[fab] I have a few questions for the board.

[Patrick W. Barnes]

On Tuesday 25 April 2006 13:28, Jeremy Katz <katzj at redhat.com> wrote:
> On Tue, 2006-04-25 at 13:42 -0400, Greg DeKoenigsberg wrote:
> > It also calls these open questions:
> >
> > 1. Is Fedora Directory Server a real project, by this standard?
> > 2. How about Fedora Translations?
> > 3. How about Fedora Live CD?
>
> Yep, and I really do think there is or needs to be a third
> classification.  While your set of things works for some classes of
> projects, for others, I think the overhead is more likely to a) turn the
> project off of being a "Fedora" project or b) run it into the ground.
> Maybe I'm wrong.  Or maybe we don't care about having those as Fedora
> projects.  But I know that a lot of what we currently actively work on
> falls into those camps.
>

Thus far, I've tried to use simple classification to separate efforts that are 
organized and worthy of things like meetings and efforts that are young or 
too small or simple to warrant meetings and committees.  Although I haven't 
stuck to it 100%, and can't provide specific guidelines, I've tried to 
classify the former as "projects" and the latter as "programs".  I've had to 
do this in order to maintain related wiki pages and to establish the 
relationships between many of the smaller efforts.

The programs fall underneath projects, such as the way that Free Media falls 
under Distribution or Word of Mouth falls under Ambassadors.  These small 
programs often do not need their own infrastructure or regular meetings.  
They do, however, have leads.  Those leads can report the program's status to 
the project which oversees it.

IMHO, we should never have a program or SIG that doesn't have a parent 
project.  Those parent projects can provide the oversight and drive to keep 
the program going, and they can do so without smothering it.

There are also cases, such as Websites, where meetings can be deemed 
unnecessary for a period of time.  Websites suspended its meetings since 
there was never enough to discuss.  They will be resumed when the need 
arises.  There are other projects which may also have fewer needs.  The 
Artwork project also does not currently conduct meetings.  Each of these 
projects still has leadership and structure.  I believe it should be up to 
the leadership of each project to determine what the needs of that project 
are.  As long as the projects are maintained and someone is able to track 
their status, I don't think we need to mandate meetings, schedules, or task 
lists.

I believe that Translation and Localization should be very closely allied, and 
together should be considered a formal project.  I believe that the Live CD 
project should also qualify as a formal project, with Kadischi's development 
as a program beneath it.  Each of these projects need a little love and 
guidance.  FDS should be working on becoming a formal Fedora project, but it 
needs to be brought closer to the community before I can name it in one 
breath with the other key projects.

-- 
Patrick "The N-Man" Barnes
nman64 at n-man.com

http://www.n-man.com/

Have I been helpful?  Rate my assistance!
http://rate.affero.net/nman64/
-- 

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 191 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://listman.redhat.com/archives/fedora-advisory-board/attachments/20060425/8b8abdce/attachment.sig>