On Mon, Aug 18, 2014 at 11:01:44AM -0500, inode0 wrote: > From an organization standpoint I would be immediately more > comfortable with a new body whose primary or sole mission was to > further the implementation of the project's vision. > > The board's role would not necessarily be more pared-down. It would > continue doing what it has been doing and could have additional > governance responsibilities added over time, like the ability to > allocate some resources among competing demands. I can behind this idea, but I'm cautious about Miloslav Trmač's admonishment that we're already creating groups and governing bodies in Fedora at an alarming rate. I believe he asked for a moratorium. Nonetheless I'm willing to try it, especially if we can be extra-clear about roles and responsibilities. > More important than being representative of the community voice at any > particular point in time to me is that the community retain a strong > voice in who those representatives are and the ability to change them. If we do go this route, I'd be interested in seeing the oversight board changed to an all-elected body (even if we have defined constituencies for some positions). -- Matthew Miller <mattdm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> Fedora Project Leader _______________________________________________ board-discuss mailing list board-discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/board-discuss
