2:25 p.m.
... since I'm not going to be there, due to an unavoidable conflict.
Sorry folks, but as of right now, we didn't have any pending tickets, so
it would have been a short meeting. :)
Lets just meet again on Nov 23, or, if something urgent comes up in the
interim, feel free to meet without me (assuming that you have quorum).
~tom
==
Fedora Project
2:39 p.m.
... since I'm not going to be there, due to an unavoidable
conflict.
Sorry folks, but as of right now, we didn't have any pending tickets, so
it would have been a short meeting. :)
Lets just meet again on Nov 23, or, if something urgent comes up in the
interim, feel free to meet without me (assuming that you have quorum).
Just this:
https://fedorahosted.org/fpc/ticket/116
I'll be there if anyone wants to meet.
Spot, do you have a vote in the even this works out?
-J
~tom
==
Fedora Project
--
packaging mailing list
packaging(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/packaging
--
in your fear, seek only peace
in your fear, seek only love
-d. bowie
2:59 p.m.
On 11/14/2011 03:39 PM, Jon Ciesla wrote:
> ... since I'm not going to be there, due to an unavoidable conflict.
>
> Sorry folks, but as of right now, we didn't have any pending tickets, so
> it would have been a short meeting. :)
>
> Lets just meet again on Nov 23, or, if something urgent comes up in the
> interim, feel free to meet without me (assuming that you have quorum).
Just this:
https://fedorahosted.org/fpc/ticket/116
I'll be there if anyone wants to meet.
Spot, do you have a vote in the even this works out?
Yeah, I'm +1 on that Should.
~tom
==
Fedora Project
4:35 p.m.
On Mon, Nov 14, 2011 at 03:25:25PM -0500, Tom Callaway wrote:
... since I'm not going to be there, due to an unavoidable
conflict.
Sorry folks, but as of right now, we didn't have any pending tickets, so
it would have been a short meeting. :)
Lets just meet again on Nov 23, or, if something urgent comes up in the
interim, feel free to meet without me (assuming that you have quorum).
Note -- there is potentially a big question -- fesco voted on UsrMove today
+4,-4 leaving in the bin => sbin merge that we said was contrary to
Guidelines.
notting voted on the fesco ticket in such a way that it's unclear whether he
was +1 or -1 to the feature as written.
If notting can reply before the FPC meeting, I've asked nirik to open up an
FPC ticket for whether we'll reject that as written as we did in the
preliminary look.
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Features/UsrMove
-Toshio
12:25 p.m.
On Mon, 2011-11-14 at 14:35 -0800, Toshio Kuratomi wrote:
On Mon, Nov 14, 2011 at 03:25:25PM -0500, Tom Callaway wrote:
> ... since I'm not going to be there, due to an unavoidable conflict.
>
> Sorry folks, but as of right now, we didn't have any pending tickets, so
> it would have been a short meeting. :)
>
> Lets just meet again on Nov 23, or, if something urgent comes up in the
> interim, feel free to meet without me (assuming that you have quorum).
>
Note -- there is potentially a big question -- fesco voted on UsrMove today
+4,-4 leaving in the bin => sbin merge that we said was contrary to
Guidelines.
* #690 F17 Feature: move all to /usr
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Features/UsrMove (nirik, 18:19:50)
* ACTION: : -4 votes, +4 votes, feature owners will consult with
remaining fesco member in ticket. (nirik, 18:41:38)
* ACTION: nirik to file FPC ticket for looking over things vs
guidelines. (nirik, 18:41:55)
...so this seems it's all up in the air, right? Is there any reason we
can't/shouldn't wait for next week, given that it isn't approved?
notting voted on the fesco ticket in such a way that it's unclear
whether he
was +1 or -1 to the feature as written.
Would it pass with +5/-4 ?
If notting can reply before the FPC meeting, I've asked nirik to
open up an
FPC ticket for whether we'll reject that as written as we did in the
preliminary look.
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Features/UsrMove
Also ... if FESCO passes it as-is ... what would we reject? Just the
sbin changes? Can we do that?
2:16 p.m.
On Tue, 15 Nov 2011 13:25:18 -0500
James Antill <james(a)fedoraproject.org> wrote:
...so this seems it's all up in the air, right? Is there any
reason we
can't/shouldn't wait for next week, given that it isn't approved?
Well, looking at it sooner rather than later might be nice for the
feature owners. I asked them to not do anything until things are all
set for scope.
