On Wed, Dec 10, 2014 at 1:19 PM, Mike Pinkerton <pseli...@mindspring.com> wrote:
> Primarily the uncertainty of what changes the Workstation WG has made, > coupled with Matthew Miller's comments that: > > <deletia> > > I also don't know whether Workstation updates will pull in other similarly > bad ideas in the future, and whether I would have to re-audit all of the > configuration after each update. > I understand the frustration. This case has pointed out some areas where the communications process could be improved (though I expect the number of subscribers to the workstation mailing list has gone up dramatically in the last few days). Your reasons for avoiding using Workstation don't seem that new, though. Changes have always been able to pass under the radar, either because of process failure, or the simple fact of missing the email thread. Going forward, I'd hope the WGs will use this as an example to better communicate WG-specific changes, but relying on out-of-the-box configuration to match your desired state doesn't seem sustainable. Thanks, BC -- Ben Cotton -- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
