web-m and Fedora 14
pjones at redhat.com
Fri May 21 15:06:28 UTC 2010
On 05/21/2010 05:21 AM, Kevin Kofler wrote:
> Peter Robinson wrote:
>> I don't see when the support lands in F-13 there couldn't be press
>> statements about it, just because it appears after the release doesn't
>> mean its not significant and isn't worth making a statement about.
> In fact this is a big failure of our feature process, but whenever I have
> brung this up in FESCo, the reaction of the other folks there was to
> threaten banning that kind of updates entirely. :-/
> <SARCASM>Yeah, wonderful idea, let's allow everyone else to advertise WebM
> support months before us</SARCASM> just because the upstream release date
> happened to be at the worst possible point of our release cycle. :-/
> Adding features in updates is needed. Our feature process needs to
> accomodate this. The current process is broken.
You seem to have a chronic inability to distinguish between our efforts
to define a normal process and the ability to have special cases (on a
sort of "ever" basis). We haven't really discussed the idea that we can
ever release something important if it is becomes available between
releases, though the normal process is clearly not to. That being said,
it is possible to have exceptions to the normal process. You may notice
that we've done this several times during your tenure on FESCo. The fact
that we may sometimes have to make exceptions doesn't mean that having a
normal process is bad.
You could really try a little harder to get along with people instead
of inserting vitriol at every possible chance. I don't think you'd
actually have to compromise any important moral/ethical/engineering/etc
position to be less hostile.
I hope you know that this will go down on your permanent record.
More information about the devel