Re: [RPM Fusion] Update of "Goals" by AndreaMusuruane
On Tue, Feb 24, 2009 at 6:18 PM, Thorsten Leemhuis <fedora(a)leemhuis.info> wrote:
Andrea, thx for your comments and enhancements. Much appreciated.
You are welcome.
One general remark: I guess we should try to keep the page itself
discussion
free once we finish it.
> === Ideas nobody is working on ===
> + [musuruan: is it feasible to have some of these ideas as GSoC?]
I'm not really familiar with GSoC, but I doubt that it'll work when we do it
directly. Maybe it's easier and better if it could be done as GSoC projects
done in Fedora. But I'm not sure if Fedora would be willing to do something
like that.
The basic idea is to gain visibility and to find some developers (i.e.
non-packagers) since we need them. I don't know if GCoC is feasible or
not, but it is very visible.
> + + [musuruan: can we have a synergy with 3rd party doc sites?
Fedora FAQ
> and Fedorasolved comes to my mind.]
Yes, maybe that would be a good idea.
Do somebody in RPM Fusion know them and can contact them?
> * rpmfusion-buildsys-list is broken; + * no announcement
mailing list;
> + + [musuruan: what is the problem in having one?]
it's the usual problem: Somebody need to sit down and do it/poke the people
with access to the necessary places ;-)
Yep... we need more people with these rights.
> + + [musuruan: can we look for more contributors in the
fedora-docs-list?]
Sure.
Do somebody in RPM Fusion know them and can contact them?
> + * we need a place where to host RPM Fusion projects. Something
like
> [[https://fedorahosted.org|Fedora Hosted]].
Do we? Why can't we use Fedora Hosted directly? Sure, some of the tools we
need may deal with nonfree software, but I guess all of us want the tools
itself be open source and thus acceptable for Fedora Hosted?
I'm not sure but I don't think that we can host applications whose
licenses do not follow the Fedora Guidelines in Fedora Hosted.
Bye,
Andrea.