Fedora 7

[David Zeuthen]

On Jan 6, 2007, at 3:06 AM, Warren Togami wrote:
> More broadly... Fedora is not a democracy.
>
> Fedora is a meritocracy.

Yes, and it's worth expanding on this. For example, a democracy is  
one where people with, say, too much time on their hands are able to  
build a community of peers (because most people like to be followed)  
and get elected into office based on e.g. the amount of mails the  
write and how well they crush their opposition. In a meritocracy we  
don't do this, we still let the most competent person (or persons)  
make decisions. Of course in some cases it's difficult for outsiders  
(who cannot judge, for a given subject matter, who is competent and  
who is not) to understand why some decisions are made and some are  
not. The day Fedora becomes a democracy is the day I'll contributing  
to Fedora.

> One issue however that I see with this, is historic lack of inter- 
> communication between the RH Desktop team and the community.

Not sure what you had in mind (examples?) but it's not exactly true  
(which is an understatement) though of course relations between RH  
employees and non-RH employees wanting to help out too can be  
improved. We always tell people to help out upstream; the only  
patches we carry are for defaults really. It's just like the kernel,  
we tell Fedora people to hack on kernel.org kernels.

       David