On Tue, Jun 30, 2026 at 11:45:34AM +0200, Kashyap Chamarthy wrote: > On Mon, Jun 29, 2026 at 12:22:44PM -0400, Ben Cotton wrote: > > [...] > > > The current Changes process has been around since, IIRC, F21. I made a > > few changes to it in my time as Fedora Program Manager, but it may be > > time to consider a more substantial change. But the right approach > > there is to think about what a "modern" process looks like at a high > > level, and then think about how to implement it. > > Let's imagine what the updated process could look like. Is there more > to it than this (besides the tooling changes), at a high-level: > > From now on, please propose changes via pull request to > 'fedora-changes' Git repo. Have the discussion on the devel list, > Discourse, and the MR itself. The resulting in-progress / accepted > / completed changes will be published as HTML on docs.fp.o.
> > > It really doesn't have to be more complicated than submitting markdown > > > docs against a repo as merge requests, and having FESCO approve/reject > > > the merge requests. > > > > You're right, it doesn't have to be more complicated than that. There > > are certain benefits to that complexity, though. > > My reading of Dan's point is, we're needlessly stuck in a complicated > process that should be drastically simplified. > > > I don't understand -- why should the Change Wrangler spend a lot of time > > > fixing formatting issues? > > > > Because Changes start in the wiki, go to the mailing list, FESCo's > > issue tracker, Bugzilla, the wiki again, etc etc etc. > > Again, as noted in my first reply in this thread, this sounds like too > much merry-go-round. It should be one submission to a Git repo plus > discussion on mailing list / Discourse. > > > There are a lot of moving parts. Could some of them be simplified? > > Absolutely. Is it a simple change to make? Nope. > > _Should_ there be so many moving parts? What parts can be removed w/o > negative consequences? > > Yes, the change takes work, but we can keep it as simple as we choose. As much as I like the idea of looking at our existing processes regularly and see if they can/need to be adjusted, the discussion here makes me wonder, if perhaps, we're talking past each others because of ignorance. What's your describing here seems to be, from what I understood from Ben, just part of the change process. The change process is not just about: here is an idea + some discussions + a decision. It's also about the implementation of that idea, tracking the work resulting from this idea, ensuring that bugs introduced by that idea are identified, centralized and acted on so that the person introducing the idea deals with the fall-out, not someone else. All this to say, I think we need to be looking at the process in its entirety before focusing on some part that we'd like to change in order to ensure we do not in fact lose some capabilities that we had before and which, turns out, we want to keep. Hoping this makes sense, Pierre -- _______________________________________________ devel mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected] 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/[email protected] Do not reply to spam, report it: https://forge.fedoraproject.org/infra/tickets/issues/new
