On Thu, Nov 6, 2008 at 8:36 PM, shmuel siegel <fedora(a)shmuelhome.mine.nu> wrote:
in other open source projects. The point is that this discussion an
decision making process occurred within a limited audience, not necessarily
How is fedora-devel a "limited" audience? Many of the major
maintainers weighed in on that thread.
including everybody who will be affected. It should not be surprising
that
other audiences will object when they realize the consequences of the
changes.
Are there concrete changes that you could suggest to how to actively
involve more people? I'm all ears.
2) As the subject was reopened in this list and needed another
committee
discussion to close the issue, the conclusion should have been communicated
to this list, preferably as a note to the thread that reopened the
discussion.
It actually came up on fedora-test-list, where the majority of
discussions like this take place. The reason that the discussion of
the workflow proposal was done on f-devel is precisely to engage a
wider audience than that of f-t-l
The meeting minutes of the triage meeting are always posted to f-t-l
by the wonderful John Poelstra. And in a private email, someone
mentioned that the discussion was held in private. All of the triage
meetings are open to any interested party, they occur on Tuesdays at
1500UTC in #fedora-meeting on
irc.freenode.net
That said, I really want to praise Jon for a well thought out
proposal for
improving the bugzilla workflow. Also, after the last few flame wars that I
have watched, the entire approach to community input was refreshing.
Thanks! No one is perfect. If you have ways that I could improve,
please feel free to let me know :)