On Mon, 2008-04-21 at 22:24 -0400, Max Spevack wrote: > On Mon, 21 Apr 2008, Jon Stanley wrote: > > > There however is, and should be, a requirement that the chair be > > employed by Red Hat (and have veto power). This is an emergency > > override, like Rahul said, the plane is crashing and calling > > 'Mayday!'. Not that I think that it ever has been nor ever will be > > utilized, it's something that's important to have in the back pocket. > > As a real world analogy, when I go bicycling, I wear a helmet. I > > really hope it never will be necessary, but you get piece of mind from > > knowing that it's there in case you need it. > > If I did back far enough into the archives, back when we first announced > the Board in April 2006, I remember saying something like "even though I > have veto power as the FPL, if I ever have to use it, then it means that > there has already been a colossal failure at some earlier point in our > processes". +2. It's an excellent statement on the quality of our Board members (historically and currently) and the strength of our community that neither of us can imagine actually having to confront that situation. -- Paul W. Frields http://paul.frields.org/ gpg fingerprint: 3DA6 A0AC 6D58 FEC4 0233 5906 ACDB C937 BD11 3717 http://redhat.com/ - - - - http://pfrields.fedorapeople.org/ irc.freenode.net: stickster @ #fedora-docs, #fedora-devel, #fredlug
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
