What is success for Fedora?

[Michael McGrath]

----- Original Message -----
> From: "Josh Boyer" <jwboyer at fedoraproject.org>
> To: board-discuss at lists.fedoraproject.org
> Sent: Tuesday, July 1, 2014 10:16:33 AM
> Subject: What is success for Fedora?
> 
> Something the Board has talked about recently is defining success for
> Fedora.  The project has often done this directly through our main
> deliverable, which is shipping another Fedora release.  We work hard
> to create, test, and deliver a high quality Linux distribution.  We
> look at feedback and try and correct mistakes or oversights in the
> next release.  These are all fine things, and things that should
> continue as we stride towards Fedora.next, but is that really defining
> success for the project as a whole?  Is Fedora simply a project to
> create a Linux distribution, or is it something larger?
> 
> Our Four Foundations speak to the bedrock that Fedora is built on and
> provide guidance in decision making for specific instances.  Yet we
> seem to rarely stand back and evaluate how Fedora as a project is
> doing.  Are we achieving some manner of success in promoting those
> Foundations?  Should we be striving for that?  Is it even measurable?
> If so, how?
> 
> The Board is starting this thread to have an earnest discussion around
> what people see "success" being for the Fedora project.  Hopefully the
> Board members will chime in with their own thoughts soon, but we want
> to get as many ideas around this as possible.  Hopefully this
> discussion will help the Board, and the community as a whole, gather
> some insight as to where we think Fedora is, where it should be
> heading, and what we should be doing to get it there.
> 
> Thanks.
> 

Is the goal here to find something equivalent of a Fedora Project "Gross
Domestic Product"?  Perhaps someone smarter than I can work though that
but I'm just not seeing it.

Fedora is a very large group, it might be worth considering something to
the equivalent of a re-org.  Find a few key areas separated by function
and work to establish leaders in those functions to determine how best to
measure success.

It's cumbersome and "corporate", but the fact is, how FESCo is doing has no
representation on how Fedora Infrastructure is doing.  A really healthy and
successful cloud sig might have no barring whatsoever on what the packaging
committee is working on.  Empower those that are working, help or cut those
groups that aren't.

All of these disconnected teams need to work well with each other with some
common goals or at least common values.  This group and the board can define
those values.  It is quite possible that at our current size and scope there
isn't just one success but many.  There are also likely several failures.

These are problems that have existed since the dawn of time and while
community is a value to us, sometimes it feels like we wish we were a smaller
tight-knit group and we're just not.  It may be time to look at a more
traditional organization.  Our values and people are different but
communication, accountability, and success are not issues that unique to us.
Many of them have been solved already, perhaps we should take a model that
already exists and fork it to make it our own.

     -Mike