On Sat, 30 May 2020 16:42:10 -0500, Roger Heflin wrote: > The policy means nothing when
Only an "outsider" would say that. That policy has been refined multiple times since the fedora.us era with its strict QA policies. That policy is also reason why potential "maintainers" shy away from the community project, because as volunteers they can't tell whether they would be able to meet the requirements. I could point you at the related "non-responsive maintainer policy", but so far you aren't listening. > the staffing is not there to actually do the tasks. Sweet how you try to dance around the problem. Where bugzilla components are literally flooded with tickets, automation would be the way to go. That has been pointed out before. Meaningful, early responses that give bug reporters some guidance on where and how they could escalate an issue, where they could discuss an issue in order to gather more details and to confirm a problem, and and and. > And clearly there is limited staffing. And if they are a volenteer > then tell them they arent doing their job and kick them out. Repeat until > there is no community and you have no staff. Key components are still maintained by Red Hat. That is an essential and important contribution to this project. Offer a distribution that doesn't satisfy users, and you lose (or reduce) the user part of the community including most of the guinea pigs. _______________________________________________ users mailing list -- users@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to users-le...@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/users@lists.fedoraproject.org
