[fab] New project formation is out of control

[Patrick W. Barnes]

On Tuesday 08 August 2006 16:50, Greg DeKoenigsberg <gdk at redhat.com> wrote:
> My $0.02:
>
> I wouldn't have SIGs report necessarily to any Project.  If an existing
> project chooses to kick out a new SIG, fine.  If someone wants to align a
> SIG to a Project, fine.  But if a SIG wants to sprout in the desert, doing
> their own work in a little corner of the wiki, then that should be fine,
> too.
>

I generally agree, but we must give a process for such SIGs to follow to get 
the help and review they need.  That should be trivial.

As a base policy, I'm happy with what this thread has produced.  Paul, do feel 
free to make the necessary edits.  Once that's hammered out, we can start 
talking about the finer details, such as naming conventions.

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

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

LinkedIn:
http://www.linkedin.com/in/nman64

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: 189 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://listman.redhat.com/archives/fedora-advisory-board/attachments/20060809/5f8d03b4/attachment.sig>