Le 30/12/2011 21:50, Per Jessen a écrit :
For instance, a change to using plymouth (a alternative bootsplash thingie) is currently being discussed (as an RFC)
did you notice there are now RFC? same for systemd. this mean user advices are better considered ST (if any) can only arbiter from the various point of view. I mean make a recollection of the various point of view and make a synthesis In the Linux Documentation Project, as "leader" or (I like better) "coordinator", I do such thing: after the discussion somebody have to say what the discussion gives as result there, it's me. That said, on the LDP, it's all a consensus way, I'm not paid, have no action else than moral, but most of the time it works.
Wrt "supported" functionality, I could imagine such issues eventually becoming a topic for the ST. The ST could veto planned changes in order to maintain functionality (e.g. /usr as NFS-mount) deemed to be essential to openSUSE.
Veto if much too hard a word. Any ST can only try to make the listeners aware of the problem and try to convince them to change they mind. Only ther boss can have a veto or give orders. Ir once we have a Fondation, *and* if this fondation is appointing programmers (a la mozilla), then may be, and this have to be very carefully done jdd -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, email: opensuse-project+owner@opensuse.org