the policy page
> (http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackageMaintainers/Policy/NonResponsiveMaint
>ainers) says "If the requester is a not an existing Fedora contributor, he
> may still take over a package", it does not mention how that would be
> possible. The usual way is to submit a review request and wait for a
> sponsor.

In the outline section of this wikipage it is explained how to do this:

| If you are a not an existing Fedora contributor, you can still take over a
| package. All of the above must be followed. When you seek approval for the
| takeover, you, again, must provide a bugzilla report as if it were a new
| Fedora package review.
[...]

Regards,
Till
--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
 
Old 06-06-2008, 11:09 AM
"Rakesh Pandit"
 
Default Request for ownership: zile maintainer not responding

2008/6/6 Till Maas <opensource@till.name>:
[..]
> In the outline section of this wikipage it is explained how to do this:
>
> | If you are a not an existing Fedora contributor, you can still take over a
> | package. All of the above must be followed. When you seek approval for the
> | takeover, you, again, must provide a bugzilla report as if it were a new
> | Fedora package review.
> [...]
>
> Regards,
> Till
>

If I follow those points, along with review, I should wait for at
least one FESco
member approval before taking over and I am waiting.

--
Regards,
Rakesh Pandit

--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
 
Old 06-06-2008, 11:42 AM
"Mat Booth"
 
Default Request for ownership: zile maintainer not responding

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On Fri, Jun 6, 2008 at 11:24 AM, Debarshi Ray wrote:
>> No, the usual way for new contributors is to find a sponsor.
>> It doesn't matter how they do it.
>>
>> Submitting packages for review is just one way to look for sponsors.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: http://getfiregpg.org

iEYEARECAAYFAkhJIw0ACgkQKfdzh3zDrvAlDQCfcWV6DnKKL+ aHiB19baPxyl6O
Bv8An0LiDizsfW0keW73eQeVUSnjzFUC
=LzHv
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

>
> What are the other ways?
>
> Cheers,
> Debarshi
>

I was sponsored originally because I submitted a patch for something.

--
Mat Booth
www.matbooth.co.uk

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

Thread Tools




All times are GMT. The time now is 12:52 PM.

VBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO ©2007, Crawlability, Inc.
Copyright 2007 - 2008, www.linux-archive.org