On Fri, 2007-06-08 at 13:25 -0400, Max Spevack wrote: > I propose a Fedora Engineering Steering Committee, that "reports" to the > Fedora Board and that "oversees" the following sub-groups There is one other issue to address here, and that is the groups that have coverage/responsibility over areas that impacts FESCo. Such as L10n, Docs, etc. I'd like to see some codification of the responsibility of the steering committees to: 1. Keep FPB updated about their plans, and 2. Work as peers with a dotted-line reporting requirement to FESCo For example, I think it is the job of FDSCo to let FESCo know what cool stuff we are planning and working on. FESCo needs to have say on that direction *and* needs to help push the groups they oversee and the developers within them to follow new changes. A sort of two-way responsibility, as peer groups, with various dependencies between, etc. To match this, I think that steering committees that fail to do these dotted-line duties should be disbanded. Leaders who don't/won't work openly and within the community, who don't do their dotted-line duties, should be removed. If that seems too Draconian to start with, we want to at least be certain that our "positive messaging" approach leaves no doubt as to what is required/acceptable behavior. Because, yes, there are people who need to be reminded to play open and nice with the other kids. - Karsten -- Karsten Wade, 108 Editor ^ Fedora Documentation Project Sr. Developer Relations Mgr. | fedoraproject.org/wiki/DocsProject quaid.108.redhat.com | gpg key: AD0E0C41 ////////////////////////////////// \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\
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
