On Thu, Sep 11, 2014 at 9:44 AM, Jaroslav Reznik <jreznik@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > ----- 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. I'm not sure we'd be able to find a single person that could accurately represent all the WGs. If we could, that person would probably map to the FESCo representative anyway. Even once the products are the new "normal", I would expect enough change in the products to make keeping up with all of them difficult for one person. josh _______________________________________________ board-discuss mailing list board-discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/board-discuss
