William Jon McCann said the following on 12/19/2009 01:13 PM Pacific Time:
People should step forward on their own, I agree. Similarly I'd like
the folks on the board go on the record and state publicly what parts
of the proposal that they disagree with. That would help me
understand where the points of disagreement actually are. Because
those folks didn't bring up specific issues at FUDCon, on the list, or
in the board meeting.
But let's try to turn this into something positive. For those of us
who would like to see the board give an opinion on this issue - or for
the project as a whole to move in this direction, what does the board
recommend that we do at this point? I have tried to convey that this
wiki does not only represent my professional recommendation for the
project but an effort to reflect the desires of many other
stakeholders as well. I'm sorry if this has appeared to be in bad
form. Even if it was I'm not sure it is productive to focus on that
now.
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Desktop/Whiteboards/UpdateExperience
Overall I really like the "whiteboard." I think it is a good collection
of a lot of things that if implemented would make Fedora much better.
While this page is a collection of lots of good information I do not see
it as a "proposal." To me it is more a laundry list of all the things
that should be changed. There is a section called "requirements", but
these seem like more wide ranging policy changes that would affect a lot
of different groups. While many of these requirements or "changes"
would be good for Fedora the part missing for me is how and when they
would all be implemented.
For it to be a considered a proposal (that I as a board member would
vote in favor of implementing), I would want to see a detailed section
explaining the phases and process that these changes would be
implemented with.
I would also suggest breaking the suggested changes into sections or
separate pages by functional areas. For example, FESCo, QA, Release
Engineering, etc. Some of the suggested changes might be implemented by
enhancing the release criteria. Other changes might be implemented
through policies created and monitored by other groups.
So in summary, there are lots of good ideas that would really benefit
Fedora, but the list is somewhat overwhelming and the implementations
details and related ownership and accountability for each individual
item are ambiguous.
It would also be helpful to be clear about why this set of problems
needs to be solved and what target audience we are intending to benefit
by solving them. I think this write-up assumes that a particular target
audience would benefit from these changes, but that target audience is
not clearly spelled out. Doing so would make the case for these changes
stronger.
John
_______________________________________________
fedora-advisory-board mailing list
fedora-advisory-board@xxxxxxxxxx
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-advisory-board
