On Wed, Jul 25, 2012 at 7:46 PM, Toshio Kuratomi <a.badger@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> And if you disagree with that, then I will reiterate that we should add that
> to the Fixing Features page a an anti-goal for an updated Feature Policy.
> If it is an anti-goal, it would allow for options where FESCo is not
> involved in the Feature Process for many features. If FESCo isn't a player
> in fact finding about how big the impact of a feature is, Features can be
> processed for whether they should be documentation-only features vs ones
> that require either "approval on whether this is a direction the distro
> should take" and "needs coordination among maintainers" before they reach
> FESCo. FESCo would only step in on "documentation-only" features if someone
> complains that the feature is more than a documentation-only change.
A few of us have discussed some changes that should address the major
problems with the features, and would have definitely improved the
handling of this feature. Expect a written proposal soonish.
Mirek
--
devel mailing list
devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
