Hi, I'd like to become a package sponsor. My primary goal is growing Fedora Python community, where I'm starting to see growing interest from upstreams to get involved in packaging. I've been a packager for more than 3 years now and I'm also a proven packager.
I've already reviewed [https://bugzilla.redhat.com/buglist.cgi?bug_status=NEW&bug_status=ASSIGNED&bug_status=POST&bug_status=MODIFIED&bug_status=ON_DEV&bug_status=ON_QA&bug_status=VERIFIED&bug_status=RELEASE_PENDING&bug_status=CLOSED&classification=Fedora&component=Package%20Review&email1=bkabrda%40redhat.com&emailassigned_to1=1&emailtype1=substring&list_id=3190146&order=changeddate%2Cbug_status%2Cbug_id&product=Fedora&product=Fedora%20EPEL&query_format=advanced 63 packages] (and 6 more are in still review process), mostly Ruby and Python.
I'm not completely sure what counts as a complicated review, but I guess the [https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=737293 python-django re-review] fits. Another long-ish reviews were for example [https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=811418 rubygem-hydra review] or [https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=844753 python-django-typepadapp review].
I maintain [https://admin.fedoraproject.org/pkgdb/packages/?status=&owner=bkabrda&branches= 75 packages] including python and python3.
Thanks!
+1
I worked with Slavek in the past, and I am 100% sure, he will make an excellent sponsor.
+1 that is!
Definitely +1. Slavek is an experienced packager and there is no doubt he deserves this position.
+1 from me too
+1 from me, too.
/me mumbles something like "about time too!"
I like the links to the packaging guidelines. This is especially important when reviewing packages from new contributors.
Please run fedora-review, or guide the submitter on how to run it on the bugzilla ticket, where it evaluates the "Spec URL:" and "SRPM URL:" lines.
In the cases where you did not find any issues, sometimes it makes sense to mention a few things you've verified while reviewing the package. E.g. when a spec file does special things to set up or fix placement of files (e.g. whether .so files are needed at runtime or buildtime) or when it adds patches. Brief acknowledgement would be a good thing.
Don't underestimate packages that build many subpackages. It would not be the first time somebody has not examined subpackage inter-dependencies.
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/1174408#c13 (libblockdev) : found some issues. ;)
+1 from me too. Slavek is an experienced packager, without doubt
+1 I'm confident that Slavek will be a good sponsor.
+1 definitely
Seems pointless for me to chime in as the entire European contingent has already given a storm of +1s, but...
Now I remember why I originally wanted some rule about taking care of these immediately if we got enough of a positive vote differential. Maybe I should propose that....
Thank you all for your +1s and thanks to mschwendt for the comments on the libblockdev review, I really appreciate this!
Not that a +1 is still needed, but
from me too. Also for the automatic vote proposal, though I wonder then if Trac is suitable for that. Hack Bodhi to use it for sponsor requests? :)
A week has passed with more than +3. ;)
I have upgraded you to sponsor.
Please use your powers for good!
Again, thanks to everyone, I will use my powers for good.
Login to comment on this ticket.