[FAmSCo] response to Joerg's comments was re: 2010 meetings
jsimon at fedoraproject.org
Wed Jan 13 09:17:27 UTC 2010
Ok some more points to clarify my pov. I think we all are mature people and
know that conflicts and sensible issues appear. To deal with them in a
constructive way, can make it a benefit. My originial mail was sent to the
"closed" famsco mailing list, and i had loved to discuss it with famsco behind
closed doors first, i am convinced that to much public discussions about
sensible points can also make harm to the fedora project and can be very
demotivating for contributors - and there should be found a consents first
before bring it public. But we decided to make it open, so be it ;)
On Monday 11 January 2010 02:34:33 David Nalley wrote:
> A majority of issues contained herein are outside
> the purview of famsco but I have still provided an opinion.
David you are right that we as famsco can not directly change or clarify some
of the stated points which are just examples for a situation we have right now
in fedora. From what i could read in all the lists and discussions it is
considered right within the fedoraproject to hurt a minority for the greater
benefit of fedora. All the points affects us as Ambassadors, because we have to
transport the message about the project itself. If "active" contributors from
different groups inside fedora talk to me and tell me their concerns, it has
something to do with the honesty of our message that we spread! We should at
least know about these issues to not make the same mistakes.
> On Sat, Jan 2, 2010 at 9:51 AM, Joerg Simon <jsimon at fedoraproject.org>
> Strangely - I think there is at least a part of RHT that acknowledges
> that trying to exert control is counterproductive. You 'gain control'
> rather by contributing. They certainly understand this with regards to
> the kernel. I am cognizant that this knowledge must not be pervasive
Right, as we can see at the current discussion at the advisory board about
spins ;) - i hope i do not speak to much OT ;) now.
As a person who work on the security lab myself, it shows me that some did not
get the idea behind the spins. For them it is just a kickstart file. If people
ask me to provide them something for teaching classes security-testing-
methods. I would hate to guide them to other distros like "backtrack" or
something like that, i would love to give them our fedora-security-lab - where
a proper testpath is implemented in the menus and testprocess is considered in
the framework of tools, related documentation about testing methodolgies,
thread modeling and risk assessment is available on the lab. There are
application which would never got packaged without the FEL Group or active
contributors who had never changed from debian to fedora. So maybe Groups that
work on a spin or a lab-framework are also SIG's just with another name.
Another example, sure i am personally not really happy that people from the
fedoraproject do their own lxde-booth with the fedora lxde-spin at the same
event(CLT) and split our power - but if they want to do it, we encourage and
help them because what they do on lxde is also good for fedora.
The other points from my email were mostly just examples which were brought to
me from contributors which describe the situation and what they feel about
I just wanted to let you know that we have to consider that there a some
sensible points raised and we should consider the big picture in our group
because we are in front to transport a valid message!
Joerg (kital) Simon
jsimon at fedoraproject.org
3691 0989 2DCA 58A2 8D1F 2CAC C823 558E 5B5B 5688
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Size: 198 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part.
Url : http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/famsco/attachments/20100113/fcddbccd/attachment.bin
More information about the famsco