Request: please consider clarifying the project's position on Spins

["Jóhann B. Guðmundsson"]

On 12/03/2010 11:48 AM, Josh Boyer wrote:
> Lack of manpower has nothing to do with who gets paid and everything
> to do with who is willing to be part of that particular group and put
> forth time and effort to solve problems, paid or not.  You cannot
> place blame only at the feet of those paid simply because they are
> paid.  It has to fall to the whole group

Except for the fact that when that corporate entity has sole control 
over certain aspects of a community project it can ( and it has been 
done within the Fedoraproject ) prevent increase in community manpower 
but for most parts you are right.

If we look the two issue regarding "Lack of manpower" Christoph mentioned.

"* You want QA? - We don't have the manpower, bye."

I would love to hear the reasoning behind that claim.

We have a very large and active QA community ranging from reporters 
triagers and quality engineers which is largely made up of volunteers 
and handful of Red Hat employs which are more or less dedicated to QE tasks.

We dont have a "SIG" that operates QA, up to this point QA is entirely 
steered/controlled by Red Hat and thus directly/indirectly the resources 
with it however that has never been a problem thus SIG has never been 
considered needed everything is worked collaborative openly and more or 
less together as sub community within the project.

Which makes this strictly a political issue not lack of resource from 
the QA community.

"* You want a respin of your spin? - Manpower, you know..."

Well I think that it's time for anyone involved with fedoraunity to 
chime on this issue and refresh everyone memory on what happened when 
community members wanted to step in and lend a hand to increase that 
manpower that is if anyone of them is still involved with the project 
and is subscribed to this list.

JBG