On Wed, 03 Nov 2004 12:47:21 -0500, Havoc Pennington <hp@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > Seriously, Red Hat has certain parameters (listed at > http://fedora.redhat.com/about/objectives.html), but within those it > really is flexible. <broken_record> it COULD be flexible, but right now there is no publicly communicable structure as to "community" leadership. The outline of project leadership on the website has never gotten past the draft document state... no one from outside red hat has any defined roles or responsibilities, nor is there anything close to a plan on how to move volunteers into and out of any roles of responsibilities when it comes to project policy and planning. Right now, afaict, its very much a centralized top-down decision process, very little is delegated or tasked out for community teams to decide. People in the community have varying degrees of input in discussion to decision making, depending on the degree of access they have to internal project leadership. Sure everyone can express their opinion as to what's going on, but there is no clear, public role for community leadership to take when it comes to "deciding", no clear role in setting the agenda or planning, no teams of hand selected volunteers tasked with even minor policy decision making within the acceptable solutionspace parameters laid down by Red Hat employees. What's going on here, isn't flexibility decision-making, this is simply an open discussion to acquire feedback that can either be acted upon or ignored, where the decision makers hear all or some of the expressed opinions and the choose a course of action. While open discussion is not a bad thing, and has its place, I think its disingenuous to suggest that community feedback means community decision-making. </broken_record> -jef"Look! on the side of the road a dead horse! Let's go beat it!"spaleta
