vondruch at redhat.com
Thu May 16 15:09:43 UTC 2013
Dne 16.5.2013 15:29, Josh Boyer napsal(a):
>> Anyway working with them does not make the process going any faster since to
>> me the FPC and it's concept is the bottleneck vs the open way of
>> ack/nack/patch approach where you would have more participants and eyes on
>> the guidelines changes including by the ones that already are on FPC.
>> It seem to me that the reason people would not want this is because of their
>> own lack of faith and trust in the community and Vít is right if we are
>> going to "hang on" having FPC then the current members should be relieved
>> from their duty and an open election held for their positions within the
> Have you suggested an election for the FPC? Looking at Vit's links, I
> see he asked for an open process and you immediately went to
> disbanding the FPC.
I think that JBG built on my proposal. I am personally ambivalent to
disabling FPC. I can imagine that some process as "proposed" by JBG
would work, but I am afraid it is too big leap to be accepted by FPC and
probably by entire community as well. But hopefully somebody from FPC
will proves me wrong.
Actually I previously proposed similar updates to a Feature process and
it was mostly turned down, with the bright exception of announcing the
Features on ML, so I cannot imagine something like JBG's proposal with
regard to FPC could make it.
More information about the devel