On Wed, 12 Oct 2011 17:45:52 -0700 Thomas Dineen <tdineen@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: ...snip... > Keep in mind that I am speaking from the users standpoint, > where I am seeing a lot of changes that: > a) Seriously annoy and inconvenience the user. > b) Seem to have little logical justification or utility. > > Maybe we need to have Forum like this one where we discuss > and approve these changes before they are implemented? > > For example the proponents provide a (Short) written proposal > and justification, then interested parties are encourages to comment > on the implications of the proposed change. Collateral damage? Who > else will be required to make changes to what packages? How are users > affected? Existing scripts and applications? To some extent we have this in the Feature process. For example, the network biosdevname feature is outlined at http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Features/ConsistentNetworkDeviceNaming including rationale and how to easily disable it, and other feature information. There's no way every change could be proposed and brought up on this list for scrutiny however, there's just no way it could handle the volume, even if all developers working on anything in Linux knew to discuss their development here. You're welcome to look over the F16 features for any you want to chime in on... http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Releases/16/FeatureList Otherwise I can only suggest you get involved in areas you are concerned with the development of. kevin
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
-- users mailing list users@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe or change subscription options: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/users Guidelines: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
