On Thu, Dec 6, 2012 at 3:18 PM, Matthew Miller <mattdm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Thu, Dec 06, 2012 at 11:20:22AM -0500, Josh Boyer wrote: >> As I said in the meeting yesterday, I think the definition of a Feature >> needs to be cleared up before we can really tackle this one. Feature to >> me is something important enough that it shouldn't be auto-accepted. If >> there is some other class of thing people submit that isn't a Feature, >> then I might be for auto-accepting of those. > > Alternately, "Feature" could be the term for the any small or big thing > which is useful to track and tout for marketing purposes, and big technical > changes could be, I dunno... "Major Changes". The meeting minutes showed that Fedora Marketing is already filtering the current Feature list and picking the important ones to highlight, so I don't think continuing to call the small ones Features is accurate. I mean, sure it could be done but it seems to make more sense to change the name of the small ones instead. Or just have them go to release notes. The main point is, calling them all the same thing is confusing and leads to a basically useless "Feature list". josh -- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
