Rahul Sundaram wrote:
Christopher Aillon wrote:
Rahul Sundaram wrote:
Christopher Aillon wrote:
That makes no sense. Are you seriously telling me that you ratify
changes that may be sub-par with the intent that they can be changed?
No but policies can be ratified with the understanding that they are
not written in stone.
Sounds like you need to revise your ratification process (or lack
thereof) before people should feel comfortable following anything
that gets "voted" on.
That's a FESCo decision that I am not involved with.
I wonder if I'm the only person that got the impression you were
invovled with it based on your comments. Don't try to strongarm
people into following _draft_ policies based on the fact that you
personally _expect_ it to be ratified.
I am not personally involved with it. The policy is mostly documenting
the process that we have followed even in the previous release so I do
expect maintainers to take an effort to describe what the plans are.
This is not a big enough change to warrant that IMO though. It won't be
any more newsworthy than any other firefox release. It will be done
sooner rather than later. Probably by next week, although having to
send my status updates on a tiny project like this isn't helping me get
it done faster.
--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
