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

Re: Request for voting SIG

On Sat, 10 Mar 2007 13:15:58 +0100, Patrice Dumas wrote:

> On Sat, Mar 10, 2007 at 11:59:56AM +0100, Axel Thimm wrote:
> > 
> > Doesn't the threads on fedora-usrmgmt look like a massive yelling? I'm
> > sure if it comes to a vote the majority is against the imported
> > fedora-usermgmt stuff.
> It is not a valid argument. Having a vote won't cut technical discussion 
> threads.


The decision on whether EPEL has a place/need for fedora-usermgmt ought to
come *after* a technical analysis. In Fedora-land, examining and deciding
on fedora-usermgmt has been neglected. When you know exactly what the
tools do and what they try to achieve, you can judge about them and decide
on their fate. Of course, you can also skip those steps and block a
package for other reasons, e.g. political ones.

What is happening in these threads is that wrong things written about
fedora-usermgmt, biased opinions, and even FUD lead to corrections, which
in turn are seen as opposition with the need to fight against. The
repeated attempts at proving that something in fedora-usermgmt is broken
have more than once ended in examples that involved PEBKAC.

Personally, I don't have strong feelings about all this. I've given enough
hints on how I think about fedora-usermgmt and any unavailable

> > That's not a battle-voting, it's just a conventional vote.
> It is battle voting. There is no consensus on this issue.

You can skip the vote if there is consensus. ;o)

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