> Am 03.06.2021 um 15:35 schrieb Dusty Mabe <du...@dustymabe.com>:
>
>
>
> On 6/2/21 5:28 AM, Peter Boy wrote:
>>
>>
>>
>> very nicely put. According to Matthew and others cloud wg did virtually not
>> exist for more than a year, no meetings, silence on mailing list beyond
>> bi-weekly announcement of a „standing“ meeting nobody attended to, there was
>> discussion to „kill“ it, great reluctance on the side of Dusty in our
>> meeting March 3 to make any changes on the artefacts at all, new start of
>> 2-weekly meetings March 30, „months of conversation“ which spell down to 4
>> meetings in 2 months, and then such a very fundamental change. Well, the
>> wording may be a bit offhand, but by no means farfetched.
>
> We typically run meetings every two weeks, but that did stop happening when I
> was away earlier this year. There is some truth in here though.
To clear up any misunderstanding: I am in no way criticizing or disliking the
way the Cloud WG works. It is about rebutting the attempt of a subsequent
legitimization ("months of discussion") by the facts as they are.
> https://meetbot-raw.fedoraproject.org/teams/fedora_cloud_meeting/fedora_cloud_meeting.2021-05-11-15.58.log.txt
> 16:18:15 <dustymabe> There is also the discussion of merging with the server
> WG - if we change to BTRFS does that inhibit that potential path for us (i.e.
> should we get server to buy in on the FS change too, or maybe they have
> already)?
I do not want any misunderstanding here either. This passage has nothing to do
with you. It is about the fact that all Cloud WG members have known from the
very beginning that there are considerations about a cooperation. No one can
pretend not to have known (some Cloud members asked me for proof of the
existence of this discussion). Everybody knew pretty well what he was doing.
> Maybe we can get everyone together to discuss all
> the various options and the best path forward?
I would still very much welcome and advocate that. However, some Server WG
members are already a bit annoyed and feel little inclination to let the server
WG eventually get infected, too. In our discussion yesterday, I would have
preferred to keep all options open and carefully weigh all arguments and
options before making any commitment to one option.
_______________________________________________
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct:
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives:
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
Do not reply to spam on the list, report it:
https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure
