[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

Re: Fedora 12 Features Proposed for Removal



On Thu, Aug 06, 2009 at 12:49:30PM -0700, Adam Williamson wrote:
>On Thu, 2009-08-06 at 13:39 -0600, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
>> On Thu, 06 Aug 2009 12:34:26 -0700
>> Adam Williamson <awilliam redhat com> wrote:
>> 
>> ...snip...
>> 
>> > Sure, and I was always happy to write in GNOME and KDE versions as
>> > 'Features' when writing release blurbs for Mandriva. But that's just
>> > pure PR. PR is not all our feature process does - it comes with all
>> > this bureaucracy, intended for dealing with experimental stuff which
>> > may turn out to have been a bad idea, attached to it, it's _not_ a
>> > pure PR exercise. Which leads to the absurdity we have here, the
>> > suggestion that the GNOME 2.28 'feature' should be 'dropped' for
>> > Fedora 12 (does anyone really think we're going to ship it with GNOME
>> > 2.26?)
>> 
>> It wasn't a suggestion of that, it was our feature wrangler saying:
>> hey, check these features because they are not showing 100%. 
>> 
>> Please see: 
>> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Features/Policy
>> 
>> Do we need to change some policy there?
>
>Er, the _topic_ of this thread is "Fedora 12 Features Proposed for
>Removal". The email doesn't say anything about 'if you fix this stuff
>before the meeting it'll be fine' (though that may be the actual case),
>and the amount of notice given is a princely two days, which isn't that
>long for anyone to make changes. The way things are worded are clearly
>"We're going to drop these features", not "please check this, okay?
>Please? Thanks!"

No, it's worded perfectly.  The Feature Wrangler is PROPOSING to FESCo that
we drop these Features.  It's a proposal, it's not a clear intention of
dropping them at all.

josh


[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]