On 09/25/2014 10:28 AM, Steve Traylen wrote: > Excerpts from Antonio Trande's message of 2014-09-25 17:15:45 +0200: >> Hi Jim. >> >> On 09/25/2014 04:36 PM, Jim Perrin wrote: >>> Earlier this week on the CentOS devel list I proposed an interim method >>> to help make it easier for centos contributions to flow into epel. >>> >>> Essentially the proposal is that CentOS would like a 'curator' group >>> (name can be determined later) similar to the wrangler's group. >>> >>> Members of this group would be responsible for shepherding packages >>> designated by the various SIG efforts in CentOS through the process of >>> getting these packages in epel. This means that rather than having an >>> individual owner, packages would have group ownership. Members of this >>> group will be required to have access to make package modifications on >>> the CentOS side so that they meet the packaging standards for EPEL. >>> Additionally, it would help to have an EPEL proven packager as part of >>> the group as well in order to help make things move a little quicker. >>> >>> Would this be acceptable from an EPEL standpoint? What would be required >>> from an EPEL perspective to make this happen? >>> >> EPEL is for RHEL, Scientific Linux, Oracle Enterprice other than CentOS; >> would we need of special "curator" group for every distro? >> CentOS contributions could flow simply by taking part on EPEL and by >> integrating any special (previously discussed) packaging need .
I don't see that this prevents any other groups from participating at all. The idea is for the benefit of the other groups as well, as they ultimately would get a larger package set to use. > This would be my take also, getting pkgs into EPEL is a pretty well > defined process as is a becoming a packager. I don't see an extra step/group > is needed within CentOS is needed. It is defined. It's also perceived as cumbersome, laborious and painful, and so many would-be contributors don't even attempt to contribute. This is simply a proposal allowing those who are willing to act in place of the original packagers to help contribute. This benefits every group mentioned above, instead of keeping packages within the project. > Group ownership of pkgs in EPEL? So many people can own a package > already. I am unsure what the 'wrangler' group example is. Why list 10 owners when you can list a single group? Wranglers discussed and defined during last week's meeting: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/epel-devel/2014-September/010153.html -- Jim Perrin The CentOS Project | http://www.centos.org twitter: @BitIntegrity | GPG Key: FA09AD77 _______________________________________________ epel-devel mailing list epel-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/epel-devel
