governance, fesco, board, etc.

[Rahul Sundaram]

Ralf Corsepius wrote:

> OK, in verbose: 
> 
> rel-eng has broken FE's workflow model into something I consider
> counter-productive and unusable to community contributors. 

Do you mean rolling updates vs freeze and release or something else?

  rel-eng's deeds are throwing away all the points having made FE
> attractive.

Think of fixing problems in infrastructure as bug reporting exercises. 
If I filed a bug report as vague as these statements against of the 
packages maintained by you, would you be able to fix this issue?

>>> But that's how the board will work, 4 people get elected (community)
>>>> and 5 appointed from RH. You get the mix you mention.
>>> Well, I must have missed this. 
>> It has been that way right from the start and several people have told 
>> you this in discussions before on and 
> It's answers like these which lets appear Fedora-leadership at RH as they
> currently are perceived.

Pointing out that you have ignored what has been told to you in several 
discussions isn't a matter of perception but facts.

>> offlist.
> Nobody did.

I certainly did tell you that Fedora Board has non-RH folks possibly 
more than once. The underlying theme of Red Hat vs non-RH ignores the 
fact that employer doesn't decide community focus. Individual people do. 
Second, it ignores the fact that every governing body within Fedora has 
non-RH folks in it and if Red Hat sees individual Fedora contributors 
making a good difference it probably will want to hire them. That 
doesn't suddenly make them a non community member.

Rahul