Karsten Wade wrote: > On Tue, 2007-06-19 at 20:10 -0700, Toshio Kuratomi wrote: >> On Tue, 2007-06-19 at 19:33 -0700, John Poelstra wrote: > >>> I do not maintain any packages, but participate in the Fedora. Can I still run? >>> >> Not according to the policy. I think the policy deserves to be examined >> since FESCo is no longer strictly about packaging but about making all >> technical decisions WRT Fedora. I'm undecided whether it should be >> updated this close to the election. Does anyone else have thoughts on >> this? > > It's not too close to the elections to change this detail in this > direction. Too close to restrict the pool of contenders, but not too > close to expand it. > > +1 to FESCo candidates being anyone with an FAS account. > Is it me, or has the purpose of FESCo got lost? My understanding, FESCo (Fedora Extras Steering Committee) is to steer issues WRT to the Fedora Distribution [1] (formally the Fedora Extras Distribution), it makes sense to only allow current packagers as *they* are the ones that or contributing to the distribution. FESCo has typically dealt with issues such as: * Patent issues * Package naming * Static library issues * Approving changes to packaging guidelines (already agreed to by the packaging committee) * Approval of new sponsors (for cvsextras) Have a look at http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Development/Schedule Fedora Documentation has FDSCo (Fedora Documentation Steering Committee), which last I checked does not report to FESCo, I believe they report to the Board, like FESCo (?) So no, I'm not sure what advantage there would be to having non packagers in FESCo, ditto with having non documentation writers in FDSCo, by all means, attend the meetings, but the casting vote I'm not sure about. [1] - I'm describing the Fedora Distribution as the collection of rpms N.J. -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
