SIGs, projects, and leadership

[Karsten Wade]

Right after reminding us that steering committee (FDSCo) elections are
due right away[1], Paul asked on IRC this morning if we should consider
reverting to a SIG status:

http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/DefiningProjects#SIGs

I have concerns about that reverting concept based on the way a SIG and
a project are described there, but I think I have a grasp on what Paul
is saying.

A SIG has fewer requirements for leadership to do stuff such as:

* Hold and attend regular meetings
* Hold elections
* Report across to other projects in a predictable manner

We don't seem to be doing any of those three very well.  I'd be tempted
to follow the Fedora guideline of "when you cease being effective as a
leader, quit and get out of the way."  Another option is for more of us
(including me!) to be stronger leaders and embrace the role of making
the project details work, to support all of you in the great work you
are doing.

Regardless, these are matters that shouldn't directly affect our ability
to produce content.  But they do affect how we move into the future.  So
far, being a project seems to have helped our growth and focus.

What next?

A. Revitalize the Docs Project leadership, hold elections, and keep
things moving

... or ...

B. Reduce complexity and scope of leadership to focus on a SIG and just
getting stuff done

I've been trying to find my way back to A, and if that is our consensus,
I'll work harder at making it happen.

thx - Karsten

[1] http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/DocsProject/Policy/FDSCoElections
-- 
Karsten Wade, Developer Community Mgr.
Dev Fu : http://developer.redhatmagazine.com
Fedora : http://quaid.fedorapeople.org
gpg key : AD0E0C41
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
Url : http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/docs/attachments/20071118/5c523936/attachment.bin