governance, fesco, board, etc.
Rahul Sundaram
sundaram at fedoraproject.org
Tue Jun 12 12:08:38 UTC 2007
Ralf Corsepius wrote:
> OK, in verbose:
>
> rel-eng has broken FE's workflow model into something I consider
> counter-productive and unusable to community contributors.
Do you mean rolling updates vs freeze and release or something else?
rel-eng's deeds are throwing away all the points having made FE
> attractive.
Think of fixing problems in infrastructure as bug reporting exercises.
If I filed a bug report as vague as these statements against of the
packages maintained by you, would you be able to fix this issue?
>>> But that's how the board will work, 4 people get elected (community)
>>>> and 5 appointed from RH. You get the mix you mention.
>>> Well, I must have missed this.
>> It has been that way right from the start and several people have told
>> you this in discussions before on and
> It's answers like these which lets appear Fedora-leadership at RH as they
> currently are perceived.
Pointing out that you have ignored what has been told to you in several
discussions isn't a matter of perception but facts.
>> offlist.
> Nobody did.
I certainly did tell you that Fedora Board has non-RH folks possibly
more than once. The underlying theme of Red Hat vs non-RH ignores the
fact that employer doesn't decide community focus. Individual people do.
Second, it ignores the fact that every governing body within Fedora has
non-RH folks in it and if Red Hat sees individual Fedora contributors
making a good difference it probably will want to hire them. That
doesn't suddenly make them a non community member.
Rahul
More information about the advisory-board
mailing list