Some introduction words: The Fedora-world changed a lot due to the Core and Extras merge and thus FESCo changed a lot as well (and had to). Yes, *I'm* totally unhappy with how FESCo changed and how it works these days(¹). But that#s just me and my option -- others seem to be more happy. And I don't want to blame the current FESCo members how things evolved. I think it just happened without purpose; in fact I suppose it's likely that a lot of things might be similar if I would still be in FESCo(²), because FESCo has a whole lot more to do these days. Maybe to much, especially if you want to keep up with FESCo work as spare-time contributer. IOW: Fedora IMHO has growing pains. I mentioned that earlier, tried to work against that/to improve things without being in FESCo or the board, but failed to often and thus decided to reduce my Fedora contributions to a minimum. On 26.04.2008 15:13, Michael Schwendt wrote: > On Sat, 26 Apr 2008 07:48:18 -0500, Josh Boyer wrote: >> On Sat, 2008-04-26 at 11:42 +0200, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote: >>> On 26.04.2008 11:02, Michael Schwendt wrote: >>>> In the past, somebody from the old FESCO would have looked into it and >>>> would have tried to talk to you and the people you have problems with. >>>> Nowadays, there should also be somebody in the Fedora community or in >>>> Fedora leadership with interest in keeping people happy and >>>> cooperative. >>> Why can't FESCo handle that instead of discussing Fetures over and over? >>> That how it afaics was supposed to be, as everyone wanted to keep FESCo >>> when the merge happened because most people back then liked the work >>> FESCO did (it IMHO could have been a lot better, but that's a different >>> issue). >> FESCo can't help if it doesn't know there is a problem. And that is in fact the biggest problem *I* have with FESCo these days. FESCo afaics is mostly event driven these days (triggered by releases or people that poke FESCO to approve or do something); the contact to/interest in the contributers (and their option) was lost/got a lot worse. In the Extras days it IMHO was different -- FESCo then of course had to do some things that were triggered by events as well, but a lot of time was spend in a "how to improve Extras to make it better for users and contributers to keep both groups happy (and make them even happier!)"-mode. For that we were in closer contact with the contributers (their number of course was smaller and thus it was also easier). > That's why I asked _two_ questions. Deleted by Thorsten in the quote, > however. I didn't stop anybody from answering those and are interested in the answers myself, but I found the quoted part more interesting and the part I wrote was related to it, thus I only quoted that. Cu knurd (¹) -- I mentioned that two or three months ago on FAB already in a similar discussion. After that I send a mail to a bunch of German contributers and we discussed things for two or three weeks in private. I send a summary of that discussion to Paul some weeks ago. A really short summary afaics would be: Most liked the merge in general (like I do), but most agreed that things from a contributers point of view got a lot worse. (²) -- an no, I won't run in the next FESCo elections; it's not possible due to conflicting interest with my day job; that was something different when FESCo only managed Extras -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
