Michael Schwendt wrote :
On Thu, 8 Jan 2004 11:11:05 +0100, Matthias Saou wrote:
Eric S. Raymond wrote :
But I just got told twice that the Extras repository does not yet exist!
...and this is IMHO the biggest issue ATM. Once the minimal infrastructure shows up,
Minimal infrastructure won't make people happy who find the current fedora.us infrastructure and system unsatisfactory.
Not necessarily. I meant things like a CVS repository for all spec files and patches (shared for Core, Extras and Alternatives for instance), starting to reuse (some of) the fedora.us guidelines and policies etc.
Minimal infrastructure most likely means non-automated builds, and that will require human resources to perform package sanity checks before developer time is wasted on failed build attempts.
Opening automated builds to outside developers, i.e. "part of the world" won't be trivial, so I wouldn't expect that to be anything near, even once past the "minimal infrastructure" part. Then again it would be a nice surprise if I was wrong about that.
I'm not quite sure I understand the end of your statement, so maybe I missed your point.
it'll hopefully start moving forward real fast.
Public discussion of the planned general procedure of package submission and approval, too.
I got the impression that the discussions which started ended with very few interventions from Red Hat's side, and "let's just reuse fedora.us" from the people contributing to fedora.us's side. Without more elements from Red Hat as to where the main direction is headed, I don't think current discussions can get to an acceptable (i.e. interesting) signal/noise level, and I take this very thread as a witness ;-)
Matthias