On Tue, Nov 05, 2013 at 01:00:15AM -0200, Lucas Meneghel Rodrigues wrote:
On 11/05/2013 12:00 AM, Nick Coghlan wrote:
>On 11/05/2013 07:51 AM, Don Zickus wrote:
>>On Tue, Oct 29, 2013 at 01:33:33PM +1000, Nick Coghlan wrote:
>>>Even a cursory blog post somewhere (or a reply to this email!)
>>>explaining to people how to *experiment* with this would be helpful. At
>>>the moment I'm having to point people at the merged pull request to say
>>>"Yes, in theory, you can use the upcoming version of autotest as a
>>>Beaker test harness", but I have zero resources to give them on how to
>>>actually run it (because I don't actually know myself).
>>So playing with things a little more..
>>>1. How do you get the experimental version of autotest to play with? Is
>>>there a pre-built RPM somewhere that people can use, or do they have to
>>>build their own?
>>Unfortunately, I see autotest-0.15 has not been packaged with Fedora 20
>>for some reason.
>>Why is Fedora using a version of autotest from a year ago instead of
>>something far more recent????
Because it is a big PITA to get Fedora to approve new package reviewers.
It is been months that cleber is dilligently going from review to
review to finally become one, but it usually takes 20 days every
iteration. At this staggering rate, he'll become a Fedora package
mantainer by 2016. Seriously, I've been thinking "ok, now the
package maintainership thing will be sorted out any minute now" for
the past 4 months.
Now once he becomes a package maintainer, up to date packages will
start to show up.
Odd. Maybe that is for new packages. For existing packages it has taken
me less than a week to get approved to become a maintainer (with commit
privileges) for a package.
Cleber, can you point me to some of the hold-ups on getting you approved?
Being in Westford, I might be able to poke people directly to move things
along quicker. 20 days seems awfully long and would be a big turn-off to
get new Fedora contributors/maintainers (something I assumed Fedora wanted