On Wed, Jun 13, 2012 at 7:09 AM, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" <johannbg@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On 06/13/2012 11:26 AM, inode0 wrote: >> >> Quite the contrary I think it is obvious that eligible voters and >> nominees should not be the same for all groups. You are only I suppose >> talking about the Board, FESCo, and FAmSCo but there are other >> governance bodies and they are working well enough without any other >> group butting into their business. > > > The only one I'm referring to are the Board, FESCo, and FAmSCo since those > are the only once I'm aware of.. > > In QA we for example have no need to have a governing body ( hence we dont > have one ) and same thing should apply for other community wide services > like design and releng from my pov view. > > Could you elaborate on which other governing bodies exist? QA has governance too. Whether a group governs itself informally by consensus in meetings or by organizing a steering committee or by a self-forming group of interested and skilled contributors like the packaging committee isn't the important part of governance. But in all of those cases in Fedora those doing the work make the decisions, not some other committee from on high. John _______________________________________________ advisory-board mailing list advisory-board@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/advisory-board
