Re: Defining GNOME software (finally)

[Michael Catanzaro <mcatanzaro gnome org>]

On Wed, Apr 22, 2020 at 9:04 am, Sriram Ramkrishna <sri ramkrishna me> 
wrote:
> I think if you're making decisions that aren't recorded then how does
> that get communicated to the board if there are no formalisms?
> Granted, I think most of those decisions that are made on irc are
> fairly pedestrian and is not particularly worth nothing - but without
> some formalism you have no framework on what is of interest and what
> isn't, no?

Right, since decision-making is handled informally, we currently have 
no process for deciding what to report to the board. We've never done 
this before outside our team report at GUADEC so I'm not sure how we 
would handle this.

> Regarding "what is GNOME?" - this always ended up being more political
> in the past because invariable people are interested in the branding
> as being core means that we have a different set of expectations.
>
> Changes made to the buildstream configs - is there a process there
> given that it could be political?

Besides normal GitLab code review, we require approval by Javier or 
myself for additions or removal to core, plus additional approval by 
Allan for changes to meta-gnome-core-utilities (which we might rename 
or split because that contains all the non-developer applications, not 
just "utilities").