On Fri, 21 Aug 2015 10:43:15 +0200, Miroslav Suchý wrote:
Dne 21.8.2015 v 00:58 Orion Poplawski napsal(a):
My gut reaction to this is, my god, we don't need *more* packages in Fedora,
we need more people maintaining the pile we already have. So I'd like to
see
more packagers added as
On Fri, 21 Aug 2015 10:54:58 +0200, Miroslav Suchý wrote:
Your script output does not tell anything at all about activity of all
packagers in the package collection, in the normal review queue(s), in
pkgdb. No clues about number of orphaned/retired packages. No clues about
semi-dead
2015-08-21 0:58 GMT+02:00 Orion Poplawski or...@cora.nwra.com:
On 08/20/2015 02:50 AM, Miroslav Suchý wrote:
I was just watching the ongoing reports of want-to-be-contributors how hard
is to get sponsored; reports how Fedora
Repository stalled [1]; discussion that we actually do not know how
- Original Message -
From: Orion Poplawski or...@cora.nwra.com
To: Development discussions related to Fedora
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Sent: Friday, 21 August, 2015 1:58:35 AM
Subject: Re: Sponsors - who does (not) work on FE-NEEDSPONSOR tickets
On 08/20/2015 02:50 AM
Dne 20.8.2015 v 13:42 Michael Schwendt napsal(a):
Your script output does not tell anything at all about activity of all
packagers in the package collection, in the normal review queue(s), in
pkgdb. No clues about number of orphaned/retired packages. No clues about
semi-dead packages where the
Am 21.08.2015 um 08:41 schrieb Aleksandar Kurtakov:
- Original Message -
From: Orion Poplawski or...@cora.nwra.com
To: Development discussions related to Fedora devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Sent: Friday, 21 August, 2015 1:58:35 AM
Subject: Re: Sponsors - who does (not) work on FE
Dne 21.8.2015 v 00:58 Orion Poplawski napsal(a):
My gut reaction to this is, my god, we don't need *more* packages in Fedora,
we need more people maintaining the pile we already have. So I'd like to see
more packagers added as co-maintainers of packages.
Hmm,
so does it means that becoming a
On Mon, Aug 17, 2015 at 09:14:34AM +0200, Miroslav Suchý wrote:
I don't know if this has changed in he new age of having crazy human
coding machines, but the last time i looked it was extremely difficult
to see someone's sponsor and to generate statistics on sponsorship
activities. I had
Dne 20.8.2015 v 08:57 Ralf Corsepius napsal(a):
5. You cannot push around sponsors.
The ability to sponsor packagers is a privilege and not a duty. It's not
going to fly to make a volunteer privilege a
burdon.
I repeated several times in this thread that it is perfectly fine when there is
On 08/18/2015 12:04 PM, Miroslav Suchý wrote:
BTW this report reveals that we have just 39 active sponsors (during past year).
If you are sponsors, please consider sponsoring somebody from the queue:
http://fedoraproject.org/PackageReviewStatus/NEEDSPONSOR.html
You should understand that
On Thu, 2015-08-20 at 10:50 +0200, Miroslav Suchý wrote:
That said, I considering your ongoing campaign to be harmful to
Fedora.
I'm really sad to hear this.
I was just watching the ongoing reports of want-to-be-contributors
how hard is to get sponsored; reports how Fedora
On Thu, 20 Aug 2015 10:50:55 +0200, Miroslav Suchý wrote:
I was just watching the ongoing reports of want-to-be-contributors
how hard is to get sponsored;
Yes, it's incredibly easy for Red Hat employees to get sponsored via
the Become a co-maintainer process:
On 08/20/2015 02:50 AM, Miroslav Suchý wrote:
I was just watching the ongoing reports of want-to-be-contributors how hard
is to get sponsored; reports how Fedora
Repository stalled [1]; discussion that we actually do not know how many
active sponsors we have.
...
[1]
2015-08-15 9:13 GMT+02:00 Miroslav Suchý msu...@redhat.com:
Recently we had discussion here about the queue of package reviews with
FE-NEEDSPONSOR flag.
