On Tue, Jun 19, 2018 at 01:18:04PM +0200, Vít Ondruch wrote:
> 
> 
> Dne 19.6.2018 v 12:37 Josh Boyer napsal(a):
> > On Tue, Jun 19, 2018 at 3:48 AM Vít Ondruch <vondr...@redhat.com> wrote:
> >>
> >>
> >> Dne 19.6.2018 v 04:28 Kevin Kofler napsal(a):
> >>> Stephen Gallagher wrote:
> >>>> * Most FESCo votes will be performed in the tickets. FESCo members will
> >>>> have one week[1] from the creation of the ticket to vote. So long as at
> >>>> least three members have voted, the majority of votes at the end of that
> >>>> week will be counted as the result. If three votes are not received in 
> >>>> the
> >>>> first week, voting will be extended by one additional week and the 
> >>>> minimum
> >>>> required responses reduced to a single vote. If by the end of that second
> >>>> week no votes have been counted, it will be treated as a vote *against*
> >>>> any change requested by the reporter, thus preserving the current status
> >>>> however it stands. We do not expect this clause to ever be invoked.
> >>> Ouch!
> >>>
> >>> With the previous policy, any issues for FESCo would be tabled for a 
> >>> meeting
> >>> and announced on this list before the actual meeting.
> >> I think this ^^ is very valid point. I was used to review the tickets
> >> once they were announced they will be discussed on the meeting.
> > Out of curiosity, why did you wait?
> 
> I don't really want to monitor FESCo activity every day. If there was
> meeting announced, there was announced what is going to be discussed, so
> it was enough to check once per week.

I share your concern, to an extent, and I understand the motivation behind
the change too. Briefly, the motivation stems from the fact that many tickets
*are* completely non-controversial and we don't gain anything by waiting
for a FESCo meeting, and neither do we get anything by discussing in during
the meeting. But I feel that discussion is important, and during free
discussion additional questions or doubts might be raised that would not
appear in the more formal setting of a ticket. Thus, I plan to set the
'meeting' tag on all non-trivial tickets, as in [1].

Let's give it a try, maybe this will result in a slightly more efficient
FESCo (even though I think it was pretty good in this regard already).

[1] https://pagure.io/fesco/issue/1913#comment-517240

Zbyszek

> 
> >   There have been tickets in the
> > past that were already dealt with in this manner and never brought to
> > a meeting.
> 
> Sadly. But hopefully they were not that important.
> 
> >
> >>> That gave a chance to
> >>> the community to comment on the ticket and/or attend the meeting to join 
> >>> the
> >>> discussion. Thus, the community had a chance to point out any issues with
> >>> the submitted proposal before FESCo started voting.
> >>>
> >>> With the new policy, the voting starts immediately with the creation of 
> >>> the
> >>> ticket (of which FESCo members get notified by mail, whereas the community
> >>> at large does not) and has a short deadline of 1 week, encouraging voting
> >>> sooner rather than later. As a result, FESCo members will now almost 
> >>> always
> >>> vote based on only the submitter's biased writeup (the submitter of a
> >>> proposal will rarely point out, or even be aware of, all of its drawbacks)
> >>> before anybody from the community even gets a chance to see the ticket, 
> >>> let
> >>> alone reply.
> > Perhaps we could simply configure the FESCo queue to send email to the
> > devel list.  That would give everyone the same notification and
> > opportunity to comment.
> 
> Notification about new issues could be enough.
> 
> Although still, the FESCo meeting agenda used to be place, where it was
> obvious, that something probably happened with the ticket and it needs
> FESCo (and possibly my) attention. The notification of new issues would
> not replace the convenience FESCO meeting agenda, but better than nothing.
> 
> 
> V.
> 
> >
> > josh
> > _______________________________________________
> > devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
> > To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
> > Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html
> > List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
> > List Archives: 
> > https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org/message/V6B4IU6AMV5B4PXOGGIWQDELQRDCQFLI/
> 
> _______________________________________________
> devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
> To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
> Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html
> List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
> List Archives: 
> https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org/message/BYMYR2AV2X7M44N44QK6GHFP3YPRAU7U/
_______________________________________________
devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org
Fedora Code of Conduct: https://getfedora.org/code-of-conduct.html
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: 
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org/message/LAYLTT4XIBASWZBZ7VPY7PJFA7IG5HF3/

Reply via email to