Adam Williamson wrote:
> I already wrote this to -test a couple of days ago:
>
> http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/test/2010-October/095135.html
>
> and we're discussing it there. I think the thread demonstrates things
> tend to go much more constructively if you avoid throwing words like
> 'blatant' and 'failure' and 'needlessly' around. We designed a policy,
> put it into effect, now we're observing how well it works and we can
> modify its implementation on the fly. It doesn't need to be done in an
> adversarial spirit.
There's exactly one constructive thing to do, it's repealing this set of
policies (Critical Path and Update Acceptance Criteria) in its entirety.
An update should go stable when the maintainer says so, karma should be
purely informational feedback for the maintainer.
Kevin Kofler
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
