On Sat, Apr 4, 2020 at 8:32 PM Miro Hrončok <mhroncok@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
...
> >> For the stated reasons I am *-1 for this change in its current form*.
> >
> > That is your privilege as a member of FESCo. As I've said, however, I
> > think you've misunderstood the situation.
>
> Do you want to leave it at "this is your privilege" or would you rather try to
> lower the level misunderstanding? In other words, do you think it is still worth
> it to have this conversation?
>
I do think it is still worth it. I suspect that in some places we are
just talking past one another. It's possible that we would be able to
get a majority vote in FESCo, but I would much prefer if we could get
to *consensus* instead. I'm trying to incorporate suggestions, but
some of them (like requiring ELN to be a completely separate branch of
dist-git) interferes with our intended goals. And (though I haven't
been able to communicate this well, I fear) we really do intend for
conditionals to be uncommon (and ELN-specific conditionals limited to
places where it is absolutely necessary). I think using the
"pre-generated documentation" example was probably a bad one, because
that's a case that implies a much wider scope than intended. Or at the
least, I should have described it better from the beginning. What I
think is most likely is that we'd look into adding %{bcond_with docs}
in more places in Fedora (and default to that being false in ELN).
Then, later in the RHEL process we could introduce such pre-generated
docs as a downstream-only change after we break inheritance from
Fedora.
If we went that route (not just for docs, but as a model for
conditionals in general), would that address some of your
reservations?
> >> As said on the mailing list, I'd appreciate if you take the feedback provided by
> >> the packagers more seriously and adjust the proposal accordingly.
> >
> > I have read and responded to the feedback as best I know how. Please
> > do not confuse "I disagree and here are my reasons" with not listening
> > to the feedback.
>
> I've asked you to take it more seriously, I was not accusing you for not
> listening to it. I guess what I meant to say is "give the people who provided
> the feedback some benefit of a doubt and some merit and work with them to
> understand their concerns better" -- but I realize there will always be some
> level of disagreement.
There will be, but I really am trying to identify the problems and
find common ground. As I said above, I think I'm probably
misunderstanding what you're advocating for rather than ignoring it.
> > Lastly, I don't know if you reread the latest updates (that I made
> > around three hours ago to the Change Proposal), but I *did*
> > acknowledge that we are going to incorporate the possibility of
> > maintaining separate specs for ELN and Rawhide for any maintainer who
> > absolutely wants to do more manual work. The exact mechanism is going
> > to at least partly depend on the results of the dist-git forge move,
> > so I haven't incorporated that into the proposal. Functionally, it
> > will be very similar to maintaining a separate branch, though.
>
> Well, sadly I had not, because I was writing that thing for more than 3 hours
> trying to not sound like a demanding passive aggressive naysayer :(
Email is hard. I understand.
> If I had reread the latest version, my reply would be different. (Although there
> are far too many open questions in this ML thread, I won't be changing my vote
> to +1 yet, you can consider my -1 withdrawn for now.)
>
> Thank You for adding that \o/ -- this is precisely what I meant by "taking the
> feedback more seriously".
I appreciate that.
> I could imagine this latest addition incorporated into the proposal better,
> would you like to "meet" and discuss that?
I'll see if I can find some time ahead of the FESCo meeting to talk
with you tomorrow. I think it's definitely worth talking it over.
_______________________________________________
devel mailing list -- devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
