So… from the F40 Change Request: Privacy-preserving Telemetry for Fedora Workstation (System-Wide) discussion:
@avidan2006, I hope you don’t mind me singling you out here — you’re not alone, but you succinctly wrote something that a lot of people have either just implied or said with … somewhat less grace. @kevin already responded (in a nutshell — that isn’t how things are, and would be a bad way of doing things) to the direct question, but I’d like to go a step further. (John, I’d value your feedback in particular, but of course this is open to anyone.)
How can we make this more obvious?
This is the first time we’re using Fedora Discussion for a change proposal. Maybe it would have been better to start with something less controversial, but… hey, here we are. I wanted more engagement, and we got it and this is an important conversation. We clearly have many new folks contributing, and that’s a great time to check assumptions.
The post starts with some boilerplate:
This is a proposed Change for Fedora Linux.
This document represents a proposed Change. As part of the Changes process , proposals are publicly announced in order to receive community feedback. This proposal will only be implemented if approved by the Fedora Engineering Steering Committee.
Should that be made more prominent somehow? Could the wording be improved? Are there specific things that should be said, which might have helped?
Break-out topics
I can see how the break-out topics might lead, somewhat, to assuming that we’re down to rounding out those final details. That wasn’t my intent — I take each of them to be exploring part of the proposal, and implying something like “What exactly is proposed about ____, and what could be improved in that area?” In the past, discussion of Change proposals has lead to significant improvements.[1]
Would it be helpful to add the above text to these as well, or to write a different boilerplate explanation?
What else?
Are there things other than in the way the topics are introduced which could have helped?
We link to the Changes Process in the boilerplate, but that’s over in the Fedora Docs. Would it be helpful to have a FAQ on this site?
What else?
For example, the DNF Countme proposal originally suggested giving each system a UUID (as openSUSE does), but now uses a more clever metric which resists individual tracking (which was never a goal anyway). ↩︎