On 11/20/2009 04:37 AM, Paul W. Frields wrote:
> Those aren't the only alternatives. There's also the alternative of
> the maintainers voluntarily making a change to accommodate feedback.
> A situation where we have one part of the Fedora community giving
> unwanted marching orders to the other parts of the Fedora community is
> not an optimal result. (Where that's happened before on rare
> occasions, it's never been a good thing.)
> I'm not saying that FESCo shouldn't have purview over the issue, just
> that you're really drawing a black and white picture where there's
> clearly some in-between.
Yes. FESCo is a place to escalate issues when we fail to reach consensus
with the maintainers themselves. Everytime, we do this, it is a warning
sign that something has gone wrong significantly regardless of the
decision being made by FESCo.
fedora-devel-list mailing list