On Tue, Jun 4, 2013 at 12:40 AM, Vít Ondruch <vondruch@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Dne 3.6.2013 19:04, Dan Mashal napsal(a): > >> What is a system wide change vs a self contained change vs a new change? > > > That is good question. I was always against distinguishing between these > two, but .... > > For example, if there will be new release of Ruby, I am going to propose > them as a "self contained" change, since it is less bureaucracy and let the > community decide, if the change is controversial and FESCo should decide. > > And I would suggest everybody to do the same. So would python 2.7 -> 3 be a self contained change? Would glib deprecations be a self contained change? Personally, whether it "should" or "shouldn't" harm some things I don't really see a problem with doing it the old way, so even no one really cares that much about python 3 it's still listed as a new feature on one page in addition to new or old spins. Another example is MATE 1.4 -> 1.6, sure this is a self contained change but it's still considered a new feature. Is Gnome 3.6 -> 3.8 a feature? Sure it is. Is Anaconda a "self contained" feature? Definitely not. Is there really much meaning to putting Anaconda listed as a feature? Not really IMHO. There's a lot of grey area here and I just see this kind of complicating things more. With respect to all "features" mentioned. Dan -- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
