On Thu, 27 Jul 2006 17:40:36 +0200, Christian.Iseli@xxxxxxxx wrote: > Just an idea: why not have elections when at least 2-3 non FESCo members > express interest into becoming FESCo members ? This approaches "the problem" from the wrong side. First of all, there should be no need "to be in FESCo" to get something done. It ought to be the opposite. Get something done first, probably multiple times, and then it may turn out as useful to let the same person take over more things as they come up. E.g. fill well-defined positions in FESCo, so it is ensured that FESCo always has somebody who communicates with the contributor community in satisfactory ways (announcements etc.) Second, if current members of FESCo are working on something which takes some time (also longer non-public and possibly controversial discussions), it would be a disruptive action to let the community decide on whom to replace at an unfortunate point of time. Third, in a project of volunteers, there is no command hierarchy, so for many "tasks" or policies FESCo needs to meet the community's requirements and pick up ideas/input from the community anyway. Wrong decisions coming out of FESCo could lead to uproar, unhappy contributors. It doesn't help if FESCo consists of people with the wrong focus, who are elected with the help of lobbyism or by nature of a bigger target-group among the contributors. Why don't you come up with explanations on how FESCo works and what we need FESCo for? How is a FESCo member's activity measured? How is FESCo's contributor community's acceptance measured? And how exactly does FESCo work in conjunction with the the Packaging Committee (or whatever it is called officially)? I'm talking about veto powers, quorum and things like that. -- fedora-extras-list mailing list fedora-extras-list@xxxxxxxxxx https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-extras-list
