Re: Defining GNOME software (finally)

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").

[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]