----- Original Message ----- Skipping the long mail... > Initially I was concerned about the product WG seat suggestions > because "what happens if we add another Product?" > However, I think > that immediately becomes part of the conversation around adding a new > product when it is proposed. It adds one more factor for > consideration, etc. I think that will help with some of the clarity > on what it takes to be an official product. It's more if we add another WG than product (if we can already consider Atomic as 4th product but done by Cloud for example). But maybe WGs could be all covered by one representative for all of them and independent group liasons could be auxiliary members (aka when needed). Just idea, at least in the beginning, WGs are important to define how .next will look in the future. After it gets boring, it can be changed. Jaroslav > > Of the 9 permanent seats you have listed, the only one I have > reservations about is Release Engineering. I agree they're a major > player and should have a seat, but Dennis seems to be overloaded on a > regular basis and I don't want to add one more thing to his plate. > Perhaps the rel-eng group could come up with another representative to > help spread the load. > > josh > _______________________________________________ > board-discuss mailing list > board-discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/board-discuss _______________________________________________ board-discuss mailing list board-discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/board-discuss
