[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

RFC: EPEL branching if Fedora maintainer does not react

>From this weeks report:

  * _blah_> "i've requested a few packages from fedora maintainers that
have not gotten back to me... what is the next step in getting those
packages into epel?"; knurd mailed the Fedora list about this;

Find the mail attached. Is that fine for everyone? If yes I'd say we
make this policy in this weeks meeting.

--- Begin Message ---
On 27.06.2007 18:26, Brian Pepple wrote:
> [...]
> You want something to be discussed? Send a note to the list in reply to
> this mail and I'll add it to the schedule [...]

The EPEL SIG in its yesterday meeting discussed something that FESCo
likely explicitly should discuss once:

There are some EPEL maintainers that want to see some packages in EPEL
that are owned by other people. The EPEL contributors are willing to
maintain those packagers theirselfs in EPEL if the Fedora owner doesn't
want to -- but they don't want to step on anybody toes, so they normally
ask the Fedora maintainers first. Some don't answer; we likely need some
kind of semi-official way to get those packages into EPEL anyway. The
comaintainership-proposal has some things about it already (e.g. the
Fedora maintainer can't say "no, I don't want my package to become part
of EPEL" iirc), but a standard-procedure might be best for all.

I'd suggest something like this:

If a EPEL maintainer wants to get a Fedora package into EPEL he should
checks the ContributorStatus document, located in the wiki at

If the Fedora maintainer of the package issued to not participate in
EPEL then the EPEL maintainer can request the branch directly via the
standard procedures (e.g. via bugzilla currently; best to CC the Fedora
maintainer, so he knows that the package is maintained in EPEL as well).

If it's unclear if the Fedora maintainer of the package participates in
EPEL then the EPEL maintainer should just mail the Fedora maintainer and
ask him for his plans for EPEL in general and the package at hand. If
there is no answer within seven days the EPEL contributor is free to
request the EPEL branch (CC the Fedora maintainer here as well). If the
Fedora maintainer sooner or later wants to participate in EPEL then the
EPEL maintainer of the package should hand primary per release
maintainership back to the Fedora maintainer (and become comaintainer,
if interested)

Does that sound sane and acceptable for FESCo (and of course those
reading this mail)?

Sure, one week if a short timeframe, but EPEL should be known by know
and at least have updated
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/EPEL/ContributorStatus ; I'd further like
to have some quick procedure, because everything longer then one or two
weeks would slow EPEL down; and, as written, the Fedora maintainer can
get his package back later if he wants.


--- End Message ---

[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]