Dear all,
Following a previous thread debate about Unknown Horizons:
1) I'm available to maintain unknown-horizons (UH) in Fedora and EPEL (RHEL6); 2) For 1) to happen I would like to maintain also FIFE, which doesn't seem to see much love for quite some time; I ask this because FIFE flagship product is UH itself and the development of both is very close... A FIFE release always preceeds a UH release; 3) If 1) and 2) happen, then I need to maintain also python-enet, which provides the python bindings for ENet. In case ENet needs some love, then I don't mind taking it also.
For this to happen, I could use information on the following:
1) How to check who currently maintains those packages; 2) The correct 'modus operandi' to take ownership of those packages;
Consider that:
1) I already provide packages for Fedora and RHEL for at least 1 year through OBS. This packages are the ones supported by upstream; Providing them on Fedora means I would remove them from OBS and replace the current information for Fedora users on UH main website; 2) I have been sharing jokes and enjoying UH experience with upstream, so any issues found can properly be addressed to upstream and a rapid response is expected; 3) In extreme situations I can take ownership of all dependencies required (ex: guichan, scons, etc); 4) I don't know the Fedora way, so I would rather stick with FIFE and UH at the start and when I'm more confortable I can take ownership of the rest of the dependencies;
Is this OK? Should I re-open BZ718430?
[1] - https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=718430
NM
On Fri, Apr 27, 2012 at 11:47 AM, Nelson Marques nmo.marques@gmail.comwrote:
Dear all,
Following a previous thread debate about Unknown Horizons:
- I'm available to maintain unknown-horizons (UH) in Fedora and EPEL
(RHEL6); 2) For 1) to happen I would like to maintain also FIFE, which doesn't seem to see much love for quite some time; I ask this because FIFE flagship product is UH itself and the development of both is very close... A FIFE release always preceeds a UH release; 3) If 1) and 2) happen, then I need to maintain also python-enet, which provides the python bindings for ENet. In case ENet needs some love, then I don't mind taking it also.
For this to happen, I could use information on the following:
- How to check who currently maintains those packages;
You can use the fedora pkgdb at https://admin.fedoraproject.org/pkgdb. To get into contact with the owners of the packages you can either file bugs against the packages, or email packagename-owner@fedoraproject dot org.
- The correct 'modus operandi' to take ownership of those packages;
You generally don't "take ownership" of a package that someone else owns
in Fedora, except for when the owner expresses an interest in orphaning the package and passing ownership along or the owner is non-responsive. You can, however, apply to _co-maintain_ the package. In this case, you gain rights to commit to the git branch and can submit updates for a package. Co-maintainership is up to the discretion of the package owner, you can apply to co-maintain in the pkgdb (if you are sponsored into the packaging group,) but you should speak with the package owner first.
Consider that:
- I already provide packages for Fedora and RHEL for at least 1 year
through OBS. This packages are the ones supported by upstream; Providing them on Fedora means I would remove them from OBS and replace the current information for Fedora users on UH main website;
That's nice, but Fedora has a much different workflow, especially if you're working with other package owners to coordinate dependencies and avoid breakages in the package collection.
- I have been sharing jokes and enjoying UH experience with
upstream, so any issues found can properly be addressed to upstream and a rapid response is expected;
Great! A good relationship with the project upstream is a plus for reports and fixes/contributions.
- In extreme situations I can take ownership of all dependencies
required (ex: guichan, scons, etc);
This is not necessary. You can work with the current maintainers if there are any incompatibilities.
- I don't know the Fedora way, so I would rather stick with FIFE and
UH at the start and when I'm more confortable I can take ownership of the rest of the dependencies;
May I suggest:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Package_maintainer_responsibilities https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/How_to_get_sponsored_into_the_packager_group https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PackageMaintainers/Join https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/SIGs/Games
Lurking on the -devel and -packaging lists and/or the fedora-devel IRC channel are also good things to do if you have the time.
Is this OK? Should I re-open BZ718430?
You should be ok re-opening your review request and continuing the review. You should also reach out to the FIFE maintainer as was suggested in the previous thread, especially if you want to co-maintain FIFE (and perhaps he can help you maintain UH as well)
Rich
On Fri, Apr 27, 2012 at 12:44:01PM -0400, Rich Mattes wrote:
On Fri, Apr 27, 2012 at 11:47 AM, Nelson Marques nmo.marques@gmail.com wrote:
1) How to check who currently maintains those packages;
You can use the fedora pkgdb at https://admin.fedoraproject.org/pkgdb. To get into contact with the owners of the packages you can either file bugs against the packages, or email packagename-owner@fedoraproject dot org.
