technical spec for the workstation up for review

[Adam Williamson]

On Wed, 2014-02-19 at 06:53 -0500, Christian Schaller wrote:
> Hi Adam,
> Yes, some items might fall partly or fully upon the base WG, but we (as their 'customers') 
> need to clearly specify what we need them to deliver. The base WG todo list needs to be
> based upon the needs and requirements of the 3 product WGs, not the other way around.

I agree there needs to be communication and co-ordination here, I'm just
not sure the workstation technical specification is the place for that
communication to happen.

What I was guessing would happen would be that the 'product' WGs and the
base WG would have the discussion in some other forum - a mailing list
thread, a different wiki page, whatever - and the requirements formed as
a result of that discussion would be a part of the base WG's
specification, and the product specifications could then reference the
base specification where appropriate.

Otherwise it seems like we'll wind up with something unwieldy like the
base specification *and* each of the product specifications all
containing the same text (or, worse, different text for the same
requirements), which seems suboptimal.
-- 
Adam Williamson
Fedora QA Community Monkey
IRC: adamw | Twitter: AdamW_Fedora | XMPP: adamw AT happyassassin . net
http://www.happyassassin.net