governance, fesco, board, etc.

[Axel Thimm]

On Tue, Jun 12, 2007 at 05:02:26PM +0200, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
> On Tue, 2007-06-12 at 15:37 +0200, Axel Thimm wrote:
> > On Tue, Jun 12, 2007 at 01:51:26PM +0200, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
> > > On Tue, 2007-06-12 at 11:49 +0200, Axel Thimm wrote:
> > > > On Tue, Jun 12, 2007 at 11:05:57AM +0200, Ralf Corsepius wrote:
> > > > > > > ATM, I am seeing to many "dark room" decisions taking
> > > > > > > effect, which are not in the community's interest.
> > > > Prominent community members have been doing (and still do) just as
> > > > much backstage talking as RH people. Anyway this is another story.
> > 
> > > I know and don't see what would be wrong about it.
> > 
> > So when RH talks behind your back it's wrong, but when non-RH does the
> > same it's OK?

> Did I ever say this?

Well, unless I'm reading the above wrongly, yes, you did.

> > > What RH still doesn't seem to want to accept: To the same extend
> > > the community depends on RH, Fedora and RH depend on the
> > > community.
> > 
> > I'm sure everybody is aware of this fruitful symbiosis.

> So let's shutdown Fedora -- Wakeup Axel, .... this is the core of it all !!!

Why shutdown Fedora??? There is a fruitful colaboration between a
company and the community and both depend from as well as benefit from
each-other. So we recognize this, why does that mean to shutdown
Fedora?

> > > Frankly speaking, I think, most community contributors probably don't
> > > care at all what how RH, FESCo etc. do, as long as Fedora's
> > > infrastructure and objectives fit into their demands.
> > 
> > Well, that goes w/o saying. Same applies to your local goverment. And
> > if the leadership is not visible then that speaks in favour of a
> > project.

> With one difference: If a democratic government does a bad job it won't
> be re-elected, a totalitarian regime tries to continue.

True, and that democratic government will need to tax you to sustain
its structures. In the case of Fedora the bills go to Red Hat.

And in the case of open source: If a project does a bad job people
vote with their feet. If Red Hat messes up that much then people,
users and developers alike would start leaving the boat, forking
Fedora etc. So at the end of the day you do have the community having
it their way.

> > The FPC is part of fesco if you like.
> Not in my view. FPC is a technical committee, FESCO is a political one
> and therefore still has the final say.

OK, we almost mean the same, as I wrote the FPC is attached beneath
fesco. I was just contering your claim that the fesco has no say in
packaging because they lack skills and need "recommendations" from the
fpc. While the true analogon is that fesco has no time to deal with it
and outsources part of its job to subgroups like the FPC.

But fesco is not a political organ, it is an engineering group
managing all technical issues in Fedora. The political organ is the
board.

> > They are an subordinate group with many fesco members inside.

> This doesn't matter wrt. FPC, nor does your personal party
> membership nor religious belief matter. Technical qualification
> should matter.

True, but I don't get the point. :)
-- 
Axel.Thimm at ATrpms.net
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/advisory-board/attachments/20070612/88ad28e2/attachment.bin