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

[Stephen John Smoogen]

On 27 August 2014 18:07, inode0 <inode0 at gmail.com> wrote:

>
> >> This is a detail of little interest to me at this point. I view it as
> >> cruft from long ago when someone was worried about the Board making a
> >> decision so far out of line with Red Hat's interests that there needed
> >> to be a way for the Board to be put back in its place.
> >
> > Whether it's important to you or not, the question still needs to be
> answered.
>
> About a thousand details about the flock proposal need to be answered
> at some point too. This is a minor detail and if anyone thinks it is
> monumentally important that the FPL can veto decisions of this body
> then it is fine with me.
>
> >> I don't like calling it the supreme court but if that really is the
> >> model people want then having a single individual have veto power over
> >> its decisions makes it not so supreme.
> >>
> >> I don't personally view it as a court at all. I view it as a body that
> >> is entrusted with making really hard decisions at infrequent times
> >> because someone has to make those decisions. Since this body is
> >> largely, perhaps entirely in the future, determined by Fedora
> >> Community it can be held directly accountable by it.
> >>
> >>>>    - New executive council specifically tasked with refining and
> furthering
> >>>>      the project's vision
> >>>
> >>> If the council sets the vision, does it have to be approved by the
> >>> supreme court board given it has an impact on Fedora's values?
> >>
> >> I would like to think that if the FPL wants to move away from Fedora's
> >> current values it would be nice to discuss that with the governance
> >> board. I would expect that most visions promoted by any FPL would not
> >> actually run counter to Fedora's existing values and would not need to
> >> be "cleared" by the governance board.
> >
> > I'd like to think that as well.  But we're discussing governance
> > proposals and changes, and it should be clearly documented what the
> > interaction of these bodies is.  Leaving it vague is going to lead to
> > confusion.
>
> I don't honestly see how it is confusing. If anyone in Fedora has a
> question or concern regarding these matters they can bring those to
> the governance board. Nothing is changing with respect to that in my
> proposal.
>
>
I think the issue is that people know more about what people think your
proposal is than what your proposal actually is. That said.. it is true of
the other proposal also.

-- 
Stephen J Smoogen.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/board-discuss/attachments/20140827/92e5d1e4/attachment.html>