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/pkgdb/acls/name/fife https://admin.fedoraproject.org/pkgdb/acls/name/enet
PackageDB keeps ownership information per branch (several reasons for this: the owner may be different between EPEL and Fedora; the owner may want to orphan a package in Fedora devel but be willing to continue maintaining on older Fedora releases until they go EOL).
The only difference between an owner and a comaintainer (someone who has all of the acls on the package) is that the owner is assigned to be the owner in bugzilla.
2) The correct 'modus operandi' to take ownership of those packages;
You generally don't "take ownership" of a package that someone else owns in Fedora, except for when the owner expresses an interest in orphaning the package and passing ownership along or the owner is non-responsive. You can, however, apply to _co-maintain_ the package. In this case, you gain rights to commit to the git branch and can submit updates for a package. Co-maintainership is up to the discretion of the package owner, you can apply to co-maintain in the pkgdb (if you are sponsored into the packaging group,) but you should speak with the package owner first.
Just one thing to add here. Comaintainership responsibility can vary depending on the circumstances. I have a few packages where a comaintainer and I talked and he's pretty much doing all the work. I only work on the package if there's something time critical or I can contribute a patch to the code that the comaintainer can't. Communication is the key to deciding what each person is going to do.
An additional plus to comaintainership is that FESCo can sponsor you into the packager group if the package owner is willing to mentor you. That allows more people to do package reviews for you.
Is this OK? Should I re-open BZ718430?
You should be ok re-opening your review request and continuing the review. You should also reach out to the FIFE maintainer as was suggested in the previous thread, especially if you want to co-maintain FIFE (and perhaps he can help you maintain UH as well)
A hearty +1 to this.
-Toshio
No dia 27 de Abril de 2012 18:44, Toshio Kuratomi a.badger@gmail.com escreveu:
On Fri, Apr 27, 2012 at 12:44:01PM -0400, Rich Mattes wrote:
On Fri, Apr 27, 2012 at 11:47 AM, Nelson Marques nmo.marques@gmail.com wrote:
1) How to check who currently maintains those packages;
You can use the fedora pkgdb at https://admin.fedoraproject.org/pkgdb. To get into contact with the owners of the packages you can either file bugs against the packages, or email packagename-owner@fedoraproject dot org.
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/pkgdb/acls/name/fife https://admin.fedoraproject.org/pkgdb/acls/name/enet
PackageDB keeps ownership information per branch (several reasons for this: the owner may be different between EPEL and Fedora; the owner may want to orphan a package in Fedora devel but be willing to continue maintaining on older Fedora releases until they go EOL).
The only difference between an owner and a comaintainer (someone who has all of the acls on the package) is that the owner is assigned to be the owner in bugzilla.
2) The correct 'modus operandi' to take ownership of those packages;
You generally don't "take ownership" of a package that someone else owns in Fedora, except for when the owner expresses an interest in orphaning the package and passing ownership along or the owner is non-responsive. You can, however, apply to _co-maintain_ the package. In this case, you gain rights to commit to the git branch and can submit updates for a package. Co-maintainership is up to the discretion of the package owner, you can apply to co-maintain in the pkgdb (if you are sponsored into the packaging group,) but you should speak with the package owner first.
Just one thing to add here. Comaintainership responsibility can vary depending on the circumstances. I have a few packages where a comaintainer and I talked and he's pretty much doing all the work. I only work on the package if there's something time critical or I can contribute a patch to the code that the comaintainer can't. Communication is the key to deciding what each person is going to do.
An additional plus to comaintainership is that FESCo can sponsor you into the packager group if the package owner is willing to mentor you. That allows more people to do package reviews for you.
Is this OK? Should I re-open BZ718430?
You should be ok re-opening your review request and continuing the review. You should also reach out to the FIFE maintainer as was suggested in the previous thread, especially if you want to co-maintain FIFE (and perhaps he can help you maintain UH as well)
A hearty +1 to this.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=757352
Once this has been fixed :)
-Toshio
-- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel