Review queue/FESCo after the merge

[Josh Boyer]

On Wed, 14 Nov 2007 21:16:36 +0100
Hans de Goede <j.w.r.degoede at hhs.nl> wrote:

> Josh Boyer wrote:
> > On Wed, 14 Nov 2007 19:34:16 +0100
> > Hans de Goede <j.w.r.degoede at hhs.nl> wrote:
> > 
> >> 3) In the extras days I had the feeling of having some control over what FESCo
> >>     does, today I feel that certain groups within Fedora (*cough* release
> >>     engineering *cough*) are indepent islands, not that these groups are not
> >>     doing great work, but they don't seem controlled in any democratic way.
> >>
> >> 1 and 2 are not factors which can be controlled by Fedora, 3 however can. I 
> >> believe its important to fix 3, as that will make joining the government of 
> >> Fedora much more appealing.
> > 
> > Could you elaborate on what you see the problems being?  And possible
> > solutions?
> > 
> 
> Some less spoonfeeding of decisions and more discussion in public instead of 
> presenting pre-cooked proposals the entire circle of power already agrees on, 
> would help greatly here.
> 
> Look at it this way, Fedora is all about Freedom, but since the merger the 
> Freedom for contributers (esp. packagers) has been greatly reduced. Take the 
> new release engineering proposals for example, I have some ideas about this, 
> but the entire release engineering crowd had already precooked there ideas and 
> unanimously disagreed with mine, or atleast that is how I perceived this.

Perhaps I missed this thread somewhere.  Can you point me at it?  As
far as I know, all of the Rel-Eng proposals were drafted by Jesse,
posted on fedora-devel for discussion, and then approved by rel-eng and
then FESCo.

> Most typically of all this I guess is this alinea: This will probably be my 
> last mail in this thread, as I see no use in continuing this dicussion, why?
> Because I no longer believe that discussions like this will cause any changes.

I hope that isn't the case.  I'm genuinely interested in what you're
trying to point out.

josh