On Thu, May 21, 2009 at 12:08:02PM -0500, inode0 wrote: >> I cannot remember ever dealing with anything involving artwork in my entire >> tenure in FESCo. Documentation is impacted from a content point of view, but >> they have their own committee and aside from the Feature stuff FESCo doesn't >> really have any direct impact on them. Similarly for translation. > >Well, letting a much broader segment of the Fedora community vote >causes a disconnect with me. If they aren't "fit" to run for an open >seat why are they "fit" to elect those who are? At one point, they weren't. People complained about this, for good reason, and the voting requirement was changed from cvs_extras to cla_done +1 FAS group. At least that is what I think happened. >I think the question of whether being in the packager group is still >really relevant is a fair question to reflect on. I'm not suggesting >the requirement no longer makes sense, but I haven't really heard a >reason why it does yet. > >I think it is also fair to reflect on the composition of the >electorate and whether FAS+1 really makes sense for FESCo elections. Honestly, if we want to open up the candidate pool to the same thing as the voting pool that is fine with me. If you think it's important enough, you could certainly file a ticket with FESCo and we can discuss it. josh -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
