Toshio Kuratomi schrieb: > On Fri, 2007-04-13 at 07:05 +0200, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote: >> +1 -- but it might be good to bring important topics up in the FESCo >> meetings -- similar how Packaging Committee or EPEL topics sometimes get >> brought up now. That requires that the "Release team" writes proper >> minutes of their decisions and doings. > I agree. Information flow is extremely important. Note that I think > the Packaging Committee is not a good model for the release team, > though. The PC isn't just reporting to FESCo, we're also having our > items approved. Well, that was IIRC not planed this way and "just happened". The model that was planed iirc was something similar (but not exactly) to what I outline below. > As a FESCo member, I envision the releng team having > broader powers to do things first and report on them after. How about something like this as a general scheme: Package Committee, EPEL, Release team and other groups below FESCO at might arise in the future act on their own mostly; they need to meet in the public now and then (e.g. IRC) and discuss their things in public (mailing list); important decisions and happenings get reported to some list (fedora-maintainers?) and to FESCO (?) to get everyone and FESCo up2date. If one FESCo member things stuff needs to be discussed by FESCo (aka maybe vetoed) then he should mention that on the list in less then 72 hours after that report got send. The group then should wait until the next FESCO meeting and the outcome of that discussion before implementing what was agreed (of course the issue might be solved on the list as well). Something like that should be be a good mix of getting stuff done without to much delays/overhead and keeping everyone informed. > I don't think there needs to be a lot of governance, just some > information on who's doing what. +1 > Jesse, Thorsten, releng team, what do you think of this proposal: Some comments on details below, but in general agreed. > --- > > = Release Engineering Team = > > == Composition == > * Jesse Keating (f13) > * Josh Boyer (jwb) > * Bill Nottingham (notting) > * Jeremy Katz (katzj) > * [Please fill in and correct] I'd say the maybe the body that makes the decisions should have a defined size. Maybe 7 or 9 members -- that's not to much (otherwise nobody might feel responsible) and not to less (to much work for everyone). The size of the group/team/SIG itself of course is not limited. > * Give reports to FESCo on changes to processes. s/FESCo/&and the public/ > == Where we do it == > * IRC: [Select an IRC Channel] #fedora-devel > * Mailing List: releng@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Do we really need a separate mailing list? I'd say "no" (for now). [...] CU thl _______________________________________________ fedora-advisory-board mailing list fedora-advisory-board@xxxxxxxxxx http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-advisory-board
