Fedora Board election results

[Michael Schwendt]

On Tue, 24 Jun 2008 16:02:04 -0400 (EDT), Max Spevack wrote:

> What else would you like to see from Red Hat to prove that it takes 
> Fedora and community seriously?  I'm not trolling, I really want to 
> konw, so that I can work on making it happen.

What I mean is that almost all Fedora related decisions come out of Red
Hat anyway. The few +1 from community seats during FPB meetings don't
matter, do they? They are just noise. It gets more interesting if a
community rep drives something forward. Or if there is disagreement
between Red Hat's FPB members and community reps or lobbyists. If
necessary, do the people on the community seats have the guts to represent
the community's interests? If they don't, what about accountability?

The financial investments you refer to only add to the fact of how big Red
Hat's stake in the Fedora Project is. No budget increase, no growth. No
people working on Fedora full-time, no growth. The project is still young
and must grow. Hence Red Hat is forced to find a balance between pursuing
its own business goals with Fedora and opening up further to increase the
community's investment in Fedora, which is still poor. As you can see
whenever a long-time contributor or user leaves disgruntled. The decision
to leave is too easy. Voting community reps is a nice gimmick, but doesn't
result in power.

It's still too early to say we have a large pool of community reps to draw
from for FPB seats. A growing number of contributors, yes, but only very
few with interest in [project] politics, project management, and the
additional time requirements.