2008/7/10 Jesse Keating <jkeating@xxxxxxxxxx>: > On Wed, 2008-07-09 at 20:41 -0500, Callum Lerwick wrote: >> Am I wrong? > > Yes. As previously stated the feature pages are way more than just > marketing fluff. Features have very real schedule impact, just consider > this time around, RPM with a bunch of new features, and a new gcc coming > at some point soon. Usually we want to rebuild for both of those. > Without some high level coordination, how do we schedule so that we > rebuild once for all of the right reasons instead of multiple times > individually? Okay yes, I'm seeing the need for Release Engineering to keep tabs on invasive and risky changes. But I think we need to keep in mind that this and marketing are two similar but orthogonal problems, that happen to have a very similar solution. Thus we end up with two criteria: 1) The feature process is voluntary and optional. 2) Unless Release Engineering (not FESCo) deems a change is invasive enough to threaten the release schedule. Two problems, who's solution currently seems to be somewhat indistinctly mashed together in one process. Perhaps this should be clarified. -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
