On Fri, 2007-01-05 at 09:44 -0500, Jesse Keating wrote: > On Friday 05 January 2007 01:55, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote: > > This issue brings up a interesting question: Which board has the power > > to influence and adjust this particular naming scheme in our new > > "merged" world? FESCo or the Fedora Board? > > Ultimately I feel it should be the Fedora board. FESCo is really responsible > for making sure the full repo is there, and the Distribution cabal (hopefully > there will be more than just me) is responsible for taking content from that > repository and creating installable iso sets from it. I think it's a little more complicated than that. Or maybe not. If there are two committees, one for the repo and one for the release, they need to work really closely together. The release cabal needs a stable set of packages to build the releases from and the repo cabal would need to enforce that. E.g. feature freeze, string freeze, etc. Personally, I'd rather see the current FESCo and Core cabal merged into a single entity that shares both responsibilities. The Packaging Committee would certainly still exist to come up with the packaging guidelines, so that wouldn't change. And you immediately get community involvement in the content of the release isos, which is what I think Jessie meant by "hopefully there will be more than just me". Just my $0.02. josh -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
