On Mon, 2015-09-14 at 11:09 -0600, Orion Poplawski wrote:
What we haven't managed to do yet is update the package review
> > process
> > to better account for the distinction, such as by adopting a
> > "COPR
> > first" model, where folks put a package up in COPR with bundled
> > components, and then either keep it there indefinitely, or
> > collaborate
> > with others on the unbundling effort.
>
> Just to be awkward - I kinda found working with COPRs a PITA the
> only
> time I tried it and went back to using my own server space. This of
> course isn't an option for everyone, but it *is* an option for
> some of
> us who are already packaging stuff, and maybe I'm not the only one
> who
> prefers it? :)
COPR is getting better all the time and I find it pretty usable
these days.
The big hurdle now for actually supporting packaging efforts in it
IMO is lack
of permission controls.
Yeah, now I look back at it that was kind of an asshat-y mail. I have
no problem with requiring reviews to go through COPR if it winds up
being generally beneficial.
--
Adam Williamson
Fedora QA Community Monkey
IRC: adamw | Twitter: AdamW_Fedora | XMPP: adamw AT happyassassin . net
http://www.happyassassin.net