On Wed, 20 Jul 2005 21:12:25 -0400, David Cary Hart wrote:
> On Thu, 2005-07-21 at 00:54 +0200, Alexander Dalloz wrote:
> > I was following or even tried to follow those instructions.
> > Unfortunately the CVSSyncNeeded page was either much too obvious, I am
> > too brain dead or a mixture of both, so that I didn't see what to do
> > exacty. With help from Elliot in IRC I now see that the wiki is not only
> > the place of the documentation but too used for Fedora processes, such
> > like the branch creation request log.
> > While talking to Elliot he was so kind and created the FC3 and FC4
> > branches for pam_abl for me.
> > As pam_abl was reviewed and approved by Oliver Falk last Friday based on
> > the src.rpm, there seems to be no real reason why another review is
> > required now based on CVS info. At least I did understand Elliot in this
> > way. So if nobody protests I will soon request a build for devel, FC4
> > and FC3.
> Your post gives me hope that I am not such a mindless idiot. I am going
> to compare where I am at with leafnode with the documentation one more
> time tomorrow and then cry for help if it's still incomprehensible.
>From the perspective of "sponsors", we can only offer help where
questions are raised or where mistakes/accidents happen. Personally,
I try to cover many answers to questions I'm asked privately in the
Wiki. The Wiki pages should not become too complex, however, as
with every additional paragraph of text to read, it gives the false
impression that there are too many things to consider. This scares
off potential contributors. (And who really revisits Wiki pages to
check for changes?) The current situation with the work on the
new build system most likely is the most confusing thing, as packagers
don't get any status feedback for their build requests.
fedora-extras-list mailing list