FAQ Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
» Video Reviews

» Linux Archive

Linux-archive is a website aiming to archive linux email lists and to make them easily accessible for linux users/developers.


» Sponsor

» Partners

» Sponsor

Go Back   Linux Archive > Redhat > Fedora Advisory Board

 
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
 
Old 01-26-2012, 02:50 PM
Toshio Kuratomi
 
Default My Board member task: Fix the Feature Process

Since we didn't get to the Board member tasks at yesterday's meeting, jsmith
suggested that the Board members send the goals they've selected (if they've
done so already) to the mailing list to start discussion.

I've talked to rbergeron and decided to take the task of fixing the Feature
Process. We've known for a long time that the Feature Process provides
a useful service but at the expense of aggravating the people implementing
features [sometimes unnecessarily], annoying the people deciding what's
a feature [often unnecessarily], and without always achieving the
collaboration needed to make release happen without slippage and/or last
minute fixing of feature-driven brokenness [seems like at least every other
release].

These and other problems were collected by rbergeron and other impacted
Fedora contributors on:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fixing_features

I'll be working on taking those identified problems and turning out a new
Feature Policy that FESCo can approve which addresses those issues.

-Toshio
_______________________________________________
advisory-board mailing list
advisory-board@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/advisory-board
 
Old 01-27-2012, 05:53 PM
Dennis Gilmore
 
Default My Board member task: Fix the Feature Process

El Thu, 26 Jan 2012 07:50:32 -0800
Toshio Kuratomi <a.badger@gmail.com> escribi:
> Since we didn't get to the Board member tasks at yesterday's meeting,
> jsmith suggested that the Board members send the goals they've
> selected (if they've done so already) to the mailing list to start
> discussion.
>
> I've talked to rbergeron and decided to take the task of fixing the
> Feature Process. We've known for a long time that the Feature
> Process provides a useful service but at the expense of aggravating
> the people implementing features [sometimes unnecessarily], annoying
> the people deciding what's a feature [often unnecessarily], and
> without always achieving the collaboration needed to make release
> happen without slippage and/or last minute fixing of feature-driven
> brokenness [seems like at least every other release].
>
> These and other problems were collected by rbergeron and other
> impacted Fedora contributors on:
> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fixing_features
>
> I'll be working on taking those identified problems and turning out a
> new Feature Policy that FESCo can approve which addresses those
> issues.
>
> -Toshio

I think that we need to have a cutoff date that is around 6 weeks
before feature freeze where any feature that is very disruptive has to
land before. that includes things requiring mass rebuilds or that
significantly change something. we can then schedule a mass rebuild 5
weeks before feature freeze and allow plenty of time to clean up from
breakages/failures. we should probably look at removing no longer
maintained packages at this point also.

Dennis
_______________________________________________
advisory-board mailing list
advisory-board@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/advisory-board
 
Old 02-07-2012, 05:25 AM
Marcela Mašláňová
 
Default My Board member task: Fix the Feature Process

On 01/26/2012 04:50 PM, Toshio Kuratomi wrote:

Since we didn't get to the Board member tasks at yesterday's meeting, jsmith
suggested that the Board members send the goals they've selected (if they've
done so already) to the mailing list to start discussion.

I've talked to rbergeron and decided to take the task of fixing the Feature
Process. We've known for a long time that the Feature Process provides
a useful service but at the expense of aggravating the people implementing
features [sometimes unnecessarily], annoying the people deciding what's
a feature [often unnecessarily], and without always achieving the
collaboration needed to make release happen without slippage and/or last
minute fixing of feature-driven brokenness [seems like at least every other
release].

These and other problems were collected by rbergeron and other impacted
Fedora contributors on:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fixing_features

I'll be working on taking those identified problems and turning out a new
Feature Policy that FESCo can approve which addresses those issues.

-Toshio


It would be great if you can make it before next Fedora. Instead of
discussion about how many features we had to look at, we could focus on
those with wide impact.


Marcela
_______________________________________________
advisory-board mailing list
advisory-board@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/advisory-board
 
Old 02-13-2012, 10:28 AM
Robyn Bergeron
 
Default My Board member task: Fix the Feature Process

On 01/26/2012 08:50 AM, Toshio Kuratomi wrote:

Since we didn't get to the Board member tasks at yesterday's meeting, jsmith
suggested that the Board members send the goals they've selected (if they've
done so already) to the mailing list to start discussion.

I've talked to rbergeron and decided to take the task of fixing the Feature
Process. We've known for a long time that the Feature Process provides
a useful service but at the expense of aggravating the people implementing
features [sometimes unnecessarily], annoying the people deciding what's
a feature [often unnecessarily], and without always achieving the
collaboration needed to make release happen without slippage and/or last
minute fixing of feature-driven brokenness [seems like at least every other
release].

These and other problems were collected by rbergeron and other impacted
Fedora contributors on:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fixing_features

I'll be working on taking those identified problems and turning out a new
Feature Policy that FESCo can approve which addresses those issues.


WOOOOOOOOOOOOOT!



Oh, sorry, got overly excited there for a minute.



Next steps? Timeline? Where is communication going to happen? I
know it's been mentioned at times that having a FAD to tackle this
at some stage might be faster/higher-bandwidth, but I leave that
ball in your court.



Thanks, Toshio, for taking this one on.



-robyn





-Toshio



_______________________________________________
advisory-board mailing list
advisory-board@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/advisory-board





_______________________________________________
advisory-board mailing list
advisory-board@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/advisory-board
 

Thread Tools




All times are GMT. The time now is 05:39 AM.

VBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO ©2007, Crawlability, Inc.
Copyright 2007 - 2008, www.linux-archive.org