[fab] New project formation is out of control

[Paul W. Frields]

On Tue, 2006-08-08 at 16:45 -0400, Max Spevack wrote:
> On Tue, 8 Aug 2006, Paul W. Frields wrote:
> > > My top priority at the moment is the stuff for /. -- after that, I'll 
> > > be able to tackle this one.
> > 
> > Only problem I see is that news snowballs fast.  I have talked to Damien 
> > before about a variety of topics, and we spoke about the announcement 
> > this very morning.  (I'm also currently involved in a f-marketing-l 
> > thread about it.)  Would it help for me to volunteer to put the policy 
> > out there?
> > 
> > ("What policy?" many may ask.  See elsewhere in the thread for 
> > discussion.  I'm just volunteering to get the word out since Max is tied 
> > up and I am supposed to be pushing this issue anyway.)
> 
> That would be great, Paul.  If you want to lead, here's the direction:
> 
> DefiningProjects needs to get to a final state.
> 
> We need to then apply that standard to everything currently under the 
> "Fedora Universe"
> 
> We need to message it, and abide by it.

Like Patrick (I believe) said earlier, we need the policy first, then
names.  He also said something about presumptuous editing, so I'm
holding off until I'm sure what everyone wants, but I'd like to get it
done today if possible.  'Nuff said.  Patrick, if you're listening and
you want a crack at the editing yourself, you're welcome to it, but I
would like to be able to get word out to the affected parties today or
tomorrow to avoid any unwanted snowballing if possible.  If you'd prefer
I do it, no problem.

There's not a lot of editing needed in the DefiningProjects page -- I
think there's really only two phases shown there, Incubator and
"official," which seems to be what everyone wants.  I was only thinking
about the following:

1.  De-emphasize "Ideas" as a separate heading to avoid the appearance
of too much management.  (Yes, the politics of PR, sorry.)  This seems
cosmetic but I think if some of the content of this section moved into
Incubator Projects -- now to be called "SIGs" to reduce confusion and
pick up a term already used by a number of similar groups working very
well under the Fedora umbrella -- it would go a long way toward making
the page more contributor-friendly.

2.  Make the point that only Fedora Projects make announcements, press
releases, etc. outside their integral channels (mailing lists, etc.).
SIGs do this through their managing Project.  SIGs are always able to
make announcements in their own channels.

3.  Is it worth saying that we don't want to go more than one level
deep?  Else we risk overmanagement and contributor frustration.  Board
-> Projects -> SIGs.  That's plenty of organization, IMHO.

I'm trying not to talk this to death but I want to make sure the message
is clear.

-- 
Paul W. Frields, RHCE                          http://paul.frields.org/
  gpg fingerprint: 3DA6 A0AC 6D58 FEC4 0233  5906 ACDB C937 BD11 3717
       Fedora Project Board: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Board
    Fedora Docs Project:  http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/DocsProject
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
URL: <http://listman.redhat.com/archives/fedora-advisory-board/attachments/20060808/792c5591/attachment.sig>