>> You can say that all you want, but it doesn't make it so. If you want to >> assert that the *effect* is that it feels as though RH is making too many >> decisions, that's fine, and that's a worthwhile discussion. But for you >> to assert that the *intent* of the board is to be "RH internal business" >> is a slap in the face to all of the people who have stuggled against *very >> long odds* to create a public governance model for Fedora. > Well, is this of importance to non-RH Fedora contributors? I would say so, yes. I'm a non-RH Fedora contributor, and I have huge respect for Greg and Max and everyone in RH who has worked so hard to make Fedora what it is today and to give volunteers like myself the opportunity to be involved with the project's governance. I spend a not insignificant amount of time working on and thinking about Fedora (maybe I need to get out more :p), and I want to be sure that this time isn't being wasted and that the project continues in a direction that I agree with. You may disagree, but having the ability to stand for election, and to serve on the board is an important part of this. _______________________________________________ fedora-advisory-board mailing list fedora-advisory-board@xxxxxxxxxx http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-advisory-board
