4:58 a.m.
Hello,
Such a difference is made in the text 'Communicate with the EPEL SIG or
other EPEL contributors '. I think that this is an unneeded distinction.
In my opinion everybody contributing to EPEL (packages, infra...) is
in the EPEL SIG. Is it agreed?
--
Pat
6:26 a.m.
On 28.10.2008 10:58, Patrice Dumas wrote:
Such a difference is made in the text 'Communicate with the EPEL
SIG or
other EPEL contributors '. I think that this is an unneeded distinction.
In my opinion everybody contributing to EPEL (packages, infra...) is
in the EPEL SIG. Is it agreed?
For me a "EPEL contributor" is a "ordinary" contributor that is for
the
most part only interested in his or her own packages and nothing else.
A EPEL SIG member is somebody that cares of EPEL as a whole; somebody
who helps making EPEL better/who does work beyond the packaging level.
CU
knurd
6:53 a.m.
On Tue, Oct 28, 2008 at 12:26:24PM +0100, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote:
A EPEL SIG member is somebody that cares of EPEL as a whole; somebody
who helps making EPEL better/who does work beyond the packaging level.
How do you distinguish practically both kind of contributors?
I personnally think that this distinction isn't really meaningfull,
what you are is what you do. It doesn't seems to exist in fedora,
and shouldn't exist in EPEL either, in my opinion. Now we could have
personal responsibilities, but I don't think that now a SIG is needed.
At some point it was needed, because it was a SIG within fedora, but now
that, although still in fedora EPEL has its own life, I don't think it
is really important.
--
Pat
7:15 a.m.
On 28.10.2008 12:53, Patrice Dumas wrote:
On Tue, Oct 28, 2008 at 12:26:24PM +0100, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote:
> A EPEL SIG member is somebody that cares of EPEL as a whole; somebody
> who helps making EPEL better/who does work beyond the packaging level.
How do you distinguish practically both kind of contributors?
I personnally think that this distinction isn't really meaningfull,
For us that's true. But for the SIG members it's something different;
they can feel special if they are part of a SIG, and that might help
getting them more involved to help bring EPEL forward.
I'd leave the SIG stuff in place as it is, as it doesn't do any harm but
might help. References to the EPEL SIG and it's Steering Committee might
also exist in other parts of the wiki and might be important for the
government modell. FESCo iirc put "driving EPEL" in the hands of the
EPEL SIG and its steering committee.
CU
knurd
7:28 a.m.
On Tue October 28 2008, Patrice Dumas wrote:
On Tue, Oct 28, 2008 at 12:26:24PM +0100, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote:
> A EPEL SIG member is somebody that cares of EPEL as a whole; somebody
> who helps making EPEL better/who does work beyond the packaging level.
How do you distinguish practically both kind of contributors?
I personnally think that this distinction isn't really meaningfull,
what you are is what you do. It doesn't seems to exist in fedora,
and shouldn't exist in EPEL either, in my opinion. Now we could have
For the Fedora Collection there exist FESCo, rel-eng, the infrastructure team
and a lot of SIGs and also a lot of other groups (artwork, website,
translation, ...), so there is some distinction.
Regards,
Till
8:04 a.m.
On Tue, Oct 28, 2008 at 01:28:32PM +0100, Till Maas wrote:
For the Fedora Collection there exist FESCo, rel-eng, the infrastructure team
and a lot of SIGs and also a lot of other groups (artwork, website,
translation, ...), so there is some distinction.
There are also some rel-eng and infras people for EPEL, and the
other groups are, in my opinion also part of EPEL (artwork, website,
translation) as EPEL is under the fedora umbrella. But there is no
fedora SIG, and I don't think that FESCo plays this role either -- FESCo
is the equivalent of the EPEL Steering commitee.
There could be SIGs within EPEL at some point, but I don't think about
EPEL as a SIG. That doesn't matter much in the end, I don't care, this
is very formal. No problem with readding something about the EPEL SIG.
--
Pat
8:19 a.m.
