Improving the Spins process

[Bill Nottingham]

Jon Stanley (jonstanley at gmail.com) said: 
> On Thu, Oct 13, 2011 at 11:28 AM, Jared K. Smith
> <jsmith at fedoraproject.org> wrote:
> 
> > 1) We discussed whether the desktop media should go through the same
> > process, essentially treating it just like we treat the rest of the
> > spins.  This would give us a more organized way to review the
> > kickstart file, make sure the design team is happy with the artwork,
> > etc. just like we would for spins.  I think this is probably a good
> > idea, but would love more feedback from the desktop folks and the
> > design team before making a final decision on this.  The intention is
> > not to add a layer of bureaucracy, but to simply help add some
> > structure to what is currently fairly unstructured.
> 
> I obviously can't speak for the desktop or design teams, but in
> general, I think that this proposal is sound. I've always found it odd
> that what the desktop team does is not subject to the same review that
> we put any other spin through - I fail to see how they are
> important/different/whatever from the rest of the spins that we
> produce. Same sentiment goes for the KDE spin.

Well, they're important becasue they have been the defined products that
we produce, outside of even the Spins process. (They're actually referred to
in the spins process as being separate bases that Spins can build on.)

Also, 'make sure the design team is happy with the artwork'? Maybe I'm
missing something, but I don't see that in the spins process anywhere as
something that spins go through.

Bill