On Thu, Mar 04, 2010 at 10:20:35AM -0500, John J. McDonough wrote:
On Thu, 2010-03-04 at 10:05 -0500, Paul W. Frields wrote:
We have a team bug-stomping scheduled for this coming weekend --
In working with some new contributors, I was noticing that we have very few sponsors on some of the guides. We might want to either make sure quaid is available (I think he is on most of them), or perhaps assign some sponsors ahead of time to make things go a little easier.
I will try to look through the bugs and see where we might have some holes, but I have a pretty full dance card these next couple days so I'm not so sure I'll get to it. If someone else wants to take that on I would appreciate it.
I guess all we really need is someone who can commit to the guides where there are a lot of bugs, but it would be helpful if we had someone who could add commiters where appropriate.
So how many of the guides are using git? From my look at fedorahosted.org, it's the majority. That's good because git makes it dead-simple to make fixes, generate a patch, and then email it to the list where it can be used.
There are some good setup hints for git here: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Git_Quickref
By the way, for people using Subversion repos, there is a git-svn utility that allows you to use a good portion of git coolness with these legacy style repositories.
So at worst, without access people can still make their fixes, and send them to this list for inclusion by the owners.
Or maybe Paul as the grand poobah has super privs on all the docs and it won't be a problem.
Well... I do have admin access on the FAS that allows me to arbitrarily assign group access levels but it's frowned upon to use that as a substitute for sponsorship from within the group itself. It might look like I'm tampering with the will of the group owners, even if the intentions are good. :-)
It would be best if guide owners could make sure they have several sponsors in addition to themselves who can grant user access.