On Sun, 2006-12-24 at 19:18 -0500, Michael Tiemann wrote:
On Sun, 2006-12-24 at 19:09 -0500, Konstantin Ryabitsev wrote:
> On 12/24/06, Eric S. Raymond <esr(a)thyrsus.com> wrote:
> > The question remains. Do I have to *do shit by hand*
> Why not, you're doing an admirable job so far.
Konstantin--how many packages do you maintain? I think that rather than
sniping at a would-be contributor, I'd like to see somebody who is
maintaining at least 30, and perhaps 50 packages explain how *they*
I am one of
By hand - It's largely trivial and __way__ less
effort than some people
seem to expect.
Maybe they have a better way. Maybe it drives them almost as
Eric. How *does* a maintainer of 36 packages would with the Fedora
process? How *should* one do it? This is the question and the problem
to be solved.
IMO, this is largely a non-issue. The real issues with maintaining
packages in Fedora are elsewhere.
* Lack of automated rebuilds (manual mass rebuilds are a PITA).
* Lack of automated "distro-consistency checks" (E.g. broken EVRs could
fairly easily be avoided - Check a package before releasing it).
* Lack of control over the release process (Currently, packages are
automatically being pushed - No chance for a maintainer to withdraw a
broken/mis-compiled built). I would expect maintainers to give "explicit
clearance" before a package is being released.
But ... all these issues are comparatively minor. The real road-blocks
rendering Fedora non-attractive are of non-technical nature.