About long self-definition discussions
a.badger at gmail.com
Fri Oct 16 21:42:22 UTC 2009
On Fri, Oct 16, 2009 at 01:41:16PM -0400, Jon Stanley wrote:
> On Fri, Oct 16, 2009 at 12:16 PM, Bill Nottingham <notting at redhat.com> wrote:
> > I'd prefer transparency to at least the direction discussions.
> > Implementation is where you really need the doers to go off, meet,
> > and do.
> I'm of much the same opinion, however, the discussions about direction
> always proceed at a glacial pace in the media that we normally use
> (email, IRC). I would like something like a phone call where you have
> much higher bandwidth that could be open and transparent. The good
> news on that front is that a bunch of us are convening for a Fedora
> Talk FAD next weekend, with a stated goal being live event streaming.
> This is an excellent use case for that.
Perhaps the reason it proceeds at a glacial pace is not that email and IRC
are low bandwidth compared to phone but because there are a lot of competing
directions that no one wants to be left out as the direction is defined.
I could definitely get together with a small number of people via phone and
come up with a direction. But I could also do that over IRC or even email.
Coming up with a direction that suits the large number of people who are
contributors to Fedora and have an interest in making sure their idea of the
direction Fedora should move is no easier over phone... perhaps even worse
over phone since a number of people will not be as able to participate in
the phone conversation due to language differences. So you could think that
you've reached a consensus over the phone but find that even people who were
on the call do not like the outcome.
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Size: 197 bytes
Desc: not available
More information about the fedora-advisory-board