[Sugar-devel] Non-maintainer uploads of activities

[Gonzalo Odiard]

I am not so sure this is a solution.
I think we need active maintainers, not only bugs fixes.
IMHO we need a MIA ("missing in action") or "non responsive maintainer"
policy.
We have hundred of pending tickets, from months or years ago.
And when we start to work in a abandoned activity, there are not a clear way
to request
access to git or aslo (aslo is easier than git)
Debian have policies [1] point 7.4, and teams [2] to manage MIA,
Fedora have a Non responsive maintainers policy [3].
Probably, we can change the time lapses, but the general idea is the same.

Gonzalo


[1]
http://docs.huihoo.com/debian/manuals/developers-reference/ch-beyond-pkging.en.html
[2] http://wiki.debian.org/Teams/MIA
[3]
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Policy_for_nonresponsive_package_maintainers


On Sat, May 28, 2011 at 11:46 AM, Sascha Silbe <
sascha-ml-reply-to-2011-2 at silbe.org> wrote:

> Hi!
>
> I would like to propose adopting the Debian Non-Maintainer-Upload (NMU)
> process [1] for Fructose. Individual activity authors would also be
> encouraged to allow their activities to be NMU'ed following this policy.
> The sections I'd consider applicable to Sugar Labs are 5.11.1, 5.11.2
> (read debian/changelog as Release Notes) and 5.11.4. Since the version
> number rules are different in Sugar, the NMU should append ".1" instead
> of "+nmu1" (e.g. "123.1" for an NMU based on the maintainer release
> "123").
>
> A few key points:
> - NMUs are only to be done for bug fixes
> - all bugs that get fixed by the NMU must have been reported in the BTS
>  [2]
> - the maintainer must have been given sufficient time to act (rule of
>  thumb: 2-10 days depending on the severity of the bug that gets fixed)
>
> The Infrastructure Team [3] would be authorised to manage permissions
> on git.sl.o and a.sl.o as needed for the NMU to happen.
>
> Since Sugar Labs lacks an equivalent of the Debian New Maintainer
> process [4], I would like to add a requirement that the uploader has
> successfully gone through review for a Sucrose (Glucose + Fructose)
> package at least once and their patch been included in mainline. Note:
> Patch author and uploader can be different persons.
>
> Sascha
>
> [1] http://www.debian.org/doc/manuals/developers-reference/pkgs.html#nmu
> [2] https://bugs.sugarlabs.org/
> [3] https://wiki.sugarlabs.org/go/Infrastructure_Team
> [4] http://www.debian.org/devel/join/newmaint
> --
> http://sascha.silbe.org/
> http://www.infra-silbe.de/
>
> _______________________________________________
> Sugar-devel mailing list
> Sugar-devel at lists.sugarlabs.org
> http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/sugar-devel
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.sugarlabs.org/archive/sugar-devel/attachments/20110529/0ecbefc5/attachment-0001.html>