propsal summaries, moving forward [was Re: [Request for Comments] Governance change for Fedora Project]

Matthew Miller mattdm at
Fri Aug 22 14:18:02 UTC 2014

Okay, so, I think I'm hearing two basic proposals here. Let's see if we can
get them pinned down into a decide-betweenable form, and proceed from there.

A. The Flock Proposal (a.k.a. Josh/Toshio/Haïkel/Christoph/Paul/etc., or

   - Replace current board with new body
   - New body has advisory role to FPL; FPL makes final decisions, 
     striving as always for consensus where possible
   - Keeps all current responsibilies of board
     - some things, like trademarks and community dispute resolution 
       may be delegated to subcommittees
   - Additionally, stronger charter for active leadership; creating
     and implementing shared vision
   - Composed of representatives from various Fedora committees, 
     elected at the committee level; exact structure to be determined,
     but also flexible as needs of project change
   - Overall "org chart" for Fedora a little more pyramid-structured, with
     this clearly at the top.

B. Two-Body Proposal (a.k.a. what I think I'm hearing from John)

   - Keep current board basically as it exists now in practice
   - Not necessarily as it is written up, which differs from that
     - specifically, "The Fedora Project Board is the executive team of the
       Fedora Project that makes guiding decisions and leads the project
       forward" would be rewritten to better reflect the idea of a "supreme
       court" rather than an _executive_ body.
     - in "responsibilities" from,
       strike "oversight of subprojects" and "issues of strategic, as
       opposed to tactical, importance for Fedora that require leadership
       and vision from above the team or subproject level to achieve
   - As Greg defined the terms, more concerned with governance, less with
   - Possibily additional governance roles, including more direct handling
     of community budget
   - Not mentioned, but putting this out there: we could consider switching
     this to being entirely elected at large rather than having appointed
   - Chair of this body not necessarily FPL; in fact, FPL not necessarily a

   - New executive council specifically tasked with refining and furthering
     the project's vision
   - More leadership, less governance
   - Probably composed almost exactly as proposal "A"
   - Except, unlike "A", this body wouldn't handle trademarks, community
     conflicts, or fundamental questions of Fedora values
   - It would, however, handle big things: I would expect that under this
     model most of the proposal would have gone here rather than
     to the Board unless someone specifically raised particular issues
     having to do with Friends/Freedom/Features/First.

   - Operational org chart still basically pyramid structured with new
     council at the peak and the board in sideways watchdog role

Do these seem like reasonable statements of the proposals? Are there
refinements to be made? Are there other proposals?

I'm going to be taking a vacation next week, but then, as my kids' school
starts up again in September and regular routine is re-established, it will
be nose-directly-to-the-grindstone. I'd like to call for a basic decision
here by, say, second week in September, so we can have clarity moving

Matthew Miller
<mattdm at>
Fedora Project Leader

More information about the board-discuss mailing list