Fedora Board Recap 2009-01-20

[Josh Boyer]

On Thu, Jan 22, 2009 at 06:37:24PM -0600, Mike McGrath wrote:
>On Thu, 22 Jan 2009, Josh Boyer wrote:
>> >
>> >If http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Overview is correct.  I'd like to see the
>> >page focused and simplified on what we're about.  I'd also like to know
>> >what we should do to get it spread around a bit more.
>> >
>> >Somehow I feel like we've not properly set our users expectations right
>> >and in the end it hurts us when they have a bad experience.  Fedora's goal
>> >is not one of a popularity contest, we serve a deeper purpose. [1]
>>
>> Then start by answering your own question.  Fedora's goals, it's mission,
>> and it's plan are driven by it's community[1].  Not by the Board, and with all
>> respect to our excellent leader, not by the FPL.
>>
>> So, what do you want that plan to be?
>>
>> josh
>>
>> [1] And by community, I mean everyone that contributes to it regardless of
>> employer.
>>
>
>To me that's a cop out.  

I'll note that you still haven't answered your own question ;).

>How can 13,000+ active community members all lead a
>single project?  Why have a board at all[1]?  I think the community
>leading was great back when there weren't that many of us but now I really
>do think it's hurting people.  I'm happy to continue to aid in leading the
>infrastructure team but where are we going and for what ultimate purpose.

I think infrastructure is a great example of community leading.  You guys roll
out stuff all the time that is new and exciting and was never dictated by
a Board, planned out, and made sure to fit in "mission statements" or "goals".

>Everyone has their own expectations of Fedora but no one has said what it
>is and should be.  The result is us constantly not meeting the
>expectations of the mainstream (because those expectations have not been
>defined by us) and then having technical users discount us because of the
>bad press.  Not everyone is doing this, but enough are that people take
>notice.

I see both good and bad press surrounding Fedora.  Do you have examples of
where you think we really need to address a criticism that has been made?

>We are a mature and growing project.  I can't imagine a non-free
>organization of our size and scope getting any further then this without a
>defined purpose, goals and mission.  Individual teams keep setting goals
>for themselves (like in infrastructure for example) but without some
>larger purpose those goals are likely to get misaligned.

Ok, I think you have a point there.  However, I also think that is one of
the functions of both FESCo and the Board.  Those committees exist to
make sure the various SIGs, projects, etc continue to move forward and _not_
get misaligned.  So rather than a kind of concrete mission statement, think
of them as the group that weighs each new turn of events in light of the
current state of things and makes sure it's not entirely tangential to
Fedora.

They are there to enable people and monitor (I hesitate to use the term
'police'), not to define.  I'm sure if someone said "Hey, let's scrap this
koji thing and use launchpad", the Board would say "No."  Similarly, if
someone said we should start shipping proprietary kernel drivers or
alternative kernels (even such as kernel-libre) that FESCo would review it
and say no.

Honestly, I think the Overview page you linked to is enough of a guideline
of what we are and where we're going.

>[1] Our board is community and non community members.  It seems suited to
>this task.

Our board is community and community members.  Just because they were
appointed does not mean they are not part of our community.

josh