----- Original Message ----- > From: "Zbigniew Jędrzejewski-Szmek" <zbyszek@xxxxxxxxx> > To: "Development discussions related to Fedora" <devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> > Cc: golang@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > Sent: Wednesday, June 12, 2019 4:20:40 PM > Subject: Re: New Go Packaging Guidelines landed in rawhide (koji) today > > On Wed, Jun 12, 2019 at 04:39:07AM -0400, Jakub Cajka wrote: > > > F31 change page: > > > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Adopt_new_Go_Packaging_Guidelines > > > and approval: https://pagure.io/fesco/issue/2120 > > > > It seems that this change has been accepted as Self Contained Change > > but IMHO it is System Wide Change as it seems to affect (nearly) all > > Go based packages in distribution(and will require work/attention of > > people that are not change owners, actually not accounted for in > > change proposal). For past several releases I have been doing rebase > > of Go compiler change(yet to be filed for F31) that is IMHO > > comparable(maybe a bit smaller) in scope and they were always deemed > > by FESCO as System Wide Changes. This really leaves me > > confused. Could someone from FESCO clarify? > > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Policy#Self_contained_changes says > > Examples include [...] a coordinated effort within a SIG with > > limited impact outside the SIG's functional area > > So in this case, even though the change affects so many packages, it > falls into the "self contained change" category. > > That said, the difference between "system-wide" and "self-contained" > boils down to two things: some additional data required in the change > page, and filing the change a bit earlier. In this case the additional > data is mostly there in the change page, and the change was filed early, > so even if we were to change the Change to "system-wide", the effect > would be cosmetic. > > Zbyszek Thank you for clarification :). IMO it would be great if that has been recorded in https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Policy#Self_contained_changes, this approach can't be really inferred from it(at least I don't see it there). With that popped on my mind that may be calling it "early/late window change" would fit better along with recording the complexity of the change, rather then system wide, contained change. But this is really just my brain storm. Unfortunately no early changes for me as Golang release are aligned late in to the Fedora devel cycle. JC > _______________________________________________ > devel mailing list -- devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html > List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines > List Archives: > https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > _______________________________________________ devel mailing list -- devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
