Adventurous updates? (was: Re: Stable Release Updates types proposal)

[Michael Schwendt]

An increase of private mail is not leaving much time to participate in
these endless threads on devel list, if I still want to get something done
beyond that. So, just this:

On Sat, 13 Mar 2010 03:20:02 +0100, Kevin wrote:

> There is no need to prove it: The mere RISK of losing 70-80% of our users 
> (which is exactly what is going to happen if the poll happens to be 
> representative, but those changes get implemented anyway) is a risk not to 
> be taken lightly.

1) Anyone, who wants "adventurous updates" is not representing me.
I'm willing to fix bugs -- and I want to retain the freedom to publish
bug-fix updates, which make the software work -- but I don't like to
jump into cold water after a final release and return it to its
development period by applying "adventurous updates" on purpose.
The final release is the wrong place for that.

2) Fedora doesn't only need more testers of updates to stable releases, it
also needs more testers during its _entire_ development period. I'm not
convinced that everyone follows the "release in Rawhide first, test in
Rawhide first" principle before even considering to upgrade a stable
release. Let those 70-80% of our users do a great job by helping
with getting the next Fedora release in shape. It will work better out
of the box and will need less bug-fix updates. I'm happy about the
remaining 20-30%, who prefer installations that need not be tinkered
with daily.

3) FESCo *and* the FPB ought to discuss their visions and goals _privately_
(they still have non-public communication channels for that), try to find
an agreement with eachother, and when they make their plan public, let
some sort of spokesman make an announcement on behalf of the committee/board.
If their proposals _or_ decisions are unpopular and result in criticism,
I don't want to see the committee/board members fight the critics. The
members (in particular the elected community representatives) are free to
ignore critics, or collect feedback and possibly revise their proposals or,
as a last resort, withdraw unpopular decisions.

> When I speak for KDE SIG, I say so! 

What about your FESCo membership? How do you separate between your own
personal agenda and being an elected community representative?