On 18.09.2008 19:18, zimbra wrote:
Thorsten Leemhuis said the following on 09/18/2008 09:58 AM Pacific Time:
On 18.09.2008 14:13, Josh Boyer wrote:
== Summary ==
=== Features ===
> [...]
As an added note, the following Feature pages have not been updated.
They
need to be updated before Beta or they will be dropped as Features:
** https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Features/BetterStartup
** https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Features/EFI
** https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Features/FirstAidKit
** https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Features/GNOME2_24
** https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Features/GoodHaskellSupport
** https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Features/HDTVEnhancements
** https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Features/KernelModesetting
** https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Features/OnlineAccountsService
** https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Features/RPM4.6
** https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Features/SaveToBugzilla
** https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Features/Sugar
** https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Features/TimeZoneAndLocation
What exactly are the consequences if a Feature "will be dropped"? It
sounds a bit like a threat and as something bad. But is it really?
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Features/Policy/Dropping
thx for the pointer
Since the beginning of the feature process we have referred to it this
way. To date this is best motivational technique we've been able to
find to get people to update their feature pages. We'd gladly accept
suggestion for something better :)
"dropped" essentially means it won't be advertised as a key feature of
the release on this page:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Releases/10/FeatureList
Well, that logic does work much for me. If I'd be a *lazy* fedora
contributor (and I'm sure we have some of those then work on
middle-sized or big features) then I'd just do my work and simply ignore
the whole feature process right from the start (or at this point) to
avoid the bureaucracy that it brings. Sure, my Feature then might not
get mentioned in the FeatureList -- but a lazy packager might not think
about that at all or just say "that's mainly Fedora's problem, not mine".
But if that scheme works for you guys then I won't ask more stupid
questions, especially as I normally don't have to deal with the Feature
process much :-) .
But I have one final question (hopefully not that stupid): Is anybody
doing checks for "new features" (as i features, not as in feature
process) that (for example) should get mentioned in the release notes
and checked during QA, but don't have a Feature page (yet)? Take for
example KDE 4.1, which afaics has no Feature page (correct me if I'm
wrong, I could not find one), but at least should get mentioned in the
realease notes properly.
> [...]
CU
knurd
--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
