On Mon, Jan 9, 2023 at 2:11 PM Daniel P. Berrangé <berrange(a)redhat.com> wrote:
On Mon, Jan 09, 2023 at 11:47:54AM -0500, Matthew Miller wrote:
> On Sun, Jan 08, 2023 at 06:06:47PM +0100, Kevin Kofler via devel wrote:
> > PS: The impression I get is that everything was deliberately rigged so that
> > the vote would end up the way it did:
> >
> > 1. A new ticket was filed, in order to exclude the participants of the
> > previous discussion.
> > 2. The people watching the old ticket were NOT notified.
> > 3. The Tools Team was NOT notified.
> > 4. The proponents of the Change, on the other hand, WERE notified.
>
> I agree with your earlier post that this did not have enough visibility,
> enough notice, or enough time. I was certainly taken by surprise, and I was
> trying to keep an eye on this one in particular. (Having the discussion
> under "Schedule for Tuesday's FESCo Meeting" didn't help it jump
out at me
> either.)
Holding a FESCo meeting and vote on the very first working day after
the long xmas / new year holiday is not exactly good timing if you
want contributors to be broadly aware it is happening[1]. I might
humbly suggest that next year, any important meetings that would
naturally fall in the 1st week, be postponed until the 2nd week
of Jan.
We should push out the entire schedule one to two weeks then. We keep
losing time in the schedule, and we shouldn't lose even more.
--
真実はいつも一つ!/ Always, there's only one truth!