2011/6/11 Anas Nashif <[email protected]>: > > On 10 Jun 2011, at 22:00, David Greaves wrote: >> So... what do you think? Can I expect some more communication and some >> proposed patches? > > Yes, sure. Communication goes both ways as we know. When did you last ask > MeeGo release engineering about their requirements and input to the above? > Where are all of those requirements and plans mentioned above are coming from > btw? >
Anas raises a good point - there seems to be no defined feature process or even referred to a place where discussion can go on in :) I'd propose the following: * Tie the project somewhere in the MeeGo project - it already seems to be a MeeGo infrastructure tools project, so mark clearly it's a cross vendor project - it's confusing that the page starts with "Nokia OBS" picture * Mark clearly on http://wiki.meego.com/Release_Infrastructure/BOSS that (proposed) location of discussion around BOSS is at meego-distribution-tools@ mailing list * Establish a featurezilla of sorts for BOSS features (like we have for MCTS and MWTS) and use the same model as MeeGo does, that is: - Submit a feature description. People/companies can state if they'd like to commit resources to do a feature by providing an assignee and a timeframe. If there's a assignee, it can go on a roadmap. - Have -all- stakeholder feedback go into the same process, that means Nokia, MeeGo RE, MeeGo Apps, whoever. * Monthly (IRC?) meeting of roadmap review, indicating which features can go into the codebase in next release/which won't make it Thoughts? /Carsten _______________________________________________ MeeGo-packaging mailing list [email protected] http://lists.meego.com/listinfo/meego-packaging
