On Wed, 2010-10-27 at 22:19 -0400, Josh Boyer wrote: > 2010/10/27 MÃirÃn Duffy <duffy@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>: > > Would you feel better if the Board said "not approved for F14"? > > Yes, absolutely. > > > We felt > > bad because there weren't guidelines in place when we were asked, but I > > hope the requestors are under no illusions that this is anything but a > > late-in-the-cycle request. > > You felt bad, so you drafted requirements, and waived half of them? > That is not straight-forward at all. > > > If anyone is afraid of blame please place the blame on me. It's my fault > > if this doesn't ship for F14. Nobody should be blaming rel-eng for > > *anything* here, nor setting them up to be blamed. > > It has nothing to do with placing blame. It has everything to do with > the Board answering a direct question with a direct answer. IMHO, > that answer should have been: > > "This request is being made too late in the development cycle to be > approved for F14. However, the Board recognizes that we lack clear > and concise criteria around such request and will be addressing this > shortly to close this gap for future releases." We sort of said this in the discussion on this list before the board meeting minutes we're discussing and were met with a lot of protest. ~m _______________________________________________ advisory-board mailing list advisory-board@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/advisory-board
