On 04/22/2016 11:58 AM, Paul W. Frields wrote:
- I will expect Joe B from the Cloud WG to tell us authoritatively through the *marketing* list exactly what should happen next, since he (correctly) raised the issue of ensuring zero confusion over publishing these articles.
Ideally this should have been settled between Cloud WG and rel-eng before an article was proposed. But failing that, we shouldn't schedule any Magazine post about changes in deliverables without clearly knowing it's decided. (To be fair, that seemed to be the case for at least a week, until dgilmore raised an objection.) Better communication will fix similar problems in the future.
Correct. This *was* decided, and then a question was raised. I don't want to second-guess the second-guessing, because it was well-intentioned and we're all communicating in like 15 different venues and ... ugh. Communication is hard, kids.
I agree with Dusty's post earlier, I think we should stick with the message that we are doing away with 32-bit cloud images irrespective of other 32-bit images/etc. We don't at the moment have the resources, or frankly interest, in doing much with 32-bit x86 cloud images.
I'm CC'ing Dennis directly in case cloud@ and marketing@ are not on his "read immediately" list. :-)
WG folks: Please respond with a +1 or -1. Other votes welcome too.
Alternate proposals welcomed, but we should move quickly. Happy Friday.
+1
On Friday, 22 April 2016, Joe Brockmeier jzb@redhat.com wrote:
On 04/22/2016 11:58 AM, Paul W. Frields wrote:
- I will expect Joe B from the Cloud WG to tell us authoritatively through the *marketing* list exactly what should happen next, since he (correctly) raised the issue of ensuring zero confusion over publishing these articles.
Ideally this should have been settled between Cloud WG and rel-eng before an article was proposed. But failing that, we shouldn't schedule any Magazine post about changes in deliverables without clearly knowing it's decided. (To be fair, that seemed to be the case for at least a week, until dgilmore raised an objection.) Better communication will fix similar problems in the future.
Correct. This *was* decided, and then a question was raised. I don't want to second-guess the second-guessing, because it was well-intentioned and we're all communicating in like 15 different venues and ... ugh. Communication is hard, kids.
I agree with Dusty's post earlier, I think we should stick with the message that we are doing away with 32-bit cloud images irrespective of other 32-bit images/etc. We don't at the moment have the resources, or frankly interest, in doing much with 32-bit x86 cloud images.
I'm CC'ing Dennis directly in case cloud@ and marketing@ are not on his "read immediately" list. :-)
WG folks: Please respond with a +1 or -1. Other votes welcome too.
Alternate proposals welcomed, but we should move quickly. Happy Friday.
-- Joe Brockmeier | Community Team, OSAS jzb@redhat.com javascript:; | http://community.redhat.com/ Twitter: @jzb | http://dissociatedpress.net/
On 04/22/2016 12:17 PM, Joe Brockmeier wrote:
On 04/22/2016 11:58 AM, Paul W. Frields wrote:
- I will expect Joe B from the Cloud WG to tell us authoritatively through the *marketing* list exactly what should happen next, since he (correctly) raised the issue of ensuring zero confusion over publishing these articles.
Ideally this should have been settled between Cloud WG and rel-eng before an article was proposed. But failing that, we shouldn't schedule any Magazine post about changes in deliverables without clearly knowing it's decided. (To be fair, that seemed to be the case for at least a week, until dgilmore raised an objection.) Better communication will fix similar problems in the future.
Correct. This *was* decided, and then a question was raised. I don't want to second-guess the second-guessing, because it was well-intentioned and we're all communicating in like 15 different venues and ... ugh. Communication is hard, kids.
I agree with Dusty's post earlier, I think we should stick with the message that we are doing away with 32-bit cloud images irrespective of other 32-bit images/etc. We don't at the moment have the resources, or frankly interest, in doing much with 32-bit x86 cloud images.
I'm CC'ing Dennis directly in case cloud@ and marketing@ are not on his "read immediately" list. :-)
WG folks: Please respond with a +1 or -1. Other votes welcome too.
Alternate proposals welcomed, but we should move quickly. Happy Friday.
Hi all, following up on this article - will this be ready to publish any time soon or will it still need some more time for decisions? Thanks!
-- Cheers, Justin W. Flory jflory7@gmail.com
marketing@lists.fedoraproject.org
-
Joe Brockmeier -
Justin W. Flory -
Sylvia Sánchez