Dear All, Apologies for not participating in last week's meeting: real life got in the way... I read the #fedora-meeting logs, and thought I'd share my views here. I view the board as a political body, and an interface between corporate sponsors and the Fedora project. They get to deal with money matters, and have the final word on all Fedora matters. They can meddle in technical matters if they so wish, but I do not think it is their mandate. I like spot's approach of saying they tell us "we need to fly" and provide for some level ground for us to take off. Unless I'm mistaken, the board head is paid by RH, as is wwoods of QA and f13 of releng. These folks are incredibly useful and dedicated to get each release off the ground. I see FESCo as a bunch of elected volunteers that people come to and ask "is it ok if ..." when they have questions wrt what they can put in Fedora. FESCo's answer should have arbitration value for all technical matters. I think FESCo members should also be willing to act as emergency response team when some fire needs to be put out, e.g. a mass rebuild needs some manual help to complete. I do not think it is FESCo's role to come up with ideas of what the future should be like. I think this kind of creativity is better served by SIGs or individual contributors. I agree a lot of FESCo's work is just rubber stamping propositions from SIGs. But I think someone needs to be there to do it. As Fedora contributor, I feel better knowing that a bunch of elected volunteers is manning the deck at all time, watching what's going on and making sure we are not headed straight into the iceberg. CHF 0.02... Cheers, Christian -- fedora-devel-list mailing list fedora-devel-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-devel-list
