FESCo wants to ban direct stable pushes in Bodhi (urgent call for feedback)

[Kevin Fenzi]

On Fri, 26 Feb 2010 16:40:46 +0100
Kevin Kofler <kevin.kofler at chello.at> wrote:

> Josh Boyer wrote:
> > The time period is mere speculation on your part.
> 
> It's not just mere speculation, the idea has been brought up by
> nirik, citing EPEL as precedent:
> [begin quote (from the meeting log)]
> Feb 23 21:40:50 *	nirik notes the maintainer also requested a
> push to stable in epel, but the epel policy of 2 weeks in testing was
> observed instead.
> [snip not directly related discussion]
> Feb 23 21:53:23 *	nirik personally thinks the epel process has
> been working nicely...
> [snip not directly related discussion]
> Feb 23 21:53:41 <skvidal>	nirik: I think time-based is
> probably a hang up - but....
> [end quote]

Thanks for taking my quote out of context. 

I was saying the EPEL policy seemed to be working well for EPEL. 
That wasn't a "We should immediately do this now in fedora", but just a
datapoint. 

> Transparency means asking for feedback BEFORE writing the policy. The
> sooner you involve the community, the better. Putting out a policy as
> "take it or leave it", or worse "take it, you have to, we voted it
> through already" is not transparent.

Perhaps Matthew has been busy and unable to do this yet? 

kevin
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 198 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/devel/attachments/20100226/a2725ec4/attachment.bin