On 21/12/10 10:11, Arjan van de Ven wrote:
but on the flip side, requiring that every little thing goes through
such an approval process goes to far if you ask me. The paperwork gets
way out of proportion with the actual work. In addition, if someone
implements something cool and contributes it to MeeGo, that's what
community contribution is about. We should be saying "thank you sir" not
"please fill out this stack of paperwork in threefold and we may let you
put it in".
WHAT!
Remind me again why we're cutting GPL3 apps?
Oh yes. Because we're not *just* a community based hobby distro. We're supposed
to have a rigorous QA process with tightly defined features to allow vendors to
rely on the stability and functionality and to allow us all to manage MeeGo in a
highly efficient manner.
If we don't do that then product vendors can't rely on MeeGo and we can all just
go home (or go and play on Fedora or Ubuntu or openSuse or Gentoo).
So it seems to me that a responsible thing to do is not just "drop the process"
but to try and understand the objectives and ensure we're fixing the process,
not just dropping it at the first speed bump.
As for the community comment - even the community OBS is not saying "thank you
sir" - we're saying "we're serious about quality and we hope you are too".
Frankly I think MeeGo should be much more hard-nosed in keeping things *out* of
core/UX areas and push things into the community where there are *much* fuzzier
edges.
David
--
"Don't worry, you'll be fine; I saw it work in a cartoon once..."
_______________________________________________
MeeGo-packaging mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.meego.com/listinfo/meego-packaging
