On Wed, Sep 21, 2016 at 12:32:40PM -0600, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
> * IMHO the initial upstream default didn't make sense for Fedora

On this specific change, I'm not sure the *updated* default makes sense
either. It still is quite constrained.

> * Perhaps after beta but before final we ping maintainers of
>   "important" packages asking what big changes have happened? Or
>   someone just goes thru the release notes for them all and proposes a
>   list of them?

I think this is good, but probably too late for some kinds of

> * Your brilliant idea here. 

I think that we should have a general policy for packagers of
far-reaching infrastructure packages (systemd, glibc, kernel, whatever)
that any new restrictions or constraints should be disabled by default
in Fedora, regardless of upstream defaults, until we're able to have a
conversation — here, in the edition WGs, and/or in FESCo, as
appropriate for the particular change.

Matthew Miller
Fedora Project Leader
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org

Reply via email to