I suggested to write some script which would query db and reveal those
sponsors who does not make his duty.
Here comes this script:
Miroslav Suchý wrote:
Recently we had discussion here about the queue of package reviews with
FE-NEEDSPONSOR flag.
I suggested to write some script which would query db and reveal those
sponsors who does not make his duty.
Here comes this script:
On 08/19/2015 02:05 PM, Christoph Wickert wrote:
2015-08-15 9:13 GMT+02:00 Miroslav Suchý msu...@redhat.com:
Recently we had discussion here about the queue of package reviews with
FE-NEEDSPONSOR flag.
I suggested to write some script which would query db and reveal those
sponsors who does not
Dne 17.8.2015 v 18:30 Michael Schwendt napsal(a):
Have you followed the How To Get Sponsored guidelines?
...
So what?
I'm tired by such an attitude and by all complainers, who sit and wait
instead of showing a bit of activity and following the guidelines.
Your attitude just discouraged [1]
This is current output from my script with updates based on your comments:
Aurelien Bompard abompard - no recent sponsor activity
Adrien Devresse adev - no recent sponsor activity
Adrian Reber adrian - no recent sponsor activity
Alexander Kurtakov akurtakov removed FE-NEEDSPONSOR from BZ 1190728
On Tue, 18 Aug 2015 12:55:37 +0200, Miroslav Suchý wrote:
Have you followed the How To Get Sponsored guidelines?
...
So what?
I'm tired by such an attitude and by all complainers, who sit and wait
instead of showing a bit of activity and following the guidelines.
Your attitude just
BTW this report reveals that we have just 39 active sponsors (during past year).
If you are sponsors, please consider sponsoring somebody from the queue:
http://fedoraproject.org/PackageReviewStatus/NEEDSPONSOR.html
Good start is to take some bug from top (or bottom) of
http://red.ht/1K3njkO
On 08/17/2015 07:47 AM, Josh Boyer wrote:
David Woodhouse dwmw2 - no recent sponsor activity
Reports bugs but not otherwise active in Fedora to my knowledge.
He's still around. He actively maintains packages for SIPE support (Microsoft Lync /
Skype Business) in Pidgin.
--
devel mailing
On 17.08.2015 15:18, Josh Boyer wrote:
On Mon, Aug 17, 2015 at 9:07 AM, Miroslav Suchý msu...@redhat.com wrote:
Dne 17.8.2015 v 14:47 Josh Boyer napsal(a):
I would recommend removing all of the above people from the sponsors group.
-1
There is nothing wrong on being inactive. At least as
On Mon, 17 Aug 2015 15:50:26 +0200, Marcin Haba wrote:
Yes, exactly! I am waiting from March 2015.
Waiting for what?
There may be a misunderstanding of the How To Get Sponsored Wiki page.
I am active in a few Fedora
areas (informal reviews, bugs requests, preparing new features requests,
Dne 17.8.2015 v 14:47 Josh Boyer napsal(a):
I would recommend removing all of the above people from the sponsors group.
-1
There is nothing wrong on being inactive. At least as long as others are active.
If they would want, they can return any time they want.
We should *not* be like turned down
On Mon, Aug 17, 2015 at 9:07 AM, Miroslav Suchý msu...@redhat.com wrote:
Dne 17.8.2015 v 14:47 Josh Boyer napsal(a):
I would recommend removing all of the above people from the sponsors group.
-1
There is nothing wrong on being inactive. At least as long as others are
active.
If they would
@lists.fedoraproject.org
Subject: Sponsors - who does (not) work on FE-NEEDSPONSOR tickets
Recently we had discussion here about the queue of package reviews with
FE-NEEDSPONSOR flag.
I suggested to write some script which would query db and reveal those sponsors
who does not make his duty.
Here comes
On Mon, Aug 17, 2015 at 8:34 AM, Miroslav Suchý msu...@redhat.com wrote:
This is current output from my script with updates based on your comments:
Axel Thimm athimm - no recent sponsor activity
Had his packages orphaned a while ago due to non-responsive maintainer.
