how about supporters like e.g. the irc support group?
* technical background: yes,
* have to suffer the sins of others: yes,
* have a different point of view on various changes and ideas: yes,
* are closer to the user base and their common problems: yes
kind regards,
Rudolf Kastl
--
devel mailin
On Mon, 2011-11-14 at 19:35 +, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" wrote:
> On 11/14/2011 06:38 PM, Bruno Wolff III wrote:
> > The issue that came up in the discussion was that there is a good group
> > to use to include for QA. The qa group isn't really used and proventesters
> > is a bit broad and its fu
On Mon, Nov 14, 2011 at 9:15 AM, Matthew Garrett wrote:
> Or we can open it to the entire project and
> just assume that the electorate will ensure that nobody inappropriate
> gets elected.
I don't see the harm in letting the electorate decide this. If you're
not a packager and you somehow manage
Am Montag, den 14.11.2011, 12:31 -0500 schrieb Clyde E. Kunkel:
>
> Multidisciplinary membership is good. However, please keep a balance in
> that no one group is over represented.
>
> Also, how about a non-technical member from the general user community?
I'd say no. Not only because I thin
On 11/14/2011 05:50 PM, Matthew Garrett wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 14, 2011 at 12:31:21PM -0500, Clyde E. Kunkel wrote:
>
>> Also, how about a non-technical member from the general user community?
Very strong no from me.
FESCO is a technical committee, supposed to provide strategic technical
decisions
On 11/14/2011 06:38 PM, Bruno Wolff III wrote:
> The issue that came up in the discussion was that there is a good group
> to use to include for QA. The qa group isn't really used and proventesters
> is a bit broad and its future is in question. One possible solution is
> to start using the qa grou
On Mon, Nov 14, 2011 at 16:15:05 +,
Matthew Garrett wrote:
> Something that was brought up at the last fesco meeting is that
> fesco membership is currently restricted to members of the packaging
> group. That's arguably overly restrictive - fesco is intended to be the
> body with technic
On Mon, Nov 14, 2011 at 04:19:50PM +, Peter Robinson wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 14, 2011 at 4:15 PM, Matthew Garrett wrote:
> > Something that was brought up at the last fesco meeting is that
> > fesco membership is currently restricted to members of the packaging
> > group. That's arguably overly r
On Mon, Nov 14, 2011 at 11:19 AM, Peter Robinson wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 14, 2011 at 4:15 PM, Matthew Garrett wrote:
>> Something that was brought up at the last fesco meeting is that
>> fesco membership is currently restricted to members of the packaging
>> group. That's arguably overly restrictive
On 11/14/2011 04:30 PM, drago01 wrote:
> That does not make sense. Why should a "non-technical member" be in
> the body that make technical decisions?
Agreed FESCO needs to be made up of people with really strong technical
background and a be very skilled in maintaining and packaging components
On Mon, Nov 14, 2011 at 12:31:21PM -0500, Clyde E. Kunkel wrote:
> Also, how about a non-technical member from the general user community?
> Should provide a nice balance to the technical side.
Fesco exists to make technical decisions. The people who are members
should be competent to make th
On Mon, Nov 14, 2011 at 6:31 PM, Clyde E. Kunkel
wrote:
> On 11/14/2011 11:19 AM, Peter Robinson wrote:
>> On Mon, Nov 14, 2011 at 4:15 PM, Matthew Garrett wrote:
>>> Something that was brought up at the last fesco meeting is that
>>> fesco membership is currently restricted to members of the pac
On 11/14/2011 11:19 AM, Peter Robinson wrote:
> On Mon, Nov 14, 2011 at 4:15 PM, Matthew Garrett wrote:
>> Something that was brought up at the last fesco meeting is that
>> fesco membership is currently restricted to members of the packaging
>> group. That's arguably overly restrictive - fesco is
On Mon, Nov 14, 2011 at 4:15 PM, Matthew Garrett wrote:
> Something that was brought up at the last fesco meeting is that
> fesco membership is currently restricted to members of the packaging
> group. That's arguably overly restrictive - fesco is intended to be the
> body with technical oversight
Something that was brought up at the last fesco meeting is that
fesco membership is currently restricted to members of the packaging
group. That's arguably overly restrictive - fesco is intended to be the
body with technical oversight over the entire project, not merely
packaging, and in that s
15 matches
Mail list logo
