Matthew Miller (mattdm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx) said: > On Fri, Aug 29, 2014 at 12:11:09AM -0400, Bill Nottingham wrote: > > > Reminder: If you have questions on either of the current proposals, > > > or would like to make an alternative proposal, please make sure to > > > send them by the end of this week. > > My alternative proposal is as stated earlier in the thread - the change to > > the council is fine, but I'd suggest it still be vested with decision-making > > power, rather than a mere advisory role. > > The repercussions of this difference area big enough that I think it should > be considered a separate proposal -- it makes the composition of the > council and selection of representatives a much more crucial part of the > question. ... how so? This isn't obvious to me from reading the proposal, and reading the meeting logs. Is the concern that if the council has actual decision-making power that it needs to be fully represenative of all teams (proportionally or otherwise)? I understand the idea there, but even at the advisory council we should be working towards as much representation as possible. In fact, when I read parts of the proposals as written, such as in your mail: > - Keeps all current responsibilies of board > - some things, like trademarks and community dispute resolution > may be delegated to subcommittees or from Haïkel's mail: > * the community council will be the main governance body of the Fedora > Project, its role will be to define a shared vision accross the > project and the highest decision-making power. That also includes > technical decisions. ... these statements both seem incompatible with a merely advisory board. Bill _______________________________________________ board-discuss mailing list board-discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/board-discuss
