The Forgotten "F": A Tale of Fedora's Foundations
jwboyer at fedoraproject.org
Tue Apr 22 16:55:32 UTC 2014
On Tue, Apr 22, 2014 at 11:17 AM, Matthew Miller
<mattdm at fedoraproject.org> wrote:
> On Mon, Apr 21, 2014 at 05:50:20PM -0400, Josh Boyer wrote:
>> Board seats should absolutely keep in mind various aspects of the
>> entire project, but we need less partisanship and more open-mindedness
>> at this level. We need people willing to work together to find out
>> what is best for the Project as a whole, not argue on behalf of
>> certain pieces of it. Compromise and cooperation are what will wind
>> up getting us moving again.
> In other words, if we're going to have one foundation over the others, let's
> make it Friends. :)
Well, I was talking on a tangent of "representation" there. In the
context of Board level member composition and priorities, maybe. It
should certainly have equal footing with Freedom anyway. Features
doesn't make a ton of sense at the Board level. The Board is very
clearly never First in anything we do.
The primary guiding Foundation(s) are going to differ from group to
group though. Take FESCo and the FPC for example. In FESCo, Freedom
is very seldom even in play because it is almost always a given, so
Features and First tend to be the main Foundations in play. The FPC,
on the other hand, often has to deal with Freedom due to content and
licensing. I doubt they're making many Friends with all the packaging
rules they come up with though ;).
Anyway, overall I do think we as a Project need to keep Friends more
in mind than we have been. I don't think we need to be literal
friends with everyone, but we do need to consider how we can cooperate
and compromise on things as they come up.
More information about the devel