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

Re: Disappointed: My feature was removed without noticing me



Richard W.M. Jones wrote:
> The Haskell feature was dropped at the same meeting just because the
> guy maintaining it wasn't there.  Probably he didn't know the meeting
> was happening because he didn't read some announcement in one of the
> multitude of mailing lists that we need to keep up with.  Or being in
> Europe, he might have been busy at 7/8pm in the evening.
> 
Just to clarify, the feature wasn't dropped because loupgaroublond
wasn't there.  It was dropped because the feature page was incomplete.
loupgaroublond was pinged because people knew he was in charge of the
feature and wanted to see if he could clarify the remaining points.

> As a positive take from this, I think that the meeting organizer
> should CC all people who should be at the meeting, when sending the
> announcement.  I also think that FESCo members shouldn't comment on
> proposals unless they are technically au fait with them.  This means
> FESCo members taking some time each week to do technical work with the
> projects.
> 
I think this is coming at it wrong but then I haven't been involved with
 FESCo or the Feature process since it was first proposed and voted on.
 at that time we envisioned FESCo having the following reasons to review:

1) Is this legal for Fedora?
2) Is this a feature?
3) Can this feature be finished in time?
4) Does this feature need coordination with packagers not directly a
part of the feature?
  a) If so, is it something Fedora wants to do?
  b) If so, how do we help inform other packagers of what to do?

The amount of technical knowledge needed for 1 and 2 is not large.  For
3 there's some technical knowledge but also non-tecnhnical concerns like
how much time the Feature owner has to devote to the process.  #4 does
require a technical evaluation.

In this round, #3 was the predominant reason for dropping a feature.
(#1, 2, and 4 are worked through early in the process when the feature
is first proposed).  Beta is here.  If the feature cannot be tested at
this time (because packages aren't, code hasn't been written, or it's
not clear what has been done) then it's probably going to get dropped as
a feature.  Otherwise, beta is a meaningless term.

-Toshio

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature


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