Discussion of Server Working Group governance

Kevin Fenzi kevin at scrye.com
Tue Oct 29 20:38:32 UTC 2013

On Tue, 29 Oct 2013 20:26:15 +0000
"Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" <johannbg at gmail.com> wrote:

> How about not copy other governing structures try a new approach ;)
> It's better, more fairer and efficient, to no be voting et all but 
> simply make up the server WG with representatives from each sub 
> community as in one of each from these groups 
> documentation,ambassadors,qa,releng,marketing,design,website and the 
> rest from the server community and have them chose within themselves
> who will be representing on their behalf and for how long.

I was just going to send something about the voting aspect of this,
but you beat me to it. :) 

If there's a way we can come up with that doesn't involve general
elections I think that would be nice. Fedora should be/is supposed to
be/would be nice if it was, a meritocracy... so we should try and have
voting members in the working group who merit it. 

Perhaps we could come up with a critera for "active participant" (ie,
attends the majority of meetings, has posted to the mailing list in
the last month, etc and get our new members from this pool of people
who are actually participating/interested in the group. 
> Once we as in the initial group members are happy about the 
> transformation process from server application to server "product"
> from all angles of the related communities as in 
> doc,qa,releng,ambassadors,marketing,website,design and server and
> have successfully pushed through several products through that
> process ( to try and tested it ), we step down and let the new
> governing structure take over.

Well, we may not have people from each of those groups interested in
being voting members. Additionally, it might be nice to gradually
replace people so we don't get a great change of direction at once. 

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 836 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/server/attachments/20131029/8919a382/attachment.sig>

More information about the server mailing list