[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

Re: gnome 2.9

On Wed, 03 Nov 2004 12:47:21 -0500, Havoc Pennington <hp redhat com> wrote:
> Seriously, Red Hat has certain parameters (listed at
> http://fedora.redhat.com/about/objectives.html), but within those it
> really is flexible.

it COULD be flexible, but right now there is no publicly communicable
structure as to "community" leadership. The outline of project
leadership on the website has never gotten past the draft document
state... no one from outside red hat has any defined roles or
responsibilities, nor is there anything close to a plan on how to move
volunteers into and out of any roles of responsibilities when it comes
to project policy and planning. Right now, afaict, its very much a
centralized top-down decision process, very little is delegated or
tasked out for community teams to decide.

People in the community have varying degrees of input in discussion to
decision making, depending on the degree of access they have to
internal project leadership. Sure everyone can express their opinion
as to what's going on, but there is no clear, public role for
community leadership to take when it comes to "deciding", no clear
role in setting the agenda or planning, no teams of hand selected
volunteers tasked with even minor policy decision making within the
acceptable solutionspace parameters laid down by Red Hat employees.

What's going on here, isn't flexibility decision-making, this is
simply an open discussion to acquire feedback that can either be acted
upon or ignored, where the decision makers hear all or some of the
expressed opinions and the choose a course of action.  While open
discussion is not a bad thing, and has its place, I think its
disingenuous to suggest that community feedback means community

-jef"Look! on the side of the road a dead horse! Let's go beat it!"spaleta

[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]