----- Original Message -----
----- "Paul W. Frields" <stickster(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Since the FPL has appointed three of those seats to volunteers and
> only one to someone who's a Red Hat employee, I'm not sure how this
> is
> relevant. Looking at the Board history for those seats[1] one can
> see
> half the appointments since mid-2008 have been volunteers. Also of
> note is the fact that half the people elected by the community
> since
> that time have also been volunteers. So the appointments don't
> look
> slanted toward Red Hat employees AFAICT, which is just as intended.
>
> We can agree to disagree on your overall point, that's fine. I
> just
> wanted to point out the facts don't support an effort to stack the
> Board with Red Hat people.
>
> * * *
> [1]
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Board/History
>
How about the bigger question, what percentage of FESCo has been Red
Hat employees during any term.
How many ran for elections and got voted...
After all it is FESCo that really
matters what is in Fedora, not the board.
More than to other Fedora bodies as FESCo is engineering committee and
Red Hatters in Fedora are mostly engineers. Makes sense :) You see less
in Board and even less in FAmSCo...
Jaroslav
I would track this out
myself but the use of non@redhat email addresses makes it hard, even
asking the candidates in Election town halls you get the run around
commonly. "Who I work for doesn't matter." How many times have we
heard that?
-- Bob
--
marketing mailing list
marketing(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/marketing