Christopher Aillon
On Mon, Aug 17, 2015 at 6:48 PM, Josh Boyer jwbo...@fedoraproject.org wrote:
On Mon, Aug 17, 2015 at 9:07 AM, Miroslav Suchý msu...@redhat.com wrote:
Dne 17.8.2015 v 14:47 Josh Boyer napsal(a):
I would recommend removing all of the above people from the sponsors group.
-1
There is nothing
This is current output from my script with updates based on your comments:
Aurelien Bompard abompard - no recent sponsor activity
Adrien Devresse adev - no recent sponsor activity
Adrian Reber adrian - no recent sponsor activity
Alexander Kurtakov akurtakov removed FE-NEEDSPONSOR from BZ 1190728
On Mon, 17 Aug 2015 16:55:46 +0200, Miroslav Suchý wrote:
Yes, exactly! I am waiting from March 2015.
Waiting for what?
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1203018
You've misunderstood the question. Hence that link isn't an answer.
Do you want me to link tickets where I'm
On Mon, 17 Aug 2015 19:01:24 +0200, Reindl Harald wrote:
maybe you should have read the link below becaus ethen maybe you would
not accuse him about his attitude - there is a lot of activity and
fast respones - what else should he do?
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1203018
Am 17.08.2015 um 18:30 schrieb Michael Schwendt:
On Mon, 17 Aug 2015 17:07:07 +0200, Marcin Haba wrote:
There may be a misunderstanding of the How To Get Sponsored Wiki page.
If everything works fine with sponsoring, so why does this subject
exist? It is not first thread here about
On Mon, 17 Aug 2015 17:07:07 +0200, Marcin Haba wrote:
Hello,
On 17.08.2015 16:33, Michael Schwendt wrote:
On Mon, 17 Aug 2015 15:50:26 +0200, Marcin Haba wrote:
Yes, exactly! I am waiting from March 2015.
Waiting for what?
For sponsoring me by somebody.
Have you followed the
Dne 17.8.2015 v 16:33 Michael Schwendt napsal(a):
Yes, exactly! I am waiting from March 2015.
Waiting for what?
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1203018
--
Miroslav Suchy, RHCA
Red Hat, Senior Software Engineer, #brno, #devexp, #fedora-buildsys
--
devel mailing list
Hello,
On 17.08.2015 16:33, Michael Schwendt wrote:
On Mon, 17 Aug 2015 15:50:26 +0200, Marcin Haba wrote:
Yes, exactly! I am waiting from March 2015.
Waiting for what?
For sponsoring me by somebody. Please read context. And this thread
title either ;-)
There may be a misunderstanding
On 17.08.2015 17:40, Pete Travis wrote:
On Aug 17, 2015 10:07 AM, Marcin Haba marcin.h...@bacula.pl wrote:
Hello,
*snip*
I am not going to continue this discussion because as I wrote in
previous mail, it was only feedback from my side. It is not my intention
to gain something by this
On Aug 17, 2015 10:07 AM, Marcin Haba marcin.h...@bacula.pl wrote:
Hello,
*snip*
I am not going to continue this discussion because as I wrote in
previous mail, it was only feedback from my side. It is not my intention
to gain something by this feedback. It is just feedback to potential
Le 17 août 2015 8:47 AM, Josh Boyer jwbo...@fedoraproject.org a écrit :
On Mon, Aug 17, 2015 at 8:34 AM, Miroslav Suchý msu...@redhat.com wrote:
This is current output from my script with updates based on your
comments:
Axel Thimm athimm - no recent sponsor activity
Had his packages
Dne 15.8.2015 v 16:43 Till Maas napsal(a):
I think the script should also consider comments to needsponsor bugs as
sponsoring work, even if the bug was not yet assigned to someone.
Good idea, I will think about how to fetch this info.
And
IMHO the wording should be a little bit more
Dne 15.8.2015 v 20:09 Jason L Tibbitts III napsal(a):
H Using Bugzilla rather than FAS is not a bad idea, as some people
H abuse their sponsor status by blindly adding people into the packager
H group without any supervision. Using FAS as the information source
H would just hide this hideous
Dne 15.8.2015 v 11:21 Christopher Meng napsal(a):
And some people contributed a lot in the past, after this result will
you request revoking their sponsorship and wipe them out?
