On Thu, Oct 8, 2009 at 9:40 AM, inode0 <inode0@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > I'm still struggling to understand what sorts of real problems are > made easier to solve by the "What is Fedora?" framework. Unless a clear mission and purpose is defined, Fedora will just kind of float along pushed around by whatever currents are strongest at the moment. Maybe that sort of philosophy suits you, but I'd rather have an idea of where we're headed. > Is it in the board's purview to "lead" the project by singling out > technologies it wants to move along over the next few releases? Yes. Fedora has limited resources. That means that someone needs to prioritize the use of those resources. As a corollary to that it may mean that some projects/ideas may be denied resources. > Are there structural problems within the project that this would help? Fedora can't be everything to everyone, and if anyone in the project thinks we can, I would call that a structural problem. > Being honest, I am concerned it could be used to broaden the board's > involvement in areas of the project where delegation of responsibility > already seems to exist. Technically, it's the board that delegated the responsibility in the first place. If they feel it's best to un-delegate the responsibility that's up to them. -- Jeff Ollie _______________________________________________ fedora-advisory-board mailing list fedora-advisory-board@xxxxxxxxxx http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-advisory-board
