On Thu, 2007-05-17 at 11:56 -0400, Peter Jones wrote: > Christopher Blizzard wrote: > > On Thu, 2007-05-17 at 10:31 -0500, Tom "spot" Callaway wrote: > >> All we're really trying to do is make good packages. We've tried > >> really > >> hard to make guidelines that lead to good, clean, > >> maintainable-long-after-you-are-dead packages. > >> > > > > I hear what you are saying and I understand. What I'm saying is that > > there's a fine line between making good packages and going over the > > edge. So in your example, documenting is good. But if you end up with > > an exception process? I think that probably crosses the line. Dispute > > resolution, maybe. But I just worry that we're going somewhere we don't > > want to be. Not sure how to properly put this into words. > > I'm totally in agreement that an exception process isn't somewhere we > want to go. Arbitration when there's a dispute causes less impedance to > actually getting things done, while still achieving the same goals. > +1 --Chris -- Fedora-maintainers mailing list Fedora-maintainers@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-maintainers -- Fedora-maintainers-readonly mailing list Fedora-maintainers-readonly@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-maintainers-readonly
