-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On 03/09/2010 12:12 AM, Matthew Garrett wrote: > ... > We need to work on making it easier for users to see that there are > available testing updates and give feedback on them. This is clearly > going to take a while .. but should happen before the actual policy change takes place. I'm afraid the impact without proper arrangements won't only be frustrated maintainers realizing how many weaknesses from parliamentarism (does your acting reflect the grass roots' desires?) Fedora has to bear but also loss of distribution superiority with many packages gone or forsaken by never or far too late being pushed to stable. QA enforcement works well for businesses were people get actually paid for reviewing and testing stuff before going out to customers but since Fedora is (mainly) a community-driven distribution this mechanism should be provided opt-in / opt-out and enforced only where major system breakage may occur, coincidentally this is where many users are actually in place to give Karma (e.g. who doesn't use glibc?). Why not provide a mechanism to count the approximate number of users for a package first, coupling this with the minimum Karma automatism - where low-profile packages are excluded from this by not reaching a minimum threshold? This approach would be sophisticated, sensible and IMO easily accepted by the majority of users and maintainers. - -- Alexander Kahl GNU/Linux Software Developer -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Fedora - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ iEYEARECAAYFAkuWCcQACgkQVTRddCFHw10KGgCglDxJA4U7hw0Q6LN39JT+Hv4C TkoAoIwIKawBDPnXeFZr0eSkcl500z9C =W34l -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
