On Fri, Apr 27, 2012 at 11:47 AM, Nelson Marques <nmo.marq...@gmail.com>wrote:
> 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; > 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. > 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. > 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; > 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. > 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; > Great! A good relationship with the project upstream is a plus for reports and fixes/contributions. > 3) 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. > 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; > > 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
-- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
