On Sat, Apr 27, 2013 at 9:58 PM, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" <johannbg@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On 04/27/2013 10:48 PM, inode0 wrote: > This is really my point. One set of questions might be perfect for one > strategic plan and complete nonsense for another. Some general > questions are fine to think about as we begin but I think they likely > will need to be revisited once there are plans on the table anyway. > Perhaps after this exercise we could each propose a vision of what we > think a healthy Fedora Project might look like in the future. > > > Sorry to say but I have a hard time seeing that the board can come up with a > vision on what it thinks a healthy project should look in the future ( even > if it was possible that view would be subjected to the board members of that > time ) Any view of the Board is subject to the Board members at the time. It can only change and potentially improve by periodic reconsideration. > Again and again the board has tried to label such a diverse community we > are, with a single label and again and again it has failed thus i asked when > will the board learn that the sub-community set's their own direction,own > target audience and it's own strategy and are fully responsible for their > own "health". > > For us to succeed as an project we have to provide them ( the > sub-communities ) with the platform,the tools ( like measuring > sub-communities even down to individual package activity which should > indicate their "health" ) and the freedom to do so instead of keeping users > and contributors boxed in a "default" and the board at that time tunnel > vision... And you just described one vision of a healthy Fedora Project which will never be the position of the Board without reconsideration of the existing position. John _______________________________________________ advisory-board mailing list advisory-board@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/advisory-board
