On Tue, 2010-02-02 at 11:02 -0600, Adam Miller wrote: > I will agree with that, I can see an application space for certain > decisions when presented with conflict, but how often does this happen > and how is it currently, as well as how has it been in the past, > handled and resolved? > As sigs and spins grow in size or numbers the potential for this to happen is great. There have been cases of the Desktop sig wanting to bring in newer versions of some software, which the KDE sig was not ready for, there are conflicts between the traditional Unix folks and the future looking Desktop folks, there are conflicts between the "everything should work to it's fullest extent out of the box" folks and "our installs should be as slim and trim as possible with all optional functionality in separate and not installed by default packages" folks, and so on. Because we decree that our spins cannot make material changes to the packages and only some minor config changes, we put them in an awkward situation if they want to target an audience that is vastly different than the other audiences. To me, that's why it's important to define the overall target audience who "trumps" other audiences when there is a conflict. So that we can say "You are free to do whatever meets your needs, so long as it doesn't disrupt the needs of our target audience". -- Jesse Keating Fedora -- Freedom² is a feature! identi.ca: http://identi.ca/jkeating
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
-- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
