[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next]
[Thread Index]
[Date Index]
[Author Index]
Re: [Fedora-haskell-list] Mass closure of submissions?
- From: Jens Petersen <petersen redhat com>
- To: Miles Sabin <miles milessabin com>
- Cc: fedora-haskell-list redhat com
- Subject: Re: [Fedora-haskell-list] Mass closure of submissions?
- Date: Wed, 18 Jun 2008 15:49:16 +1000
Hi Miles,
Thanks for raising this. I am in communicating with Rajesh offline to
try to make things clearer.
* New submitter created BZ's for packages in good faith but without
being aware of the (currently non-existent?) Haskell packaging
guidelines.
Yes, well-intended I know. I hope he may still pick up some of them
again starting with a single package first though.
* Various borderline rude comments were made.
I agree the communication could have been better though he may not be
following comments in bz or the ml's closely.
* The BZ's were closed with extrordinary haste without giving the
submitter a great deal of time to respond (I mean, maybe he's been
away on holiday for the last few days?).
I agree I would have preferred to keep them open a little longer. Not
sure how many packages were submitted. I think Tibbs marked them not
ready which would have been sufficient for now probably IMHO, but I
think Bryan had concerns about the quality of the packaging and choice
of libs.
Now, perhaps that's not how it really was, but I don't feel
particularly motivated to do work on any packages myself unless I'm
reasonably confident that I won't be on the receiving end of similar
(apparently) high-handed treatment.
I am sure if you follow the processes correctly you will not have many
problems. Feel free to ask here if you have any doubts about what you
want to package, etc.
* What in particular that guy did wrong.
No response in bz and not following submission process...
* What are the most important things for a package submitter to do to
ensure a successful outcome.
If you follow the processes outlined on the wiki you can't go too wrong.
:) The coming Haskell Packaging Guidelines should help too: I hope
we cam get them submitted soon so we can avoid further ambiguities like
this.
Thanks, Jens
[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next]
[Thread Index]
[Date Index]
[Author Index]