On Tue, 2007-06-12 at 14:43 +0530, Rahul Sundaram wrote: > Ralf Corsepius wrote: > > > > > RH "dark chamber" decisions in many cases first take effect, and are > > never discussed nor voted on. They are "divine", except for some rare > > occasions when one or more of these "divine creatures" has the grace to > > listen. > > > > ATM, I am seeing @RH's (esp. rel-eng) drawing arguable RH-centric > > decisions, which I consider to be spoiling large parts of the basis the > > former FE's success was based on. > > If you want things to improve you can't be throwing vague accusations. > Rel Eng has non-RH members in it and can potentially accommodate more if > they volunteer. OK, in verbose: rel-eng has broken FE's workflow model into something I consider counter-productive and unusable to community contributors. rel-eng's deeds are throwing away all the points having made FE attractive. >> But that's how the board will work, 4 people get elected (community) >>> and 5 appointed from RH. You get the mix you mention. >> Well, I must have missed this. > >It has been that way right from the start and several people have told > you this in discussions before on and It's answers like these which lets appear Fedora-leadership@RH as they currently are perceived. > offlist. Nobody did. Ralf _______________________________________________ fedora-advisory-board mailing list fedora-advisory-board@xxxxxxxxxx http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-advisory-board
