On 10 February 2016 at 14:57, Josh Boyer <jwbo...@fedoraproject.org> wrote:
> On Wed, Feb 10, 2016 at 9:41 AM, James Hogarth <james.hoga...@gmail.com> > wrote: > >> > > Marketing are aware the package exists ... I worked with them on the > Fedora > > Magazine article(s) after all ... even got a >5000 view badge for it! ;) > > Fantastic. > > I was rather happy with the result. > > Putting on my #centos community hat though ... > > > > Recently there was an uproar in mailing lists there and we told people to > > pay attention to Fedora ChangeSets for a loose indication on things to be > > aware of coming up. > > So you took a process that originally already had problems and added > more problems by telling people to use it for things it wasn't meant > for? :) > > Seriously, I understand the motivation there but Changes is not the > place to pay attention to things from a CentOS perspective. Not every > Change will wind up in RHEL, so it is already misleading. Further, > given the lifecycles, a Change that lands in one Fedora release may be > superseded by one in a later release. > > Err I don't know where you are getting this from ... I *did not* submit this change ... I'm the point of contact and one of the maintainers for Let's Encrypt but I'm not the one that put together the wiki page. As I pointed out I'm at best ambivalent about this being a valid change - but we should probably have some mechanism to highlight new non-change features. Indeed though many (most?) Fedora changes won't affect future RHEL Mattdm was the one over on those lists suggesting people pay attention to Fedora ChangeSets for at least a rough heads up on what might be coming at some point. > > If new packages/technology aren't to be mentioned and only changes to > > existing technology that may affect $developer are we do need a better > way > > of exposing new things that are not changes. > > Yes. New packages land in Fedora all the time. We don't want to > require them to file a Change simply because someone in some other > project might be interested in it. It's too much process. > > If we need cross-project collaboration on things that will either be > _in_ RHEL for sure, or things that CentOS wants/needs, that is a > totally separate discussion. One that is certainly worth having. > Realistically I think LE has had enough publicity for now and given the strong feelings would dismiss this from the F24 ChangeSet. I would say it's taking it to the extreme to declare about all new packages - most people won't care about the vast majority - but certain ones that have a significant community interest around makes sense. Regardless of potentially upcoming RHEL releases, the ability to highlight non-change features in a Fedora release, outside of $random FM article, sounds like it would be a worthwhile discussion to have on the marketing@ mailing list.
-- devel mailing list devel@lists.fedoraproject.org http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
