On 13. 05. 20 14:45, Vít Ondruch wrote:
When the change process was established, I always proposed that the change should be always pre-approved by default. The changes would be judged by the amount of feedback received on ML after their announcement. If somebody had strong concerns, it would be possible to bring this change to be judged by FESCo.
That isn't that bad of an idea, really.
But then everybody felt strong that it is not possible, because if there was not official body approving this, that could be end of the world. So now, when we have that body, it gives blank approvals, because the members of the body cannot get themselves educated about the problematic? Can somebody explain me what is the reason for the process then?
Unfortunately, I don't full-time working week to dedicate to FESCo to reasonable educate myself on *all* proposed changes and sometimes, I decide to abstain. Does this mean I am disqualified of being a good FESCo member?
My proposal is that FESCo should put their stuff together and provide reasonable ruling or it should completely dissolve, because it proves itself useless. There are no reasons for the committee to gather together just to provide rubber stamps to changes.
It reads a bit harsh to call all the time I actually do spend on FESCo stuff useless :(
-- Miro Hrončok -- Phone: +420777974800 IRC: mhroncok _______________________________________________ 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
