Le Ven 5 janvier 2007 16:01, Josh Boyer a écrit : > 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. My feeling is somehow different. I'd really love to have a clear separation between the group that makes long-term transverse decisions and the group responsible for driving a particular release (with perhaps given Fedora's short lifecycle & usual manager burnout different groups for different releases). That's the only way you'll get clear release focus Regards, -- Nicolas Mailhot -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
