On 01/08/2013 03:48 AM, Miloslav Trmač 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?)
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.
Yes
Such an escalation wouldn't fix F18, true.
This may come as an completely stupid question but given that we have
not released yet why cant we remove those packages?
Surely we must have some kind of "omg we cant release with this
component in final it's utterly broken or posses security risk!" fail
safe mechanism in place to deal with this?
In retrospect, the update to httpd 2.4 should probably have been a
feature; that would make this problem visible by beta free
Remi had brought up the topic here on devel in due time and had compiled
that list sometime in our beta slippery slope if I'm not mistaken.
FESCo
already has "fixing features" on the agenda in a general sense, more
thoughts on how to improve the process would definitely be welcome.
This is is not happening because of lack of communication or people did
not know, it's happening because people did not react thus fixing
unresponsive maintainers is more closer to the point or rather coming up
with having a rock solid cleanup process.
JBG
--
devel mailing list
devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
