Matthew Miller wrote:
> On Sat, Nov 10, 2012 at 01:16:55AM +0100, Kevin Kofler wrote:
>> > However, I'm not sure that we can solve this kind of disconnect by a
>> > process change.
>> How about a general policy that planned regressions are not acceptable
>> unless explicitly approved by FESCo? Any feature that you want to remove
>> (temporarily or permanently) MUST be spelled out on the feature page.
>
> Here's the problem: if this is the requirement for a feature, then
> regressions will just be done as "it's not a feature, it's just the new
> version of upstream project X!"
>
> That doesn't buy anyone anything.
But they wouldn't be able to claim a misunderstanding as now and FESCo would
have a standing for requesting a reversion. Plus, in this case, Anaconda
isn't an "upstream project" in the first place, we are upstream.
Kevin Kofler
--
devel mailing list
devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
