On Mar 5, 2015 12:19 PM, "S.Kemter" <sirko.kemter@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
>
>
> 2015-03-03 17:19 GMT+01:00 Matthew Miller <mattdm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>:
>>
>> On Thu, Feb 26, 2015 at 07:15:50PM +0000, Cesar Pinto wrote:
>> > I was recommended to write to this list to suggest a monthly meeting to
>> > discuss strategic initiatives. Please see below my comm. from the
>> > Ambassadors list.
>>
>> Awesome, thanks. :)
>>
>> I think these are great ideas. As you can see, it's still kind of quiet
>> around here as this list isn't really off the ground yet. Let's change
>> that!
>>
>> > But I agree, we should just open the dialogue and see if anyone is
>> > interested.
>>
>> Definitely. Who else is interested? I'm back from my month of travel
>> (FOSDEM, DevConf.cz, SCALE 13x ... I know there are people who travel
>> even more than that, but turns out that it's way too much for me... not
>> that I didn't enjoy every place, but it all added up... Anyway...) and
>> interested in getting things going again!
>
>
>
> Matt I would prefer, we getting FOSCo off the ground, not thinking about "meetings for strategies". As for strategy thats long term everything else is tactical and I think the F2F meetings end of the year the EMEA Ambassadors and last year also that one of APAC are the right place to talk about that kind of thing. Especially we cant have an strategy for all regions, they differ to much, even inside the regions are huge differences.
>
> br gnokii
>
I mostly agree here, gnokii (except, I understood the outreach effort to be larger than Ambassadors, so the point about doing strategy at Ambassadors meetings doesn't stick.) I don't see a lot of value in immediately establishing FOSCo as a chartered governance body. The initial response has been lackluster, and I suspect that it would be better if this list was showing action on the issues it was meant to address. Defining scope, procedure, policy, meeting arrangements, and such is fine, that's all part of coordinating efforts towards a greater goal.
Before we get into all that, I suggest we dive directly into that greater goal of cross-team collaboration. A few dozen people reaching consensus on procedure here doesn't inherently gain the cooperation of the greater community. otoh, if the group here can't come up with viable ideas, the community won't care if the beaurocratic trappings have been refined or not.
I think this group is a good idea. I hope there are ideas about what it can do, and how to do it. If we're just going through the motions, however.... I have an idea. I'll start, on a new thread ;)
--Pete
_______________________________________________ outreach mailing list outreach@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://lists.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/outreach
