On Tue, Jun 30, 2026 at 04:03:38PM +0100, Adam Williamson wrote: > On Mon, 2026-06-29 at 16:18 +0100, Daniel P. Berrangé wrote: > > IMHO the goal of any git based workflow is to fully eliminate any/all > > change wrangler scripts, and indeed eliminate most of the work that > > the change wrangler has to do. "change wrangler" as a concept should > > probably not even exist if we got the process right. > > I don't think this is realistic. There are still parts of the process > that require a human touch, e.g. considering whether the change > proposal is just fundamentally *wrong* in some way and advising the > submitter before it reaches FESCo, or checking in with maintainers to > request status updates and query whether Changes should be deferred. > (Sure, you can have automatic comments, but a human touch is > substantially better for this). Ideally it should involve *much* less > drudge work, and it definitely doesn't need to be a full-time job on > its own, but I still think we should always have a designated human > wrangler.
Yes, I'll accept that view. It is a "curator" oversight role, rather than a fundamental mechanical part of the process. With regards, Daniel -- |: https://berrange.com ~~ https://hachyderm.io/@berrange :| |: https://libvirt.org ~~ https://entangle-photo.org :| |: https://pixelfed.art/berrange ~~ https://fstop138.berrange.com :| -- _______________________________________________ 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
