governance, fesco, board, etc.

[Michael Schwendt]

On Tue, 12 Jun 2007 14:15:47 -0400 (EDT), Max Spevack wrote:

> On Tue, 12 Jun 2007, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
> 
> > * bodhi, koji are immature, semi-functional, semi-cooked pieces of SW 
> > which still have to prove their longevity, but so far don't do 
> > anything but introducing bureaucracy and are almost strangling former 
> > FE.
> 
> So you want all of the infrastructural changes to be developed in the 
> open, but you don't want there to be any hiccups or growing pains as we 
> start to use them?

"Growing pains"? Hopefully a typo. ;)

"Gradual transition" is what has been missing. Too many changes at once
and shortly before a final release of the distribution. Effectively,
you've slammed a door into the faces of lots of Extras contributors. A new
build system, undocumented changes in the procedures (e.g. buildroot
"poisoning") and a dramatically changed work-flow.

> And I question how semi-functional something like Koji is when an entire 
> Linux distribution has built itself using it.  Seems pretty functional 
> to me.  And I guess I should tell all the people I met at LinuxTag who 
> have deployed Koji in their own environments, and told us how great it 
> was, that they are wrong and it actually is a POS.

That's a surprise, considering that the original release in rpm form did
not even include support for importing the buildroot comps file and
required patching the code or running lots of koji admin commands manually
in addition to figuring out undocumented bootstrapping of the koji
database tables. Are you sure these people really installed koji builders
that could actually build packages from Fedora Core/Extras successfully?

Don't misunderstand me. In general I think koji is great and superior
compared with plague. Its roll-out came too suddenly, especially when
there's still no rather safe way to mail important announcements to all
package maintainers.