On Sun, Apr 23, 2006 at 11:12:32PM -0400, seth vidal wrote: > On Sun, 2006-04-23 at 21:46 -0500, Josh Boyer wrote: > > Yes, I agree. We want a mix of both old and new members at any one time. > > That way, we don't get a radical change of plans or focus every year. > > > > So, there are some members who want to leave FESCO at the moment. That is > > fine. Thank them for their contributions and let them go. Then elect > > enough members to make FESCO a governing body of 13. Then in 6 months, > > those that were there already have their term up and you elect another half. > > At the risk of sounding pessmistic - do we have 7 new people who > actually want the jobs? Also how do we handle the issue of security in > terms of the package-signing key during transitions? Clearly anyone > outgoing shouldn't keep access to the key. I believe the count in the last FESCO meeting turned out to be around that number. That's why I suggested much of the above :). As for the package-signing key issue... good question. I'd need to know more to suggest how to handle it though. I agree that once someone is out, they should not have access to the key any longer. josh -- fedora-extras-list mailing list fedora-extras-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-extras-list
