Re: keeping spare-time-contributors happy

[Luke Macken <lmacken@xxxxxxxxxx>]

On Tue, Sep 04, 2007 at 12:00:04AM +0200, Julian Sikorski wrote:
> Rahul Sundaram pisze:
> > Hans de Goede wrote:
> >>
> >> And why not ? They worked well enough before, didn't they?
> >>
> >> Don't get me wrong I'm in favor of updates announcements and of
> >> avoiding unneeded updates.
> > 
> > If you already in favor of these, I don't think you need any convincing
> > that these are important for the end users. Sure, they aren't absolutely
> > necessary but these are an improvement over what we had previously and
> > there is some additional overhead as part of that.
> > 
> > If anyone in favor of the processes then implementation details can be
> > improved. If anyone thinks that the processes themselves are not useful
> > then any implementation won't make them happy. Don't mix these.
> > 
> > Rahul
> The other problem is that pup does not display the info maintainers put
> into bodhi yet.

This data will appear soon.

luke

--
Fedora-maintainers mailing list
Fedora-maintainers@xxxxxxxxxx
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-maintainers

--
Fedora-maintainers-readonly mailing list
Fedora-maintainers-readonly@xxxxxxxxxx
https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-maintainers-readonly