re: This part of Wednesday's meeting: = = = = = * We're just not sure the current elections scheme is serving us well. Pushing discussion to the list for wider input. How much does governance matter to folks? ** In light of Docs role with contributors embedded in SIGs ** How subprojects govern themselves in the hands of subprojs? = = = = = http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/DefiningProjects According to the current policy, to be a "project" (meaning an official subproject) there has to be some sort of governance in place, "possibly including an election or selection scheme." So we have some leeway to do what we think needs to be done to empower Docs to get things done. If elections are too often, too much, too early, or whatever the popular opinion may be, I think we just need to decide on what the new scheme will be. Would it make sense, rather than to have a sort of "global Docs committee" like FDSCo, instead just have people who agree to take up the banner for particular interest areas, and we could still meet regularly as we do now? Those assignments could be somewhat formal in nature, and noted on the wiki so community members know who's responsible for each area. -- Paul W. Frields http://paul.frields.org/ gpg fingerprint: 3DA6 A0AC 6D58 FEC4 0233 5906 ACDB C937 BD11 3717 http://redhat.com/ - - - - http://pfrields.fedorapeople.org/ irc.freenode.net: stickster @ #fedora-docs, #fedora-devel, #fredlug
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
-- fedora-docs-list mailing list fedora-docs-list@xxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-docs-list
