On Fri, 2010-08-13 at 18:16 +0200, Kevin Kofler wrote: > Chris Adams wrote: > > SIGs don't exist to exercise control over all packages in the > > distribution (or all packages that tangentially affect them). > > As I said elsewhere on this list, that's exactly where our organizational > structure fails. So, your proposal is that FESCo (and possibly the Board) - which you excoriate for not being sufficiently elected for your tastes - be replaced by the SIGs, entirely informal and entirely unelected groups with no formal place in Fedora's governance structure at all? Oh, yes, that's going to work well. How do we decide which SIGs trump which other SIGs if they disagree? How are SIGs - groups which are by their very definition based around certain specific interests - supposed to set distro-wide policies for packaging? Why are groups which anyone can join (or, alternatively, which can choose their membership based on any criteria at all) better qualified to run the project than a board, and committees, to which people are elected by vote of project members? -- Adam Williamson Fedora QA Community Monkey IRC: adamw | Fedora Talk: adamwill AT fedoraproject DOT org http://www.happyassassin.net -- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
