On Thu, 2007-06-21 at 09:35 +0200, Patrice Dumas wrote: > On Wed, Jun 20, 2007 at 02:33:18PM -0500, Josh Boyer wrote: > > > > The FPB also has community elected seats. > > Indeed, and I think it is more here that political representation is. > Strangely, although I am on many fedora lists I didn't see anything > about this election (then I googled and saw the pages on the wiki). > On which list was it announced? fedora-list and fedora-announce-list > > I'm not sure what from the community you want to be represented, so > > without further examples I can't really say which board or committee > > should handle that. > > In fact after a bit of thinking I am not sure that FESCo had more > political control before (contrary to what I said above). What has > changed (temporarily) is that FESCo lost a part of the engineering > control during the merge, with rel-eng becoming more important. But if I Erm, not really. FESCo never did release engineering in the Extras world. There was no loss since it was never done before. > recall well FESCo never had a political role, except for very minor > decisions. I wanted FESCo to have a political role, but it is not > reality, even the FESCo role about, say, static libs is technical and > not political. > > So FESCo doesn't really represent the community, because it doesn't > really have a political role, but having the technical leaders elected > nevertheless means that the community is represented in the technical > decision body. Yes, it represents the community in technical matters at the least. But you still didn't give me an example of something you feel is "political" in nature, so I have no idea if FESCo would be involved in those things or not. josh -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
