On Wed, 2015-03-11 at 10:51 -0400, Matthew Miller wrote: > (Overall, the basic process looks solid, and the 2010 goals still seem > correct.) If the FUDCon process is under review, could the FAD process be looked at too? It also mentions that the FPL needs to approve a FAD and so on. https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/How_to_organize_a_FAD The FUDCon process is a lot better documented - it has a suggested timeline and so on. The FAD page has none of this and has lead to some confusion in the past. -- Thanks, Regards, Ankur Sinha "FranciscoD" http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Ankursinha
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
_______________________________________________ council-discuss mailing list council-discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/council-discuss
