On Mon, 2007-06-25 at 12:58 -0400, Brian Pepple wrote: > I wonder why people that are that interested in voting for FESCo, > wouldn't be interested in joining up with one of the groups (packaging, > QA, etc) that under the governance of FESCo? It's not like the bar for > entry is that high for all of them. Maybe someone is waiting for the right leadership to follow? Or hasn't found quite the right place? Hard to know, hard to guess, risky to assume. > Regardless, I think we have a fundamental difference of opinion here, > but I would be willing to have this brought up for a vote at this week's > FESCo meeting if you would like. If you could give me a proposal for > what you think the requirement for voting would be, I'll add it to this > week's schedule. I did my best to compile all of the proposals into this page. http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/KarstenWade/FranchisementGrantProposals You are all free to edit it there or copy it to another namespace. I hope I have done a fair job in making my point. I think this matter is very serious. The granting of a franchise should not be taken lightly. IMHO, enfranchisement is above the realm of 'opinion' and into the realm of 'ideal'. - Karsten -- Karsten Wade, 108 Editor ^ Fedora Documentation Project Sr. Developer Relations Mgr. | fedoraproject.org/wiki/DocsProject quaid.108.redhat.com | gpg key: AD0E0C41 ////////////////////////////////// \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
-- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
