[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

Re: Leaving? (cont'd)

On Mon, 2006-07-31 at 15:18 +0530, Rahul wrote:
> Hans de Goede wrote:
> > 
> > Rahul wrote:
> >> Hans de Goede wrote:
> >>
> >>> In extras we already have a few unwritten rules, for example don't do an
> >>> soname changing update (or other ABI breakign lib update) except for
> >>> devel. This doesn't slow things down. There is a difference between
> >>> having a comittee sanction every update, or having a few guidelines in
> >>> place, which everybody follows as they see fit, and only when in doubt
> >>> ask the list.
> >>>
> >> Unwritten rules generally tend to be fuzzy. Its much better to document
> >> things more clearly. If we can have policy guidelines that doesnt slow
> >> things down, please work on documenting them in a common way to both
> >> core and extras.
> >>
> > 
> > I fully agree, the point I was trying to make is that we already have
> > rules (although unwritten) and that those rules do not seem to slow
> > things down.
> > 
> Is everybody following them?
Nope. As I see it, there are 2 factions in FE:
- Those who want to stick to upstream as close as possible.
They often package svn/cvs snapshots, alpha/beta release without caring
much about compatibility or package usability.

- Those who obey this "unwritten rule".

>  If its not written rules, I might as well 
> as break them anytime I want.

Well, apparently some people seem prefer "max. freedom" combined with
"complex bureaucratic rules", instead of "restricted freedom" with
"simple rules. From my experience, the former rule doesn't work in
community projects such as Fedora. Unfortunately, there seems to be
pretty large groups of people who don't share this opinion.


[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]