On 11/20/2009 04:37 AM, Paul W. Frields wrote: > > Those aren't the only alternatives. There's also the alternative of > the maintainers voluntarily making a change to accommodate feedback. > A situation where we have one part of the Fedora community giving > unwanted marching orders to the other parts of the Fedora community is > not an optimal result. (Where that's happened before on rare > occasions, it's never been a good thing.) > > I'm not saying that FESCo shouldn't have purview over the issue, just > that you're really drawing a black and white picture where there's > clearly some in-between. Yes. FESCo is a place to escalate issues when we fail to reach consensus with the maintainers themselves. Everytime, we do this, it is a warning sign that something has gone wrong significantly regardless of the decision being made by FESCo. Rahul -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
