On Friday, 23 October 2020 at 19:06, Clement Verna wrote: > On Fri, 23 Oct 2020 at 17:20, Miro Hrončok <mhroncok@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > On 10/23/20 2:45 PM, Aleksandra Fedorova wrote: > > > Sorry, but you just need to accept the fact that some _early > > > development_ work in Fedora can happen without your decision on > > > it. > > > > I except (and accept) that most of the development work in Fedora > > happens without my decision on it. > > > > I would like you on the other hand to accept that major changes in > > Fedora are coordinated trough the change process and ELN is part of > > Fedora. > > This for me highlights the fact that our change process is not adapted > to all parts of Fedora, in particular parts that need to move faster > than the 6 month releases. I have in mind the Container base image, > Fedora CoreOS and ELN, IMO these artefact depends more on the content > (the set of packages included in them) rather then knowing which > version of Fedora release they are based on. But it matters which Fedora version they're based on, because there are often major differences in package versions involved. Which often means API changes. You think the Change process is not suitable, fine. Propose an additional one for the faster moving parts. I have no problem with that. What I do have a problem with is small groups of people making major changes in Fedora without discussing them with the rest of the community. This whole idea would have looked a lot better, if the initial e-mail said something like: Listen, everyone, we have this idea to use ELN buildroot to do an automated rebuild of a subset of Fedora packages using GCC11 snapshot. It's better than doing it in COPR or in rawhide directly because X and Y. We have GCC devs on board as well as a number of RHEL devs to fix issues. What do you think? > The Container base image and Fedora CoreOS are releasing every couple > weeks, ELN is just a rolling release, I think it is unfair to ask to > follow a change request system that is design for release that happen > every 6 months. As above, send a proposal before you actually implement it. You'll certainly get constructive feedback. What I and many other people really hate is being presented with decisions already made and solutions already determined. It makes us feel left out. > I think we either need a new change request system that is light > enough to allow these group to iterate and make changes every week or > so, or we need to trust the people involved in these groups to make > the best decisions for the Fedora they care about and to also notify > anyone that would be impacted by these changes. > > I also would like to point out that the Fedora's project mission > statement is to explicitly allow such group to be empowered to make > their decisions, at least this is what I understand in the following > > ``` > *Fedora creates an innovative platform for hardware, clouds, and > containers that enables software developers and community members to > build tailored solutions for their users.* > *```* It is also meant to be inclusive for anyone who wants to help. We are supposed to build consensus on how we do things: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/#_friends Regards, Dominik -- Fedora https://getfedora.org | RPM Fusion http://rpmfusion.org There should be a science of discontent. People need hard times and oppression to develop psychic muscles. -- from "Collected Sayings of Muad'Dib" by the Princess Irulan _______________________________________________ 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
