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.
Fedora Project Leader
devel mailing list -- firstname.lastname@example.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org