I wish I could fully disagree :) But this proposal was also to raise awareness, and at the best make two not-interacting stakeholder groups at least read about each others reasoning/interests. I admit the latter was achieved only partially, but at least some perspectives of both sides had been included in the Discourse, although the persistently high share of +1 in the poll might indicate that several people from devel did not vote indeed. Anyway, even if it gets rejected, if the issue around ptrace_scope, and maybe even the question how things like that occur, is discussed at FESCo, the proposal had already a sense. As rejecting the proposal does not imply that ptrace_scope remains at 0 given its circumstances, it might be still worth to work on the Docs to avoid the 2015 issue to happen again, depending on how this issue is to be resolved.
I surely will accept whatever FESCo decides, and implement what is approved. However, if the proposal needs to be split to re-propose as three proposals (I understand your reasoning about this of course), I might need a co-owner, as I am not sure if I can ensure to get this done on time atm and also answer all questions about them on time when they are published the next time. So if it comes that way, everyone who is in favor of the proposal(s) and is interested to team up, feel free to let me know then. Looking forward to the decision for now ;)
On 12/09/2025 20.46, Neal Gompa wrote:
On Fri, Sep 12, 2025 at 7:04 PM Christopher Klooz <py0xc3@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Demanding people only interact with you through the forums limits the audience, feedback and input you'll get for your proposals.
The problem is that splitting the discussion in two media limits the audience you interact and exchange with, and thus also the feedback you can provide: a discussion for knowledge creation & transfer is always iterations of input and output for everyone, not just the proposal owner with many 1:1 conversations but everyone to benefit from everyone's thoughts and considerations. Imho, a major issue in Fedora is that we have atm two groups (potentially with a big gap in between), which some people in between, that very often do not consider each other and do not exchange with each other, just presuming what interests the other might have or simply not taking them into account at all.
There is a lot of space for innovation and improvement if the groups would more exchange & share opinions but also their reasoning and their "WHY", up to how to do something better. This might cause much more (social and technical) support for everyone. Instead, we sometimes even have hostilities (e.g., often about packaging issues) because one group finds out what the other did, or not did, without them knowing, or they simply do not understand the reasoning because no one took the time to explain in the media they use, and thus also not allow them to give potentially useful feedback or contribution.
Discourse has become the major point of discussion of Fedora, and although I am an opponent of forcing people from the mailing list to Discourse, I think it is reasonable and a good return on (time) investment for everybody to accumulate change proposal feedback at one place, so that everyone can also read through the thoughts and considerations of others, including all stakeholder groups. Hope that makes sense :)
Most of the people you want to reach for this topic aren't on
Discourse and don't want to be. Regardless, with my FESCo hat on, I
would reject this on the basis that it's too complex and doing too
many things at once. It would definitely need to be broken up into
smaller proposals and relevant stakeholders need to be engaged for
them.
--
_______________________________________________
devel mailing list -- devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/
List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines
List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Do not reply to spam, report it: https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/new_issue
