On 29 January 2014 15:49, inode0 <ino...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Wed, Jan 29, 2014 at 4:39 PM, Jon <jdisn...@gmail.com> wrote: > > On Wed, Jan 29, 2014 at 2:30 PM, Stephen Gallagher <sgall...@redhat.com> > wrote: > >> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > >> Hash: SHA1 > >> > >> Apologies for the slightly alarmist $SUBJECT, but I want to make sure > >> that this gets read by the appropriate groups. > > > > [snip] > > > > > >> > >> 1) Are Spins useful as they currently exist? There are many problems > >> that have been noted in the Spins process, most notably that it is > >> very difficult to get a Spin approved and then has no ongoing > >> maintenance requiring it to remain functional. We've had Spins at > >> times go through entire Fedora release cycles without ever being > >> functional. > >> > > > > Putting on my rel-eng hat I can say that any spin that fails to > > compose will be dropped. > > > > I believe we also encourage or even require the spin maintainers to > > test their spin as functional. > > (To work out if the spin succeeds to compose but fails to actually work) > > > > The idea is to encourage active spin process, inactive spins will auto > > retire by policy if they fail. > > > > Another aspect I worry about is the mirroring stuff. > > With the coming WGs I fear the rsync mirroring will grow very large, > > and spins are an attractive piece of fat to cut. > > You probably didn't mean for that to sound so negative but a piece of > fat to cut is how rel-eng thinks of spins? > > I recall being assured at the beginning that some interested company > was willing to provide the necessary support for us to give this a > fair try. > > How long is a fair try? It would help to define that before people go on a rant about doing it for a couple of years now.
-- Stephen J Smoogen.
-- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
