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

Re: [Fedora-spins] Spins SIG Meeting(s) / Agenda!



Rahul Sundaram wrote:
Jeroen van Meeuwen wrote:
Rahul Sundaram wrote:
Jeroen van Meeuwen wrote:
Rahul Sundaram wrote:
I'm done arguing with you. Either comment on the process before the vote on Monday or forever hold your peace.
Which process are you referring to now?
I think this is a good time for you to start reading the agenda.

Please stop being dismissive and read the rest of mails where I gave you more input.


Reviewing what you've written so far;

- not at FUDCon

I've told you I'm sorry, give it a rest already.

- "It's general principle to be inclusive of everyone in the community as much as possible"

Wasting my time typing this email is a little more inclusive then I'd like to see.

- "I've commented on the spins process extensively"

And how do you think your comments are not in the new process we've come up with during FUDCon?

- "what should a report contain?"

I'm not sure yet, have any ideas? This has settled down just under 3 days, and it hasn't even been voted upon yet. Do you want all the details now? You sure? Because that would make it more permanent and less flexible then the state it's in now (still open for suggestions).

- you're confused on what process it is we're talking about

Suggested solution: read the Spins_Process page on the Wiki

- you're looking for what the process was and how we streamlined it

Suggested solution: read the Spins_Process page on the Wiki

- you're eager to know what needs to be done for XFCE and other spins you submitted

Suggested solution: Await what the Spins SIG comes up with after the meeting, since this item is on the agenda

- you have an opinion about Spins being Spins vs. Features

Suggested solution: weight that argument in your vote for the new process

- """It would be still viable if the process is outlined. The process has to be in discussed and in place before FESCo delegates it to somebody else."""

1) The process is outlined
2) the process has been discussed, with representatives of Rel-eng, our dear Feature Wrangler, the Spins SIG leader, a few spin-submitting/maintaining users, a FESCo delegate, and reviewed afterwards by QA and the Rel-Eng lead. Remember that Rel-Eng in the first place is the party to whom FESCo delegated responsibility.

I could continue but I don't feel like it. I sure hope this email sounds dismissive enough for you to finally stop arguing over nothing and continue the part of the thread where I think you may have actually said something useful.

Kind regards,

Jeroen van Meeuwen
-kanarip


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