On Fri, Dec 7, 2012 at 4:28 AM, Vít Ondruch <vondruch@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: >>> 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". >> > Feature is something somebody considers important enough to create feature > page for it. Period. We're going to disagree on this point. It's OK that we disagree. > I am not sure why do you want to categorize it by size and impact, when it > will be autocategorized by feedback on ML. The only think matters is that > the Feature is widely advertised and that the community can provide early > feedback. Please avoid bureaucracy. I would realy hate to see something like > FFCo (Fedora Feature Committee), which would decided if feature is feature, > major change, alteration, evolution or disruption, since it really doesn't > matter. It doesn't matter from a "get this thing into Fedora" standpoint. It very much matters from a marketing/communication standpoint. If it didn't matter, Fedora Marketing wouldn't be picking specific items out of the overall Feature list. The example I used in the meeting (which btw you should really go read the full logs at this point because all I'm doing is repeating myself) is that if you give a tech journalist a list of 10 Features, they can write a pretty decent article about what is coming in the next Fedora release. If you give them a list of 20-30 Features, they're either going to ignore you entirely or pick 10 Features they think are worth writing about. Some Features are more important than others. I want FESCo involved in reviwing the ones that are big, have an impact across the distro, are somewhat controversial, and have the potential to require a lot of coordination. Whatever we call those, that is what I want reviewed. josh -- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
