On Fri, Apr 3, 2020 at 9:42 PM Randy Barlow <bowlofe...@fedoraproject.org> wrote: > > On 4/3/20 4:41 PM, Leigh Griffin wrote: > > We didn't quash communication for reasons already mentioned. We didn't > > facilitate it is a more accurate assessment, for which we have > > acknowledged and apologized. > > You certainly didn't engage with the community. Fedora has a change > process, and every other significant change goes through it. Sure, not > everyone is happy with the results of every decision, but there is at > least open discussion. That open discussion often influences the > decision. You didn't do that here, and the only communication of the > decision was buried in an e-mail that many people don't read. That > communication was also a decision, not an invitation for discussion. > There is no process now for discussion to influence the decision, a > cornerstone of open development. > > This is not open.
I'd like to point out *every other major infrastructure change* has gone through the change process, debated publicly, and approved by FESCo before implementing: * Merged Core and Extras in our CVS: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Releases/FeatureMergeSCM * Deployment of Koji: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Releases/FeatureNewBuildSystem * Deployment of Bodhi: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Releases/FeatureUpdateSystem * Deployment of Dist-Git: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Dist_Git_Proposal * Koji signed repos: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/KojiSignedRepos * Deployment of Pagure: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/ArbitraryBranching * Deployment of MBS: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/ModuleBuildService * Added Modular Compose: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/ModularCompose * Added Zchunk repodata: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Zchunk_Metadata * Gated Rawhide: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/GatingRawhidePackages * Dropped i686 content: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Noi686Repositories * Fedora active user metrics: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/DNF_Better_Counting * Using Taiga for the Change proposals: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/fedora-change-wrangler * Enabling modules in the regular buildroot: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Changes/Modules_In_Non-Modular_Buildroot If we were to consider this as the requisite community discussion and the decision as a "proposal", then the resounding negative feedback would be sufficient to *not* do this without going back to the drawing board and improving the proposal. But of course, that's not what is happening. And that's a problem in itself. We accepted the deviation in procedure for Fedora infrastructure changes for *this* change because there was a described process that was considered functionally equivalent. But then *that* process was not followed. You've effectively shattered the trust with the community that you attempted to create with this. -- 真実はいつも一つ！/ Always, there's only one truth! _______________________________________________ devel mailing list -- devel@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to devel-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
