Plans for tomorrow's (20090529) FESCo meeting
Josh Boyer
jwboyer at gmail.com
Fri May 29 13:44:25 UTC 2009
On Fri, May 29, 2009 at 03:01:29PM +0200, Till Maas wrote:
>On Fri May 29 2009, Josh Boyer wrote:
>
>> I don't see a problem.
>
>Imho outdated content reduces the quality of the wiki, therefore there should
>be some garbage collection.
>
>> If the Feature owner cares enough to keep proposing it, then FESCo will
>> keep reviewing it. Technical items change over time. Perhaps the
>> VirtualBox module will make it into the upstream kernel and the Feature
>> will be viable. Or perhaps a future FESCo will revist kmods.
>
>Did you look at the content of the feature page? Even in the very unlikely
Yes, I did.
>case that it may be included in Fedora in the future, Fedora will probably be
>the last distribution to include it, so it is also very unlikely that it even
>meats the Feature criteria. And if it does, there are only four sentences in
>the Feature page, that were not in the template.
Yep.
>> If the Feature owner doesn't care, then they can delete the page. Either
>> way, I don't see what the problem is with having it sit in the
>> FeaturePageIncomplete category.
>
>It seems more to me, that the Feature owner does not care, because the package
>is very incomplete and I got no response from my comment in December 2008 that
>Virtualbox won't make it into Fedora. Btw. how does the Feature owner delete
That seems to be a simple case of a page requiring wiki gardening. Seriously,
if we have to have a FESCo policy to allow the deletion of stale wiki pages
(Feature or not), then we have gone wrong somewhere.
So I suggest we just mark it for deletion and if the Feature owner cares he'll
unmark it.
>the page? It seems to me, that this is not easily possible using the wiki
>interface.
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Help:Editing#Deleting_Pages
josh
More information about the devel
mailing list