Appointment of Board Members.

[John Poelstra]

Toshio Kuratomi said the following on 08/16/2010 10:38 PM Pacific Time:
> On Mon, Aug 16, 2010 at 08:52:22PM -0700, John Poelstra wrote:
>> Toshio Kuratomi said the following on 08/16/2010 07:06 PM Pacific Time:
>>> On Mon, Aug 16, 2010 at 09:02:45PM -0400, Max Spevack wrote:
>>>> On Mon, 16 Aug 2010, Toshio Kuratomi wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Poelcat was asking for examples where the Board interfered with things
>>>>> that were rightly in fesco's sphere of influence.
>>>>
>>>> This got me thinking:
>>>>
>>>> Let's forget the past for the moment, and worry about the present.  How
>>>> well articulated is FESCo's *current* spheres of influence?
>>>>
>>>> http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_Engineering_Steering_Committee
>>>>
>>>> "FESCo handles the process of accepting new features, the acceptance of
>>>> new packaging sponsors, Special Interest Groups (SIGs) and SIG
>>>> Oversight, the packaging process, handling and enforcement of maintainer
>>>> issues and other technical matters related to the distribution and its
>>>> construction."
>>>>
>>>> How good is this description?
>>>>
>>> So... if we go with this... FESCo seems to fit poelcat's view that it's
>>> middle management.  FESCo isn't expected to be innovative here.  They're
>>> expected to take care that the routines of creating the distribution are
>>> there and no wheels come off in the process.  So how good is that
>>
>> This is not my view.  This is not what I think. It isn't helpful to the
>> discussion.
>>
> Sorry -- I was speaking right after reading this old thread:
> http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/advisory-board/2007-June/003324.html
>


Three years ago, in response to a proposal written by someone else, I 
replied with these words,

"
<disclaimer>
I have a very primitive understanding of FESCo.  Each time I try to
understand it (asking on fedora-devel or searching the wiki) I have come
up empty-handed.  I'm not against FESCo, I simply do not understand what
it is supposed to be or do.

The overall impression I got from reading this complete proposal was
that FESCo is a layer of "middle-management".  Naturally, I find that
hard to believe considering the spirit Fedora :)  I doubt this is the
case so I think being more explicit about FESCo's job would be a good
thing for those less familiar.
</disclaimer>
"

I'm not sure we're going to be able to make any progress here if my 
views are construed as being the opposite of what I've said.

> So as to erase that old memory from my head, how has your view of FESCo
> changed?  What do you presently think of it as?
>
> -Toshio

I'm not able to invest any more time in this tread as I'm getting less 
and less clear what problem really needs to be solved or what progress 
this discussion is really achieving.  I think we could make a lot more 
progress discussing these topics in person or on the phone.

John