On Jan 23, 2014 2:33 PM, "Kevin Fenzi" <ke...@scrye.com> wrote: > > On Thu, 23 Jan 2014 19:03:02 +0100 > Thorsten Leemhuis <fed...@leemhuis.info> wrote: > > I'm still undecided if I overall like Fedora.next or fear it. But more > > and more I tend to the latter position and wonder if it might be wise > > to slow things down: Do one more Fedora release the old style in round > > about June; that would give us more time to better discuss and work > > out Fedora.next and get contributors involved better in the planing. > > This is not practical. Lots of people are thinking about a > fedora.next, qa folks are coding away, lots of people who normally > would be working on the next release are not. If we tell them to stop > all that and go back to normal, we could, but then fedora.next will > likely never ever happen. [...] > The current problem I have with Fedora.next is that it's so abstract.
How are QA folks "coding away" for Fedora.next, rather than traditional Fedora QA processes, if Fedora.next is "so abstract"? I still don't understand what the Fedora.next "Products" accomplish that Spins don't/can't. Eric
-- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
