On Wed, 3 Mar 2010, Kevin Kofler wrote: > Seth Vidal wrote: >> I do not agree Kevin's view is incumbent. I think what's happened is we >> exploded in size when extras came in and when we merged core and extras >> and we lost control over the process and over assimilating what was the >> CORE process onto extras. > > But the Core process wasn't as conservative as you seem to think. KDE > updates have always been pushed, e.g. FC4 was upgraded from 3.4 to 3.5, and > bugfix updates have also always been pushed. > > But even assuming the Extras process "won" over the Core one, that just > shows that the Extras process was better. I never said it 'won' and I don't think you could make the argument that it did. Winning implies competition. That wasn't the case. Think of what Jesse and I are describing like this: When you're working a lot and involved in a great deal of activity you will often make a big mess. At some point you have to step back and tidy up the mess you made and tie up loose ends. Fedora's been active and growing and we've made a lot of messes, this is just about managing our growth and tidying up our messes. We've made a mess and as a member of fesco I'd expect you to be helping in cleaning up the mess, not making it worse b/c fesco HAS to be about the long term growth and sustainability of fedora. -sv -- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
