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

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

Jeroen van Meeuwen wrote:

- not at FUDCon

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

The problem is not me or others being in FUDCon or not but decisions being made there which will always exclude people. Ours a global community and the ability to attend conferences in a particular place anywhere in the world is limited. You said you will do it again which seemed to be that you didn't understand the issue. It is nothing personal.

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

It is not since I wasn't in 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).

Here is what I suggest:

* Postpone the IRC meeting and voting now. It is too early and there has not been enough details to warrant a vote yet.

* Post a summary of what was discussed in FUDCon and the new proposal discussed in the FUDCon. Communicate as much details as possible so that spin owners can understand why the changes were made and ask for input in this list and not on a IRC meeting. Wait for a week or two so that we can discuss it further and then maybe arrange a IRC meeting.

- 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

I already did. You would know that if you had read my mails since I was specific and pointed out a few examples where there aren't enough details.

- 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

Since I am part of Spin SIG, I am giving my feedback to try and steer the decision in the right direction.

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

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

I can't be in the IRC meeting and I don't think voting without details in the right way to do it. I am explaining it in the list so you can consider it while making the decision.

- """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 don't know what was discussed since a summary wasn't posted in this list. Filling in the details would be helpful.

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.

If you don't feel I have said anything useful so far, I am sorry to hear that but then, we have nothing more to discuss. Carry on with your meeting and I will deal with the result when it comes to that point. Thanks.


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