On Wed, 26 Feb 2014 14:26:41 +0100
Robert Mayr wrote:
...snip...
> For example spins, there was
> a long discussion on them, but we don't have any decision yet of how
> they should look like. I guess we will not provide them any more
> through spins.fpo, but that's a point we really need to know
2014-02-24 18:44 GMT+01:00 Stephen Gallagher :
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> tl;dr: FESCo needs to know what is going to need extra time to deliver
> Fedora.next in the Fedora 21 cycle.
[snip]
> * Websites Team: What sort of redesign work will we need to go through?
Webs
- Original Message -
> On Tue, Feb 25, 2014 at 3:02 PM, Jaroslav Reznik wrote:
>
> >> We do not have a formal process in place for organizing such planning
> >> efforts, but as a provisional one, we'd like to take the following steps:
> >
> > We do have a formal process in place - Change
On Tue, Feb 25, 2014 at 3:02 PM, Jaroslav Reznik wrote:
>> We do not have a formal process in place for organizing such planning
>> efforts, but as a provisional one, we'd like to take the following steps:
>
> We do have a formal process in place - Change process. I'm going to
> announce it right
- Original Message -
> -BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
> Hash: SHA1
>
> tl;dr: FESCo needs to know what is going to need extra time to deliver
> Fedora.next in the Fedora 21 cycle.
>
>
> Now that the Fedora.next product PRDs have been approved, the next
> phase is to plan our executio
On 24 February 2014 10:44, Stephen Gallagher wrote:
>
>
> As a non-exhaustive list of example things we expect will need
> attention and would like input (particularly time-estimates) on:
>
> * Quality Assurance: Coverage increases and automation such as
>Task-o-Tron[1]
> * Release Engineer