NO!
There is really no pros if we revoke some sponsors. We just need them more
active. And we need more sponsors.
On Monday, 17 August 2015 at 19:39, Michael Schwendt wrote:
On Mon, 17 Aug 2015 19:01:24 +0200, Reindl Harald wrote:
maybe you should have read the link below becaus ethen maybe you would
not accuse him about his attitude - there is a lot of activity and
fast respones - what else should
On Sat, 15 Aug 2015 10:02:05 -0400
Haïkel hgue...@fedoraproject.org wrote:
...snip...
Using Bugzilla rather than FAS is not a bad idea, as some people
abuse their sponsor status by blindly adding people into the packager
group without any supervision. Using FAS as the information source
2015-08-16 10:33 GMT-04:00 Kevin Fenzi ke...@scrye.com:
On Sat, 15 Aug 2015 10:02:05 -0400
Haïkel hgue...@fedoraproject.org wrote:
...snip...
Using Bugzilla rather than FAS is not a bad idea, as some people
abuse their sponsor status by blindly adding people into the packager
group without
Hi,
On Sat, Aug 15, 2015 at 12:43 PM, Miroslav Suchý msu...@redhat.com wrote:
Recently we had discussion here about the queue of package reviews with
FE-NEEDSPONSOR flag.
I suggested to write some script which would query db and reveal those
sponsors who does not make his duty.
Here comes
Recently we had discussion here about the queue of package reviews with
FE-NEEDSPONSOR flag.
I suggested to write some script which would query db and reveal those
sponsors who does not make his duty.
Here comes this script:
https://github.com/xsuchy/guard-fedora-sponsors
It is first
And some people contributed a lot in the past, after this result will
you request revoking their sponsorship and wipe them out?
My thought is some of these above can be dropped since they indeed no
longer work in Fedora Project, leaving the privilege to them is
useless:
Ricky Elrod codeblock
H == Haïkel hgue...@fedoraproject.org writes:
H Using Bugzilla rather than FAS is not a bad idea, as some people
H abuse their sponsor status by blindly adding people into the packager
H group without any supervision. Using FAS as the information source
H would just hide this hideous behaviour.
On Sat, Aug 15, 2015 at 09:13:18AM +0200, Miroslav Suchý wrote:
It is first version and I'm sure there will be some false negatives. The
current logic is:
1. query FAS to get all usernames from packager group who are sponsors
2. for each such user get all bugs from past 365 day for Package
On 8/15/15, Pierre-Yves Chibon pin...@pingoured.fr wrote:
Ricky Elrod codeblock
Chitlesh GOORAH
Sorry about the mistaken reply, I'm not sure about how many people
match the standard of inactive, perhaps another thread needed?
I agree we need to wipe off people carefully, but there must be a
Though it's always nice to read in the morning that you're a good guy,
I have few comments.
+ some people have been recently given the sponsor bit
+ some people do actively help our new packagers to
grow but it does not appear here
+ others have done a tremendous works as sponsors in the past
and
On 15/08/15 11:21, Christopher Meng wrote:
And some people contributed a lot in the past, after this result will
you request revoking their sponsorship and wipe them out?
My thought is some of these above can be dropped since they indeed no
longer work in Fedora Project, leaving the privilege
On Sat, Aug 15, 2015 at 05:21:21PM +0800, Christopher Meng wrote:
And some people contributed a lot in the past, after this result will
you request revoking their sponsorship and wipe them out?
My thought is some of these above can be dropped since they indeed no
longer work in Fedora
On Sat, Aug 15, 2015 at 2:35 PM, Parag Nemade panem...@gmail.com wrote:
Hi,
On Sat, Aug 15, 2015 at 12:43 PM, Miroslav Suchý msu...@redhat.com wrote:
Recently we had discussion here about the queue of package reviews with
FE-NEEDSPONSOR flag.
I suggested to write some script which would
54 matches
Mail list logo
