On Mon, Nov 05, 2012 at 07:55:26PM +0100, Miloslav Trmač wrote: > > Here, I think you're smooshing together two of the three levels I'd > > suggested, putting both non-crit-path enhancements and new leaf > > functionality into one category. Is that correct? > Yes, the "self-contained" wording covers both leaf features and a > subset of non-leaf features. "Non-crit-path" and "all relevant > maintainer are involved" are different subsets of non-leaf features, > however. >From the point of view of evaluating impact, and for that matter for the release notes, I think it's good to have big-non-crit-path-enhancements and leaf functionality categorized separately. Both of them would need to be self contained in the sense you're suggesting. In fact, for that matter, wouldn't crit path updates _also_ benefit from the "all relevant maintainers" rule? -- Matthew Miller ☁☁☁ Fedora Cloud Architect ☁☁☁ <mattdm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> -- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
