[CentOS] Initial 6.0 trees in QA

Thu May 26 19:15:39 UTC 2011
Ljubomir Ljubojevic <office at plnet.rs>

Steven Crothers wrote:
> On Thu, May 26, 2011 at 2:06 PM,  <aurfalien at gmail.com> wrote:
>> Me thinks its awesome for the updates, you have no idea how many times
>> I've had to defend Centos on other lists.
>> Kooks saying the project is dead, Dags departure from the dev list is
>> the end, blah blah blah.  Just shear nonsense.
> Please don't read into my comment of "good move forward" to much. I
> still think the CentOS project has allot of growing to do and I
> disagree with more things then I agree with at this point. I just see
> any step forward into transparency is a good thing, however I think
> they could use a good hard look at the Fedora and Debian projects.
> Fedora and Debian in my opinion are both superior to the way CentOS
> opens community development. Having one developer doing all the
> packaging (Johnny) is a waste of resources and intelligence. A simple
> repository where we can all contribute to the build cycle would be far
> more beneficial in the long run for the project. However, they are
> currently worried about people "stealing" their work and starting
> their own rebuilds of RHEL, which if that was going to happen it would
> have already. The SL team opens their build process and we can get
> close enough with Fedora to make a good start.
> Some of the developer paranoia needs to go, and more community
> involvement needs to happen still. However the QA system is a good
> step forward and like I said, hopefully the first of many over the
> next few years.

Hmm. Steven, what part of "rebuilding, not developing" fact are you 
having problems with?

How would that happen in your mind? Please give us detail instruction.

Guys prepare all srpms and ask you/us/anybody to help them. Then 
you/us/anybody start fiddling with it and create huge chatter about what 
works and what not. Keep in mind that you are NOT allowed to change 
srpms, just building environment!!!.

What happens when you take responsibility for certain package and then 
have no time for it? Will all other rebuilders be forced to wait for 
you? Will rebuilding queues be halted until we all agree is something is 
correctly done, or until we argue if one of us thinks that other one is 
not competent? Who will take precedence? Will core dev team become referees?

Or if you think we should all have simultaneous access to the same 
packages, who will volunteer to build simultaneous access system? And 
how you intend to solve conflicts?

And this issues are just from the top of my head while I have other 
problems on my mind.

Please answer this in detail, not just shrug it off and say "I do not 
know" or "That is not the point".