On Wed, Mar 18, 2015 at 8:47 AM, Paul W. Frields <stickster@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > On Wed, Mar 11, 2015 at 11:56:52AM -0400, Matthew Miller wrote: >> In going through the project structure wiki, I've come across a thing >> I've always thought a little funny. Fedora Project is an umbrella term, >> and underneath that, we have an official thing called a ... Project. >> Does anyone object to consistently referring to these as, instead, >> Subprojects? >> >> Additionally, while <https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Defining_projects> >> has a formal procedure for these subprojects, we haven't particularly >> followed up on things like "Projects at this stage are expected to >> provide regular progress reports and to maintain an active state." As >> we were talking about having some of the Council meetings being >> reporting-focused, I think this might be a natural fit for bringing >> reality in line with the documentation. >> >> On the other hand, the section on SIGs focuses on the path to becoming >> a full Project Project, while the praxis is really captured in the last >> sentences: "It is possible for SIGs to exist indefinitely in this >> manner if the contributors feel there is no need for official project >> status. Indeed, many SIGs are sufficiently narrow in focus that they do >> not require project status to fulfill their missions." Here, I think >> it'd be better to rewrite this to put the SIGs-as-they-are aspect first >> and the incubator possibility as second. >> >> And then, of course, there's no mention of the Fedora.next structure >> here at all. The Working Groups we established are in many ways >> effectively each Subprojects (and the standards they're meant to be >> held to are similar); should they be considered as part of that, or as >> something distinct? > > My recollection is that page is extremely old. I would argue it's > also not extremely useful because it simply formalizes common sense. > It also adds a level of bureaucracy to initiatives contributors ought > to feel free to start at any time. When I read this page it fills me > with ennui. I guess what I'm advocating is to not take every wiki > page hanging around for 7+ years as de facto necessary to carry > forward. :-) I agree. josh _______________________________________________ council-discuss mailing list council-discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/council-discuss
