On 05/10/2010 05:16 PM, Toshio Kuratomi wrote:
Good food for thought, I will certainly mull this over the next 27 hours.On Mon, May 10, 2010 at 02:14:33PM -0400, Tom spot Callaway wrote: One thing this highlighted for me, and maybe it's something I missed, being the FPC NKOTB, but it never occurred to me that FPC members could attend FESCO meetings. I see the notifications, I just never put 2 and 2 together. <facepalm> In any event, thanks for writing this up, it gives us a good place to debate from and, I hope, will lead to a more efficient process without sacrificing quality. -J Basically, I think the current way that ratification by fesco works in practice delays guidelines getting put into effect and getting written up with little benefit. The actual times when FESCo points out problems are largely when the issue gets discussed on the mailing lists between the FPC meeting and the FESCo meeting. This could just as easly tie into the process where FESCo represents the packagers to the FPC to get a change in an established guideline as opposed to having a separate step where the guidelines must be explicitly ratified by FESCo. In our present process, fesco is supposedly reviewing the Guidelines between the time that the FPC passes them and the FESCo meeting but it's apparent that this seldom happens in practice. As noted in that ticket, it would make it easier to get FPC guidelines written up as the accountability for writing up passed guidelines could be handed out directly following the meeting rather than getting lost in the shuffle between FPC meeting - FESCo meeting - FPC meeting. The real benefit is probably to FESCo, though, as it clears out ten to fifteen minutes that they would no longer need to spend on it in meeting and however long the members actually do spend on reviewing the guidelines outside of the meeting as the current method of review is assuming they do. So if it's brought to a vote in FPC, I'll vote that FESCo stop explicitly having a review step and moves to just pushing things they notice as problems back to FPC. But I won't mind overly much if it doesn't win out there -- I'd be more concerned about it if I were on FESCo and had to try to add reviewing of the guidelines to the other things on the FESCo agenda. -Toshio-- packaging mailing list packaging@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/packaging |
-- packaging mailing list packaging@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/packaging
