yesterday's board meeting
fedora at leemhuis.info
Thu Mar 29 05:12:30 UTC 2007
On 28.03.2007 16:55, Max Spevack wrote:
thx for the Summary Max!
> Actual details reprinted below, in case people want to comment.
> '''Fedora Board and Fedora Engineering Steering Committee'''
> '''General Fedora Board stuff'''
> We talked about the need to do a better job of making it clear how the
> Board's decisions (at least the controversial ones) are made, and
> indicating whether there is generally consensus in those decisions, or if
> there is a lot of dissent. The next time a "tough" decision is made by
> the Board, there will be more conversation about it in this way.
> We are also taking the steps necessary to figure out how the Board
> succession will look, since there will be some changes after Fedora 7.
> Right now this is being discussed on the private fedora-board-list, but it
> will jump over to fedora-advisory-board soon. It is also being discussed
> [:Board/SuccessionPlanning: on the wiki].
Quoting the wiki: "RH 3: Engineer/Engineering manager with strong
relationship to RHEL; We get a lot of complaints that RHEL folks don't
have enough insight into Fedora. This is an attempt to fix that. We will
gather some suggestions from RHEL managers and evaluate from there.".
Just wondering: Might it be better to get someone from RHEL engineering
into FESCo or both the Board and FESCo? FESCo afaics should be the one
that does the technical decisions -- those have a strong impact for RHEL
so having someone from RHEL there might be better.
On the other hand: FESCo does meetings and nearly all other things in
the open, so RHEL people can join there easily if they want.
More information about the advisory-board