Sorry for top posting, but I'd like to clarify two points: (1) I changed the title to reflect the real topic we are covering. Again, the movement of a few VKB bugs to the new product at this moment is not a decision anywhere, instead it's just an action performed by individual contributor, hence the statement of "poor decision making in MeeGo" does not sound valid. (2) I am not quite sure about the scope of the process you are talking about, I assume it's in QA area. If you are referring to the general MeeGo scope, maybe you could consider to send your mail to meego-community in addition to meego-qa.
In general, I think the process you talked below is what we are following. I agree sometimes there are aspects which are not perfect for several reasons, but in general things are improving as I can see. I just have one comment about the distribution list of the announcement. IMHO, we need to analyze the impact of change and send to relevant mailing list, not necessary to be -community all the time. Fan > Saturday, July 02, 2011 3:08 PM > Sivan Greenberg wrote: > > Can we gather the involved parties to set up new process for that? > That will mandate announce time and graceful wait after the > announcement for people to comment? Many times, since people are busy > with their stuff they might forget about a change like this coming, > even if it was communicated to -dev, so I think we should: > > 1) Always cross post to -community (the list is so low traffic that it > would not make a problem) > 2) Allow a week's time for people to realize again the announcement > and let them respond, object, discuss again during that time before > the change starts over. > 3) Make sure the change is done in small chunks but sequential, every > time **re-announcing** the parts affected on -community. > > This sort of things keep repeating them selves, which is bad for the > project's reputation and for its progress. > > Andre, maybe we need to have a "new" process like this approved by the > TSG to make it more "official" ? > > Now I start thinking the meego critics team was not such a bad idea > after all...But everything is useless if people continue to ignore > workflow and process. > > -Sivan > > On Thu, Jun 30, 2011 at 9:03 PM, Andre Klapper <[email protected]> > wrote: > > Hi Jason, > > > > On Thu, 2011-06-30 at 09:25 +0800, Zhou, JieX A wrote: > >> Was there any body realize the potential risk/impact of this to the > >> other parties (let's say meego-dev@ mailing list here) when the > >> original mail of this change sent out? > >> > >> If yes, why nobody (especially EM guys)popped up his/her concern at > >> the time when he/she received the mail or forwarded it to other > >> parties? > >> If no, then my comments below....... > > > > Disclaimer: I'm part of MeeGo EM. > > > > I was aware of the planning and I was assured in > > https://bugs.meego.com/show_bug.cgi?id=19369 that feedback of involved > > parties has been collected so this is not the root problem. > > > > Problem instead is that people started *moving* bug reports to different > > places which broke workflows of some developers. > > > > I was not aware that this moving has started as the moving itself not > > announced anywhere neither what is moved (only version 1.3 reports if I > > get it right). > > > > andre > > -- > > Andre Klapper (maemo.org bugmaster) > > http://www.openismus.com > > > > _______________________________________________ > > MeeGo-qa mailing list > > [email protected] > > http://lists.meego.com/listinfo/meego-qa > > > _______________________________________________ > MeeGo-qa mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.meego.com/listinfo/meego-qa _______________________________________________ MeeGo-qa mailing list [email protected] http://lists.meego.com/listinfo/meego-qa
