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

["Jóhann B. Guðmundsson"]

On 12/07/2012 09:28 AM, Vít Ondruch wrote:
>
> Feature is something somebody considers important enough to create 
> feature page for it. Period.

That describes the current state and is your point of view.

To me an "Feature" is a completely different thing.

>
> I am not sure why do you want to categorize it by size and impact, 
> when it will be autocategorized by feedback on ML. 

It's common knowledge that you cant autocategorized by feedback on 
Mailing list regardless what's it's for. ( For obvious reasons )

> The only think matters is that the Feature is widely advertised and 
> that the community can provide early feedback. 

No that is not enough because in the end you will only get feedback from 
users of those feature not necessary from developers of other components 
that might get affected by that feature.

> Please avoid bureaucracy. I would realy hate to see something like 
> FFCo (Fedora Feature Committee), which would decided if feature is 
> feature, major change, alteration, evolution or disruption, since it 
> really doesn't matter.

FESCO is for that, as in to accept,decide and determine the wider impact 
an feature might have to the whole projects eco system and arguably the 
entity that's responsible for it to be integrated into the distribution 
in as painless manner for users and developers alike. ( from my pov ).

JBG