On Sun, 27 Apr 2008 10:02:11 +0200, Patrice Dumas scripst:
> It is already the case. The rule is more or less, bring it to the lists
> and then to fesco. But this is costly so having propoer guidelines to
> follow like AWOL are better.

Sure, but FESCO seems to be a little overloaded with just general
leadership stuff (deciding about features, etc.).

Matěj

--
The content of this message is licensed under a Creative Commons
Attribution 3.0 License, Some Rights Reserved.
http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/3.0/us/

--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list

On Mon, Apr 28, 2008 at 12:51:46PM +0200, Matej Cepl wrote:
> On Sun, 27 Apr 2008 10:02:11 +0200, Patrice Dumas scripst:
> > It is already the case. The rule is more or less, bring it to the lists
> > and then to fesco. But this is costly so having propoer guidelines to
> > follow like AWOL are better.
>
> Sure, but FESCO seems to be a little overloaded with just general
> leadership stuff (deciding about features, etc.).

That's exactly my point. For such issues, a specific guideline which
allows not to involve FESCo would be better.

--
Pat

--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list

On 4/28/08, Patrice Dumas <pertusus@free.fr> wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 28, 2008 at 12:51:46PM +0200, Matej Cepl wrote:
> > On Sun, 27 Apr 2008 10:02:11 +0200, Patrice Dumas scripst:
> > > It is already the case. The rule is more or less, bring it to the lists
> > > and then to fesco. But this is costly so having propoer guidelines to
> > > follow like AWOL are better.
> >
> > Sure, but FESCO seems to be a little overloaded with just general
> > leadership stuff (deciding about features, etc.).
>
> That's exactly my point. For such issues, a specific guideline which
> allows not to involve FESCo would be better.

I respectfully disagree. A _better_ solution would be for FESCo to
spend less time deciding features, and more time focusing on community
issues and development.

josh

--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list

On Mon, Apr 28, 2008 at 11:48:08AM -0400, Josh Boyer wrote:
> >
> > That's exactly my point. For such issues, a specific guideline which
> > allows not to involve FESCo would be better.
>
> I respectfully disagree. A _better_ solution would be for FESCo to
> spend less time deciding features, and more time focusing on community
> issues and development.

I agree with your sentence, but it is not contradictory with what I say,
guidelines to avoid involving FESCo for 'stale bugs with solution
proposed by the submitter' will certainly help FESCo focusing on community
issues and development. There could be, in that guideline, recourse to
FESCo, but this should not be the first thing to do in such case.

--
Pat

--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@redhat.com
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list