RFC: Release team meetings

[Thorsten Leemhuis]

> I see you've taken this as an US vs THEM stance again. 

BTW, I'd like to add something.

I know my mails might look like "US vs THEM" or "Red Hat vs. community"
sometimes. But always keep in mind: I'm spending a lot of time for
Fedora because I think its politics are good and because I trust Red Hat
and its decisions (well, not completely [that would be stupid], but a
lot more then all other big Linux vendors). And I also really appreciate
the work and the open-source efforts of Red Hat and it's employees.
That's why I'm participating in Fedora.

But the community and Red Hat employees didn't interact to well when
Fedora was started years ago (they in fact didn't interact much more
than in the RHL days when Fedora was young [say up to FC3/FC$]). It got
a whole lot better in between, but the interaction between those two
groups still needs to improve imho. Both sides afaics needs to learn how
to interact better with each other to understand each others position
and workflow -- then we'll hopefully sooner or later have a real Fedora
*Project* with a community where it doesn't matter if someone is working
for Red Hat or not, or if he is getting payed for his work by someone or
does it in his spare time.

We are on that way, but it's still a lot work to do. And even worse: I
think we need to put the focus a bit more on community for some time to
really send out the sign "Fedora is a community project" to the press
and the Linux enthusiast out there. Then we hopefully  might get rid of
things like http://www.arouse.net/despair-linux/fedora.jpg
in the end. That's by the way the reason why I request things like "the
goal should be that all packages that formerly were part of Fedora Core
should have co-maintainers from the community after the merge" (¹) or
"FESCo should have at least 50% community members".

CU
thl

(¹) "Non-RH-employees" might be the better term than community in fact,
as Red Hat employees are of course community members as well