On Wed, 3 Mar 2010, Kevin Kofler wrote:
Seth Vidal wrote:
> I do not agree Kevin's view is incumbent. I think what's happened is we
> exploded in size when extras came in and when we merged core and extras
> and we lost control over the process and over assimilating what was the
> CORE process onto extras.
But the Core process wasn't as conservative as you seem to think. KDE
updates have always been pushed, e.g. FC4 was upgraded from 3.4 to 3.5, and
bugfix updates have also always been pushed.
But even assuming the Extras process "won" over the Core one, that just
shows that the Extras process was better.
I never said it 'won' and I don't think you could make the argument that
it did.
Winning implies competition. That wasn't the case.
Think of what Jesse and I are describing like this:
When you're working a lot and involved in a great deal of activity you
will often make a big mess. At some point you have to step back and tidy
up the mess you made and tie up loose ends.
Fedora's been active and growing and we've made a lot of messes, this is
just about managing our growth and tidying up our messes.
We've made a mess and as a member of fesco I'd expect you to be helping in
cleaning up the mess, not making it worse b/c fesco HAS to be about the
long term growth and sustainability of fedora.
-sv