On Mon, 2013-01-07 at 21:02 -0700, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
> On Tue, 8 Jan 2013 04:48:36 +0100
> Miloslav Trmač <mitr@xxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> > On Tue, Jan 8, 2013 at 4:31 AM, Adam Williamson <awilliam@xxxxxxxxxx>
> > wrote:
> > > On Tue, 2013-01-08 at 03:06 +0000, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" wrote:
> > >> So the remaining webapps that ship with the broken configuration
> > >> that we are about to release into the hands our our enduser base
> > >> and how they should be handled are not considered high-level
> > >> technical decision?
> > >
> > > What is the decision to be made? "Do we fix them"? Obviously yes.
> >
> > ("Obviously"? Per which release blocker criterion?)
>
> I think Adam was saying we should fix them, but they can be 0 day
> updates (or whenever they are fixed).
>
> > The way I understand Jóhann, the topic to escalate was a proposed
> > removal of currently unorphaned packages from the distribution, which
> > sounds like a quite reasonable topic for FESCo.
>
> Sure. Then we got sidetracked. ;)
Hmm, sorry, I think I somehow missed the proposal to remove packages - I
thought Johann was just referring to 'this issue' in general. If that
would indeed be a FESCo issue, then sorry, it was a reasonable
suggestion indeed.
--
Adam Williamson
Fedora QA Community Monkey
IRC: adamw | Twitter: AdamW_Fedora | identi.ca: adamwfedora
http://www.happyassassin.net
--
devel mailing list
devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
