Le Ven 5 janvier 2007 16:01, Josh Boyer a écrit :
On Fri, 2007-01-05 at 09:44 -0500, Jesse Keating wrote:
> On Friday 05 January 2007 01:55, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote:
> > This issue brings up a interesting question: Which board has the power
> > to influence and adjust this particular naming scheme in our new
> > "merged" world? FESCo or the Fedora Board?
>
> Ultimately I feel it should be the Fedora board. FESCo is really
> responsible
> for making sure the full repo is there, and the Distribution cabal
> (hopefully
> there will be more than just me) is responsible for taking content from
> that
> repository and creating installable iso sets from it.
I think it's a little more complicated than that. Or maybe not. If
there are two committees, one for the repo and one for the release, they
need to work really closely together. The release cabal needs a stable
set of packages to build the releases from and the repo cabal would need
to enforce that. E.g. feature freeze, string freeze, etc.
My feeling is somehow different. I'd really love to have a clear
separation between the group that makes long-term transverse decisions and
the group responsible for driving a particular release (with perhaps given
Fedora's short lifecycle & usual manager burnout different groups for
different releases).
That's the only way you'll get clear release focus
Regards,
--
Nicolas Mailhot