On Sun, Oct 24, 2010 at 6:36 AM, Sascha Thomas Spreitzer <sspreitzer@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Hello, > > my opinion is: > > 1. There is no legal/contract/agreement/signed thing as of law > requirements, that any contributor must obey board decisions > ( As the fedora project is no incorporation of any form the, Fedora > board is not put into force of any legal form or body. ) > ( FP members/contributors have not signed any contract/agreement which > puts any force upon them. ) Volunteer projects rarely have the cooperation of its participants through use of legal force. Cooperation, concensus-building, and the desire by the participants to achieve a common goal all direct our actions, even when we might appear at odds. > 2. There is no legal requirement that EMEA ambassadors are in the need > of any approval at all. This is not a "Board vs Ambassadors" fight, and I object to the trivial characterization thereof. It does not benefit anyone to look at this through that clouded lens. We are both trying to achieve the same goals, the only serious concern being the timing to introduce this new method of software delivery. No one thinks what Christoph suggested is a bad idea - on the contrary, it's very interesting. The only concern is that this change is coming very late in our release cycle, and it is directly in the critical path of the user experience we currently deliver, the combination of the two is why the Board and other teams have been hesitant to jump in wholeheartedly. > = EMEA Ambassadors proceeding with their freedom of contribution -> > spread media as they wish The Project as a whole has funds which are used by the Ambassadors to create media. While some Ambassador teams may produce their own media with their own private funds, I believe that the majority of the funds used to produce media to give away come from the Project's Community Architecture budget. Therefore it is in the best interest of the Project as a whole to ensure that the media, in many ways our "best first impression" for users, be a well-thought-out and prepared user experience. I don't personally think it's a good idea for different sets of Ambassadors to produce wildly different media, all under the same name of Fedora. If, as Christoph has found out, the price for dual-layer DVDs has fallen to the point where we can easily make use of that technology to provide an enhanced user experience, we absolutely should look at what that experience should be. The proposal on the table is quick and simple - I grant it that, but if we really have 9GB to work with, the "choose your desktop environment at boot time" model isn't the one I'd naturally gravitate towards. I'd much prefer to see a well-integrated environment, where at runtime the user can choose their desktop environment trivially, and through the reduction of space taken up by duplicate RPMs from the different squashfs images, be able to showcase more applications directly. Thanks, Matt _______________________________________________ advisory-board mailing list advisory-board@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/advisory-board
