On Fri, Oct 16, 2009 at 01:41:16PM -0400, Jon Stanley wrote: > On Fri, Oct 16, 2009 at 12:16 PM, Bill Nottingham <notting@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > I'd prefer transparency to at least the direction discussions. > > Implementation is where you really need the doers to go off, meet, > > and do. > > I'm of much the same opinion, however, the discussions about direction > always proceed at a glacial pace in the media that we normally use > (email, IRC). I would like something like a phone call where you have > much higher bandwidth that could be open and transparent. The good > news on that front is that a bunch of us are convening for a Fedora > Talk FAD next weekend, with a stated goal being live event streaming. > This is an excellent use case for that. > Perhaps the reason it proceeds at a glacial pace is not that email and IRC are low bandwidth compared to phone but because there are a lot of competing directions that no one wants to be left out as the direction is defined. I could definitely get together with a small number of people via phone and come up with a direction. But I could also do that over IRC or even email. Coming up with a direction that suits the large number of people who are contributors to Fedora and have an interest in making sure their idea of the direction Fedora should move is no easier over phone... perhaps even worse over phone since a number of people will not be as able to participate in the phone conversation due to language differences. So you could think that you've reached a consensus over the phone but find that even people who were on the call do not like the outcome. -Toshio
Attachment:
pgp313I9PPSBa.pgp
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ fedora-advisory-board mailing list fedora-advisory-board@xxxxxxxxxx http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-advisory-board