> notting voted on the fesco ticket in such a way that it's
unclear
> whether he was +1 or -1 to the feature as written.
Would it pass with +5/-4 ?
Yes. FESCo uses simple majority.
> If notting can reply before the FPC meeting, I've asked
nirik to
> open up an FPC ticket for whether we'll reject that as written as
> we did in the preliminary look.
>
> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Features/UsrMove
Also ... if FESCO passes it as-is ... what would we reject? Just the
sbin changes? Can we do that?
I'd rather avoid the 'who can override who' discussion. ;)
Speaking for myself (a member of fesco) but not fesco, I would really
like to hear from FPC those parts that they feel are not in Fedora's
best interests. FESCo empowered the FPC to handle those issues, so
IMHO, we should let FPC review and let us know what parts we should
drop from the scope or re-work.
I would hope that FESCo would see those concerns and ask the feature
owners to adjust their feature to match.
kevin
9:01 a.m.
On Tue, 15 Nov 2011 13:25:18 -0500
James Antill <james(a)fedoraproject.org> wrote:
> ...so this seems it's all up in the air, right? Is there any reason we
> can't/shouldn't wait for next week, given that it isn't approved?
Well, looking at it sooner rather than later might be nice for the
feature owners. I asked them to not do anything until things are all
set for scope.
> > notting voted on the fesco ticket in such a way that it's unclear
> > whether he was +1 or -1 to the feature as written.
>
> Would it pass with +5/-4 ?
Yes. FESCo uses simple majority.
> > If notting can reply before the FPC meeting, I've asked nirik to
> > open up an FPC ticket for whether we'll reject that as written as
> > we did in the preliminary look.
> >
> > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Features/UsrMove
>
> Also ... if FESCO passes it as-is ... what would we reject? Just the
> sbin changes? Can we do that?
I'd rather avoid the 'who can override who' discussion. ;)
Speaking for myself (a member of fesco) but not fesco, I would really
like to hear from FPC those parts that they feel are not in Fedora's
best interests. FESCo empowered the FPC to handle those issues, so
IMHO, we should let FPC review and let us know what parts we should
drop from the scope or re-work.
I would hope that FESCo would see those concerns and ask the feature
owners to adjust their feature to match.
I may or may not make the meeting due to $_DAYJOB.
-J
kevin
--
packaging mailing list
packaging(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/packaging
--
in your fear, seek only peace
in your fear, seek only love
-d. bowie
10:17 a.m.
On Wed, Nov 16, 2011 at 09:01:47AM -0600, Jon Ciesla wrote:
> On Tue, 15 Nov 2011 13:25:18 -0500
> James Antill <james(a)fedoraproject.org> wrote:
>
>> ...so this seems it's all up in the air, right? Is there any reason we
>> can't/shouldn't wait for next week, given that it isn't approved?
>
> Well, looking at it sooner rather than later might be nice for the
> feature owners. I asked them to not do anything until things are all
> set for scope.
>
>> > notting voted on the fesco ticket in such a way that it's unclear
>> > whether he was +1 or -1 to the feature as written.
>>
>> Would it pass with +5/-4 ?
>
> Yes. FESCo uses simple majority.
>
>> > If notting can reply before the FPC meeting, I've asked nirik to
>> > open up an FPC ticket for whether we'll reject that as written as
>> > we did in the preliminary look.
>> >
>> > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Features/UsrMove
>>
>> Also ... if FESCO passes it as-is ... what would we reject? Just the
>> sbin changes? Can we do that?
>
> I'd rather avoid the 'who can override who' discussion. ;)
>
> Speaking for myself (a member of fesco) but not fesco, I would really
> like to hear from FPC those parts that they feel are not in Fedora's
> best interests. FESCo empowered the FPC to handle those issues, so
> IMHO, we should let FPC review and let us know what parts we should
> drop from the scope or re-work.
>
> I would hope that FESCo would see those concerns and ask the feature
> owners to adjust their feature to match.
I may or may not make the meeting due to $_DAYJOB.
Looks like the last vote for the fesco ticket has not happened. So we don't
have a large outstanding ticket to take care of.
-Toshio
4538
days inactive
4540
days old
packaging@lists.fedoraproject.org
7 comments
5 participants
participants (5)
-
James Antill -
Jon Ciesla -
Kevin Fenzi -
Tom Callaway -
Toshio Kuratomi