I just deferred this Change as it is not needed anymore.
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/LetsEncrypt
Regards,
Jan
On Wed, Feb 10, 2016 at 4:27 PM, James Hogarth <james.hogarth(a)gmail.com> wrote:
On 10 February 2016 at 14:57, Josh Boyer <jwboyer(a)fedoraproject.org> wrote:
>
> On Wed, Feb 10, 2016 at 9:41 AM, James Hogarth <james.hogarth(a)gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >>
> > Marketing are aware the package exists ... I worked with them on the
> > Fedora
> > Magazine article(s) after all ... even got a >5000 view badge for it! ;)
>
> Fantastic.
>
I was rather happy with the result.
>
> > Putting on my #centos community hat though ...
> >
> > Recently there was an uproar in mailing lists there and we told people
> > to
> > pay attention to Fedora ChangeSets for a loose indication on things to
> > be
> > aware of coming up.
>
> So you took a process that originally already had problems and added
> more problems by telling people to use it for things it wasn't meant
> for? :)
>
> Seriously, I understand the motivation there but Changes is not the
> place to pay attention to things from a CentOS perspective. Not every
> Change will wind up in RHEL, so it is already misleading. Further,
> given the lifecycles, a Change that lands in one Fedora release may be
> superseded by one in a later release.
>
Err I don't know where you are getting this from ... I *did not* submit this
change ...
I'm the point of contact and one of the maintainers for Let's Encrypt but
I'm not the one that put together the wiki page.
As I pointed out I'm at best ambivalent about this being a valid change -
but we should probably have some mechanism to highlight new non-change
features.
Indeed though many (most?) Fedora changes won't affect future RHEL Mattdm
was the one over on those lists suggesting people pay attention to Fedora
ChangeSets for at least a rough heads up on what might be coming at some
point.
>
> > If new packages/technology aren't to be mentioned and only changes to
> > existing technology that may affect $developer are we do need a better
> > way
> > of exposing new things that are not changes.
>
> Yes. New packages land in Fedora all the time. We don't want to
> require them to file a Change simply because someone in some other
> project might be interested in it. It's too much process.
>
> If we need cross-project collaboration on things that will either be
> _in_ RHEL for sure, or things that CentOS wants/needs, that is a
> totally separate discussion. One that is certainly worth having.
Realistically I think LE has had enough publicity for now and given the
strong feelings would dismiss this from the F24 ChangeSet.
I would say it's taking it to the extreme to declare about all new packages
- most people won't care about the vast majority - but certain ones that
have a significant community interest around makes sense.
Regardless of potentially upcoming RHEL releases, the ability to highlight
non-change features in a Fedora release, outside of $random FM article,
sounds like it would be a worthwhile discussion to have on the marketing@
mailing list.
--
devel mailing list
devel(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
--
Jan Kuřík
Platform & Fedora Program Manager
Red Hat Czech s.r.o., Purkynova 99/71, 612 45 Brno, Czech Republic