On Fri, 2007-04-13 at 15:29 -0400, Bill Nottingham wrote: > Toshio Kuratomi (a.badger@xxxxxxxxx) said: > > I don't think there needs to be a lot of governance, just some > > information on who's doing what. Jesse, Thorsten, releng team, what do > > you think of this proposal: > > Well, there's a dichotomoy here - there's the 'release engineering team' > (rel-eng@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx) which you have described. However, for this > meeting, there is essentially the *release* team, which consists of members > from rel-eng, qa, docs, etc. The meeting is for the release team; if rel-eng > also wants to have meetings, that can happen. > Ah okay. In that case, I see no reason for there to be "governance" per se for a release team meeting. I would think that the releng team, since they're going to bear the brunt of getting the release out the door on time, should be in charge of the meeting (to make sure they get what they need to coordinate the release) but governance is for groups that need to work on a project together for a longer period of time. This sounds more like a status report and temporary collaboration by people who need to coordinate for a short period of time before release. -Toshio
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
_______________________________________________ fedora-advisory-board mailing list fedora-advisory-board@xxxxxxxxxx http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-advisory-board
