epel

[Axel Thimm]

On Fri, Jan 05, 2007 at 01:49:33PM +0100, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote:
> On 05.01.2007 13:18, Axel Thimm wrote:
> >On Fri, Jan 05, 2007 at 01:08:10PM +0100, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote:
> >>On 05.01.2007 12:57, Axel Thimm wrote:
> >>>On Fri, Jan 05, 2007 at 05:50:20AM -0600, Josh Boyer wrote:
> >>>>I believe EPEL is open to contributors that currently have 5 or more
> >>>>packages and/or sponsor status.  There is no need to wait for Luke's
> >>>>work.
> >>>>However, one thing that contributors might want wait on is an updated
> >>>>mock package with EPEL configs.  I've got a bug opened to get that done
> >>>>and just need to find some time.
> >>>What exactly does a contributor need to do to branch into which RHEL
> >>>branches? And where do the packages land in?
> >>Dgilmore promised in yesterday meeting to
> >>- send a mail that answers this sort of questions
> >>- that he'll try to drive this whole effort a bit more to get it
> >>flying - but I'm sure he'll be glad if people help. A real EPEL SIG that 
> >>meets now and then and works out the details and leads EPEL is IMHO 
> >>overdue.
> >Well, I was very eager to help from the very beginning (I think my
> >whining got Karsten to setup the 108 list), but w/o any info I don't
> >have a handle to do anything.
> 
> The FESCo <-> "Packager community" communication is IMHO the
> problem.

Hm, I think the meeting minutes are quite OK. Rather concise and still
it looks like they are covering everything.

> >Perhaps it was wrong to move the discussion out of the 108 list,
> >because now noone really knows who is doing what where and what is
> >being discussed by which parties.
> 
> Might be part of the problem (others will say that more mailing lists 
> are the problem), but the real problem IMHO is: It lacked a real driver. 
> I tried to do that, but I'm buried with other work already and thus 
> tried to move it over to mmcgrath and dgilmore. They did a lot of work 
> for it, but they have a lot of other work to do already, too. :-/

I was trying to become a driver, and the 108 mailing list already
started looking like a SIG, since the people Karsten had acquired
there were really interested in a RHEL branch. But then the SIG was
more or less spilled into the infinite Fedora space and lost coherency
and signal.

I think this was one of the cases where deframentation led to opposite
results, and the current merge hype (not the one of Core and Extras,
but of all lists and wiki namespaces) may create other such
disadvantageous situations.
-- 
Axel.Thimm at ATrpms.net
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://listman.redhat.com/archives/fedora-maintainers/attachments/20070107/686c6dfb/attachment.sig>