On Tue, Mar 29, 2022 at 10:04 PM Carl George <c...@redhat.com> wrote:
> EPEL has a stalled request policy [0] that allows packagers to get > themselves added as collaborators on epel* branches. Prior to this > policy being implemented, requests to add Fedora packages to EPEL > would often go unanswered for long periods of time. Packagers wanting > to help had only one option to force action: Fedora's non-responsive > maintainer policy [1]. This was view by many as overkill, as it > results in all of the non-responsive maintainer's packages being > orphaned or transferred to the requester. The stalled request policy > is much friendlier and enables greater collaboration. > > However, despite the good intentions, I've observed some frustrations > among Fedora packagers when collaborators are added via this process. > We do not want maintainers to feel rushed or circumvented. That said, > I am firmly of the opinion that nobody "owns" Fedora packages, we > maintain them. Packagers wanting to take action on EPEL requests > should have a way to do that if the existing maintainers have not > taken action within a reasonable amount of time. What I would like to > discuss is what amount of time is reasonable. > > The current process allows a collaborator to be added after a two week > period. When the stalled policy was implemented I was a fan of this > duration, but now I think it is too short. Extending it slightly > would be a good compromise to give maintainers a bit more time to > respond while still allowing the request to eventually be completed. > I have two suggestions for alternative steps for the process. > > Current process (two bugzilla pings, two weeks total time): > - 1st request > - one week goes by > - 2nd request > - one week goes by > - releng ticket to be added as a collaborator > > Proposal A (three bugzilla pings, three weeks total time): > - 1st request > - one week goes by > - 2nd request > - one week goes by > - 3rd request > - one week goes by > - releng ticket to be added as a collaborator > > Proposal B (two bugzilla pings, four weeks total time): > - 1st request > - two weeks go by > - 2nd request > - two weeks go by > - releng ticket to be added as a collaborator > > I also think we can improve the process by having the last bugzilla > comment include setting the needsinfo flag. Please share your > thoughts on these alternative process steps. > > [0] > https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/epel/epel-policy/#stalled_epel_requests > [1] > https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/fesco/Policy_for_nonresponsive_package_maintainers/ > I prefer Proposal A. I also like setting the needsinfo flag. But instead of the "last" bugzilla comment, have it be the "2nd" bugzilla comment. For both proposals having it be the "2nd" bugzilla comment gives two weeks for the needsinfo flag. Troy
_______________________________________________ epel-devel mailing list -- epel-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to epel-devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/epel-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org Do not reply to spam on the list, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
