Fedora 12 Features Proposed for Removal

[Adam Williamson]

On Thu, 2009-08-06 at 13:39 -0600, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
> On Thu, 06 Aug 2009 12:34:26 -0700
> Adam Williamson <awilliam at 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!"

Even if we adjust things discussed in this thread (the tone of the
email; the definition of '100%'; other stuff that's come up), we still
have a feature process which isn't just for pure PR purposes, it's
attached to actual development stuff like test plans and contingency
plans and freeze dates, and it seems a bit odd to subject what's really
just routine package version updates to that process.

-- 
Adam Williamson
Fedora QA Community Monkey
IRC: adamw | Fedora Talk: adamwill AT fedoraproject DOT org
http://www.happyassassin.net