On Tue, Oct 28, 2008 at 01:15:42PM +0100, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote:
On 28.10.2008 12:53, Patrice Dumas wrote:
> On Tue, Oct 28, 2008 at 12:26:24PM +0100, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote:
>> A EPEL SIG member is somebody that cares of EPEL as a whole; somebody
>> who helps making EPEL better/who does work beyond the packaging
>> level.
> How do you distinguish practically both kind of contributors?
>
> I personnally think that this distinction isn't really meaningfull,
For us that's true. But for the SIG members it's something different;
they can feel special if they are part of a SIG, and that might help
getting them more involved to help bring EPEL forward.
But don't they feel likely special when they are subscribed to the list
and help making the decisions here?
You didn't really responded to the question about who is an EPEL SIG
member. The people who put themselves on the
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/EPEL/SIG
page? I don't think it makes sense. Otherwise said I don't think there
is an need for an artificial differentiation among EPEL contributors
when it is not associated with entrance barriers nor special powers nor
a need to communicate EPEL contributors. There was a need, in the past
to communicate who was really interested in EPEL, when the project was
small, but today, is there such a need?
I'd leave the SIG stuff in place as it is, as it doesn't do
any harm but
might help. References to the EPEL SIG and it's Steering Committee might
also exist in other parts of the wiki and might be important for the
government modell. FESCo iirc put "driving EPEL" in the hands of the
EPEL SIG and its steering committee.
The steering commitee is another story, I think it makes sense, and it
is in my opinion, something similar with FESCo for fedora (and with less
missions). There has to be some way to decide when there is no
agreement. It is the steering committee that FESCo endorses, not the
SIG.
--
Pat
8:28 a.m.
On 28.10.2008 14:04, Patrice Dumas wrote:
On Tue, Oct 28, 2008 at 01:28:32PM +0100, Till Maas wrote:
> For the Fedora Collection there exist FESCo, rel-eng, the infrastructure team
> and a lot of SIGs and also a lot of other groups (artwork, website,
> translation, ...), so there is some distinction.
There are also some rel-eng and infras people for EPEL, and the
other groups are, in my opinion also part of EPEL (artwork, website,
translation) as EPEL is under the fedora umbrella. But there is no
fedora SIG, and I don't think that FESCo plays this role either -- FESCo
is the equivalent of the EPEL Steering commitee.
As mentioned earlier today on this list already: the EPEL SIG (and it's
steering committe) is below FESCo in Fedora's government model (or did
that change recently? then I missed that).
There could be SIGs within EPEL at some point, but I don't think
about
EPEL as a SIG.
Neverthelees it was created as one and the SIG (not the Steering
Committee iirc; that was build by the SIG) got permission to run EPEL
from FESCo.
/me now tries to stay away from this discussion
CU
knurd
8:56 a.m.
On Tue, Oct 28, 2008 at 02:28:48PM +0100, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote:
As mentioned earlier today on this list already: the EPEL SIG (and it's
steering committe) is below FESCo in Fedora's government model (or did
that change recently? then I missed that).
Ok, FESCo is above in the command chain, but the missions are similar
(except that EPEL doesn't need to duplicate some FESCo missions, like
being above the packaging commitee or other transverse SIGs that are of
relevance for both EPEL and fedora as a distro).
> There could be SIGs within EPEL at some point, but I don't
think about
> EPEL as a SIG.
Neverthelees it was created as one and the SIG (not the Steering
Committee iirc; that was build by the SIG) got permission to run EPEL
from FESCo.
Is it still true? Reading the
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/EPEL/SteeringCommittee
page, except for the historical remark that the steering commitee was
formed by the SIG, there is no specific mention of the SIG (only one
where it is side by side with the community and the steering commitee).
It seems to me that all the authority the SIG once had is now in the
hands of the steering commitee. But I may be wrong.
--
Pat
5652
days inactive
5652
days old
epel-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
8 comments
3 participants
participants (3)
-
Patrice Dumas -
Thorsten Leemhuis -
Till Maas