Thorsten Leemhuis said the following on 09/18/2008 10:51 AM Pacific Time:
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".
Having the right level of accountability and motivation around the
feature process has been the unsolved riddle for me since we started it.
If you can suggest and help me implement the alternative we will have
taken Fedora to the next level! I ask myself this every time we try to
fine tune the feature process to make it better.
Way back when there was no formal process around features or what was
new in a release. There also seemed to be limited visibility into areas
Fedora was innovating in. I guess we are working under the assumption
that all of us want Fedora to be good and to be recognized for what we
do even if that means "bureaucracy" (which I believe is overstating how
hard it is).
I can't think of any thriving communities or projects that have
succeeded because most of the members thought it was "someone else's
problem". Without waxing too philosophical, it is really OUR problem if
WE want to make Fedora a good and better distro.
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.
As I said above, I think it is up to all of us and the different
oversight committees to make sure everything is covered.
How can we know about the things that we don't know about if nobody
tells us? ;-) Or as the great philosopher Donald Rumsfeld is quoted as
saying here
http://politicalhumor.about.com/cs/quotethis/a/rumsfeldquotes.htm
"...We also know there are known unknowns; that is to say we know there
are some things we do not know. But there are also unknown unknowns --
the ones we don't know we don't know."
John
--
fedora-devel-list mailing list
fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
