On 09/06/2013 10:45 AM, Josh Boyer wrote:
So. What if we could do better? What if we could make the Board more representative of Fedora contributors from a composition standpoint? We have all these other committees and groups already doing the day-to-day stewardship of the project. We have the Fedora Project Lead, basically, leading. Maybe we can combine them. Cutting to the chase, what if the Board was comprised of a representative from each of: FESCo, Docs, Rel-Eng, QA, Ambassadors, Infrastructure, Design, Marketing, and <open>.
Very logical, evolutionary conclusion and the same/similar to the one I came to couple of years back.
What I mentioned was essential an overall QA ( but still with the board on top of it ) but otherwise essentially what you propose here.
Given that the hiring apparatus within Red Hat is still in the habbit of inventing position within the project and placing people outside the community within it, something I thought had been successfully dealt with and buried in the past within Red Hat, I have to say as long as these representatives aren't RH employees with the exception of the FPL it might work.
Today since times have changed I'm at an different place than what you propose here since I personally have reach the conclusion since no matter how and which angle I look at it, that ring/product proposal in it's current form is not fixing anything, it's not pioneering, it's not revolutionary, it's not "first" anything thus is not representative solution or direction for the project to take or the four foundation we have.
The bottom line of the what it is, it's just more of the same in a different form thus will suffer from the same problems as we have now but only this time, times 3 as far as I see.
What the project truly needs from my pov to attract contributors is essentially generation change to flush out that "old model/mindset" and Red Hat Desktop/Gnome-ism and being able to build upon younger more current and fresher ideas.
The way forward as I see it that will bury old community differences as well as to lower bureaucracy and exposing the project more, which in turn should hopefully attract more contributors, is that we as an overall project become a platform, essentially an infrastructure and tool for creations with focus only on the core/baseOS while sub-community will be sole responsible to built whatever product they ( the sub-community's ) come up with on top of that.
Something that I feel should have been the natural progression for the project somewhere around fc6/f7 era when we introduced "lives" but due to certain "mindset" that progress was kept at bay.
To manage what I mentioned here above we need an overseeing entity, be it what you propose here or that + the additional representative from sub-community's or something completely different but that entity should not be dictating the direction,creation or the target audience the sub-communities are targeting with the product they produce.
JBG _______________________________________________ advisory-board mailing list advisory-board@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/advisory-board
