On Wed, 2010-09-01 at 01:08 -0400, Bill Nottingham wrote: > Jon Masters (jonathan@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx) said: > > > "Hi, we decided in our distro we're not taking the next 2.6.37 > > > kernel b/c it's WEIRD, and we're not taking it until you revert THAT > > > PATCH OVER THERE." How would that make us sound? > > > > I didn't say that. But if some feature X that affecting plumbing had to > > be discussed by a team representing each of the core pieces impacted, we > > could bring that up and work out a plan together, not in silos. > > We have a group for this already, you know. Meets every week. You > even showed up today for the meeting. I really don't think it should be FESCOs purview to condense debate about integration of new components into 8 minute bite-sized chunks, they seem to have bigger concerns to be dealing with at the moment. > If you've got issues with how that works (yes, that led to some > of this thread), we can certainly discuss how to fix them. But setting > up a second, different group to do the same thing seems pretty silly. Well, I see some merit in having a regular sync session with different engineering teams, without having to file tickets, etc. But I suppose I'm not articulating what I mean well enough here. Let me come up with an example and get back to you on how it would be done. Jon. _______________________________________________ advisory-board mailing list advisory-board@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/advisory-board
