Fedora Council statement on Proven Packager situation

The Fedora Council overturns FESCo’s decision [3284] to remove Proven
Packager rights from a contributor.

FESCo didn’t have a specific policy for dealing with a request to remove
Proven Packager rights. In addition, the FESCo process was handled entirely in private. The contributor didn’t receive a formal notification or warning from FESCo, and felt blindsided by the official decision when and how it was announced. The Fedora Council would like to extend our sincerest apology on behalf of the Fedora Project to them.

The lack of a defined process for situations like this needs to be addressed
before such a decision can be made, including provisions for appropriate
warnings and chances to respond by the contributor. In addition, the
announcement of a decision should not publicly identify the person.

Fedora Council is also asking FESCo to review and improve our packaging
guidelines and governance policies. For example, the guidelines for
architecture teams[1] and the proven-packager guidelines[2] do not align
(even though both are written and current policies) and must be reconciled.

The Council and the Code of Conduct Committee will be happy to review and
collaborate with FESCo on these topics should they wish.

— Matthew, on behalf of the whole Fedora Council


  1. Architectures - Fedora Project Wiki ↩︎

  2. Who is Allowed to Modify Which Packages :: Fedora Docs ↩︎

4 Likes

This is a bit poorly worded - THE Packaging Guidelines (capital P and G) are FPC’s responsibility, not FESCo’s. The guidelines you’re referring to are probably the Policies that are maintained in the FESCo docs that are related to packaging (i.e. packager responsibilities and packager and provenpackager policies). Unless you mean both these things - then FPC should be involved, too.

Fyi, the link above is currently a 404 page.

The link is correct but it is a private ticket only visible to FESCo members. Not sure what would be a better way to link the case.