Hiyas,
does one who wants to review other packages need to be sponsored or should fedorabugs membership be given to anyone who wants to have it? Afaik, the FAS says that a sponsor is not needed for fedorabugs.
Regards, Till
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1
Till Maas wrote:
Hiyas,
does one who wants to review other packages need to be sponsored or should fedorabugs membership be given to anyone who wants to have it? Afaik, the FAS says that a sponsor is not needed for fedorabugs.
There's really two questions here with two different answers:
1) Do I need to be sponsored to review packages? You need to be sponsored into cvsextras to complete a review and change the flags on a package from needs review to accepted. Enforcement of this policy is done through membership in fedorabugs. You do not need to be sponsored to give a preliminary review as part of showing that you have learned the packaging guidelines.
2) Do I need to be sponsored to have fedorabugs? You do not need to be a sponsored member of cvsextras in order to be sponsored into fedorabugs. There are multiple projects that need to have access to make changes to Fedora Bugzilla entries (Packaging for package reviews and Triage for closing bugs as dupes, for instance). Each project that makes use of fedorabugs probably has a different criterion. I don't know if there's any project currently which just says, "Ask us and we'll put you in Fedora Bugs".
- -Toshio
On Mo September 3 2007, Toshio Kuratomi wrote:
- Do I need to be sponsored to review packages? You need to be sponsored into cvsextras to complete a review and
change the flags on a package from needs review to accepted. Enforcement of this policy is done through membership in fedorabugs. You do not need to be sponsored to give a preliminary review as part of showing that you have learned the packaging guidelines.
So one needs to maintain at least one package to approve a package in a review, because one only gets cvsextras membership after submitting a package that was approved by a sponsor? Btw. I am asking these question because there is one volunteer who wants to help with reviewing packages but not maintaining one and the wiki does not really answer the question, whether this is possible and how he gets the permission to do this.
Regards, Till
On Wed, 05 Sep 2007 12:09:52 +0200 Till Maas opensource@till.name wrote:
So one needs to maintain at least one package to approve a package in a review, because one only gets cvsextras membership after submitting a package that was approved by a sponsor? Btw. I am asking these question because there is one volunteer who wants to help with reviewing packages but not maintaining one and the wiki does not really answer the question, whether this is possible and how he gets the permission to do this.
Technically the person would have to be sponsored. Right now the only documented way to get sponsored is to bring a new package to the party. However the tool will allow somebody to apply for cvsextras and somebody else to approve them, without a new package being involved. We just don't have any written guidelines on allowing this to happen.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1
Jesse Keating wrote:
On Wed, 05 Sep 2007 12:09:52 +0200 Till Maas opensource@till.name wrote:
So one needs to maintain at least one package to approve a package in a review, because one only gets cvsextras membership after submitting a package that was approved by a sponsor? Btw. I am asking these question because there is one volunteer who wants to help with reviewing packages but not maintaining one and the wiki does not really answer the question, whether this is possible and how he gets the permission to do this.
Technically the person would have to be sponsored. Right now the only documented way to get sponsored is to bring a new package to the party. However the tool will allow somebody to apply for cvsextras and somebody else to approve them, without a new package being involved. We just don't have any written guidelines on allowing this to happen.
If this person is willing to put up with a certain amount of hassle because they'd be the guinea pig case, we do have to get to the point where we have other routes to sponsorship besides maintaining packages. Reviewing packages is a relatively easy test of this, since current maintainers are expected to show they understand the guidelines through review.
There have been the beginnings of proposals for this kind of thing before but they've all tended to stall. I think they attempt to be too general and too big. We need to start small by extending the current policy on sponsorship to a few other groups (in this case, review-only) and see what we learn from doing that.
This is a topic for fesco and fedora-devel rather than the packaging committee, though. I'd say start a discussion and proposal on fedora-devel and then get it added to the fesco meeting agenda.
- -Toshio
packaging@lists.fedoraproject.org
-
Jesse Keating -
Till Maas -
Toshio Kuratomi