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

Re: The community has lost control... (Was: Re: Don't put new packages through updates-testing)

Jesse Keating wrote:
On Sunday 03 June 2007 09:27:50 Hans de Goede wrote:
Thats not entirely fair. There is a loots of traffic on the maintainers /
developer lists and much of the needed information is hidden deep down in
subject wise only semi or irrelevant threads. There have been little clear
announcements of changes, and when they were there the info was far from

Every new procedure that I initiated I tried my best to start a new thread with a clear subject on the matter. I see the same things from others, such as "Pushing updates for Fedora 7" thread. This is probably one of the most maddening thing lately, so much complaint about communication with no suggestions on how to make it better.

I think the big problem here is time, the merge has been rushed and good documentation has been suffering from this.

Ideally when new tools like koji and bodhi get introduced, first some proper documentation and detailed new workflow documents are written (preferably before making / introducing the tool, to allow discussion). However due to the time constrains there has been a serious lack of such documents. I'm not saying that you or anybody's intentions weren't good, and yes mails were send, but with very much incomplete / incomprehensible stuff in them.

As for the wiki that is currently very much out of sync with how things are
done in the merged world / out of sync with reality.

And you expect us to change it how? For god sakes if you run into a page that is inaccurate, point it out to somebody, hopefully the person who made it inaccurate by introducing a new policy. Maybe we need a tracker page of 'inaccurate pages'. Don't just expect them to be fixed automagically, point it out to somebody, change it yourself, do something. Don't just grow more and more frustrated finally bitching about it generically on a list in the middle of a long thread.

Well when the powers that be make radical changes to the workflow I would _atleast_ expect them to update:

Which is the primary document to consult when you want to introduce a new package, yet there is nothing about bodhi in this document.

I do not expect anyone to update all niche pages of the wiki, but is it to much to ask to update a very important often consulted page like:

When there are workflow changes? Sure in about a week, when I hopefully truely understand how bodhi works, I could edit it myself. But I would expect the people introducing such changes to atleast show some minimal effort to keep the most important pages of the wiki under the PackageMaintainers/ hierarchy up to date.



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