fesco

#2616 FESCo policy documents in wiki Package Maintainers category
Closed: Accepted by zbyszek. Opened by oturpe.

Closed: Accepted
Reopen Issue

I am preparing to move the existing Package Maintainers documentation from wiki to docs.fp.o. When reviewing the material in wiki's Package Maintainers category, I discovered page Policy for encouraging comaintainers of packages that seems to belong to FESCo rather than Package Maintainers. Does FESCo want to own it? I can do any of the following actions depending on your preferences:

  1. Move it to FESCo category in wiki
  2. Delete the page
  3. Create a pull request moving the content over to FESCo's docs.fp.o page
  4. Something else

What do you think?

I think we want to own it, and 3. seems most appropriate.
(We use 1. when the page uses wiki features which are not available in antora, which is not the case here.)

Yeah, agreed with @zbyszek

Thank you for your input. Here is the pull request: fesco-docs#43

Here is another similar case: FESCo election policy. If needed, I can help with pull requests etc. before.

Initially, I offered this to Program Management in pgm_team#20, but they do not think it is theirs.

Here is the pull request: fesco-docs#43

I merged the PR without a full vote here. @kevin liked the general approach, the PR looks fine, and I don't think we need to go through a vote for editorial updates.

Here is another similar case: FESCo election policy. If needed, I can help with pull requests etc. before.

Yes, please. This definitely should be in our docs.

Here is another similar case: FESCo election policy. If needed, I can help with pull requests etc. before.

Yes, please. This definitely should be in our docs.

Done: fesco-docs#44

And still one more: wiki page Who is allowed to modify which packages. This should be the last one for now, because I have now completed my review of the Package Maintainers wiki material.

Pull request to include the page in fesco-docs: fesco-docs#45.

Yep. I think thats another one that makes sense in fesco policy...

Ok, one more after I said I am done: wiki page Policy for Orphan and Retired Packages. This was not a separate page when I started, instead I extracted the FESCo policy parts of page Orphaned package that need new maintainers. The original can be seen in this revision.

Pull request: fesco-docs#46

The pull requests were merged already, let's close this. Thank you for working on this!

Metadata Update from @zbyszek:
- Issue close_status updated to: Accepted
- Issue status updated to: Closed (was: Open)

The pull requests were merged already, let's close this. Thank you for working on this!

Agreed, this issue should be considered done. In case I still find another one, I will submit it separately.

I think one more will still come in, since there is no Policy for Package Review or similar.
Metadata
None
None
None
None
None
Static archive. pagure.io was sunset in 2026; this is a read-only snapshot.
Red Hat Logo

Fedora is sponsored by Red Hat. Learn more about the relationship between Red Hat and Fedora »

© Red Hat, Inc. and others.