On 12/23/2010 4:25 PM, David Greaves wrote:
On 23/12/10 22:39, David Greaves wrote:
On 21/12/10 08:19, Carsten Munk wrote:
Well, and we're side-stepping program management totally by having
those
dummy bugs. A new package should be a FEA# and approved by program
management as per
http://wiki.meego.com/Release_Engineering/Process#Package_quality_expectations_for_submissions_into_.2A:Testing_projects
Either we start enforcing it for everything or we have to modify the
rules
to fit reality... Proposals welcome?
Is it reasonable to say that:
"In principle every change should be fixing a bug or contributing to
a feature"
every change should be improving MeeGo. While that translate to fixing a
bug or adding an enhancement, I STRONGLY object to translating it to a
bugzilla entry (which is an accounting thing not a real thing) or a
featurezilla entry (which is likewise).
For MeeGo to have a chance of success, the amount of "paperwork" must at
the very minimum be in proportion to the change you are making.. Right
now this is waaaaaay off and this is turning away contributors. (I see
this internally with people who want to contribute some small thing..
and then get their improvement rejected.. they go "WTF" and go back to
working on some other distro instead).
_______________________________________________
MeeGo-packaging mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.meego.com/listinfo/meego-packaging
