On Friday, 23 October 2020 at 19:06, Clement Verna wrote:
On Fri, 23 Oct 2020 at 17:20, Miro HronĨok
<mhroncok(a)redhat.com> wrote:
> On 10/23/20 2:45 PM, Aleksandra Fedorova wrote:
> > Sorry, but you just need to accept the fact that some _early
> > development_ work in Fedora can happen without your decision on
> > it.
>
> I except (and accept) that most of the development work in Fedora
> happens without my decision on it.
>
> I would like you on the other hand to accept that major changes in
> Fedora are coordinated trough the change process and ELN is part of
> Fedora.
This for me highlights the fact that our change process is not adapted
to all parts of Fedora, in particular parts that need to move faster
than the 6 month releases. I have in mind the Container base image,
Fedora CoreOS and ELN, IMO these artefact depends more on the content
(the set of packages included in them) rather then knowing which
version of Fedora release they are based on.
But it matters which Fedora version they're based on, because there are
often major differences in package versions involved. Which often means
API changes.
You think the Change process is not suitable, fine. Propose an
additional one for the faster moving parts. I have no problem with that.
What I do have a problem with is small groups of people making major
changes in Fedora without discussing them with the rest of the
community. This whole idea would have looked a lot better, if the
initial e-mail said something like:
Listen, everyone, we have this idea to use ELN buildroot to do an
automated rebuild of a subset of Fedora packages using GCC11 snapshot.
It's better than doing it in COPR or in rawhide directly because X and
Y. We have GCC devs on board as well as a number of RHEL devs to fix
issues. What do you think?
The Container base image and Fedora CoreOS are releasing every
couple
weeks, ELN is just a rolling release, I think it is unfair to ask to
follow a change request system that is design for release that happen
every 6 months.
As above, send a proposal before you actually implement it. You'll
certainly get constructive feedback. What I and many other people really
hate is being presented with decisions already made and solutions
already determined. It makes us feel left out.
I think we either need a new change request system that is light
enough to allow these group to iterate and make changes every week or
so, or we need to trust the people involved in these groups to make
the best decisions for the Fedora they care about and to also notify
anyone that would be impacted by these changes.
I also would like to point out that the Fedora's project mission
statement is to explicitly allow such group to be empowered to make
their decisions, at least this is what I understand in the following
```
*Fedora creates an innovative platform for hardware, clouds, and
containers that enables software developers and community members to
build tailored solutions for their users.*
*```*
It is also meant to be inclusive for anyone who wants to help. We are
supposed to build consensus on how we do things:
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/#_friends
Regards,
Dominik
--
Fedora
https://getfedora.org | RPM Fusion
http://rpmfusion.org
There should be a science of discontent. People need hard times and
oppression to develop psychic muscles.
-- from "Collected Sayings of Muad'Dib" by the Princess Irulan