Summary/Minutes for Wednesday's FESCo meeting (2012-12-05)

[Vít Ondruch]

Dne 6.12.2012 18:23, Josh Boyer napsal(a):
> On Thu, Dec 6, 2012 at 11:54 AM, Vít Ondruch <vondruch at redhat.com> wrote:
>>>> Also, there was dissent already in the "auto-approving" of leaf-features
>>>> during the meeting discussion so I am not sure that auto-accepting of
>>>> Features in general given a lack of response is ever going to actually
>>>> happen.  I personally wouldn't vote for it.
>>
>> This proposal entirely avoids discussion of "leaf-features", "self contained
>> features" or "complex features with system-wide impact" since there will
>> never by any reasonable metrics you can apply to decide. If you can't decide
>> what feature you are dealing with, how you want to judge if FESCo should be
>> approving it or not.
>>
>> If some FESCo member thinks that is should be approved by FESCo, s/he still
>> has the power to open ticket for FESCo meeting. The same power as other
>> Fedora community members.
>>
>> Actually I would be very interested to hear why there should not be
>> "auto-approving". Please enlighten me.
> I explained my reasoning in the part of the email you cut off in your
> reply.
>
> josh

Sorry Josh, but I can't find any reasons in your quote:

"Also, there was dissent already in the "auto-approving" of leaf-features
during the meeting discussion so I am not sure that auto-accepting of
Features in general given a lack of response is ever going to actually
happen.  I personally wouldn't vote for it."


Only reason I see is "there was dissent". So based on some dissent, you 
are against "auto-approving"?

I'd love to hear why there is dissent. What is the reason for dissent.


Vít