SIGs, projects, and leadership

[Vladimir Kosovac]

Karsten Wade wrote:
> 
> What next?
> 
> A. Revitalize the Docs Project leadership, hold elections, and keep
> things moving
> 
I'm with Karsten on this one.

Documentation Project grew over time to a pretty complex entity with a
lot of moving parts. It's not getting simpler, either. To have any
chance of being successful, it needs to be managed like a project.

I think I also understand where is Paul Frields coming from but I don't
agree that it's time to give up. Instead, let's do what procedurally
needs to be done - announce and hold elections and see how can we move on.

Few ideas that come to mind, in a not so coherent shape:

Before the results are in (very important!) get together all
contributors who are, depending on the state of the individual activity
over the past year, happy to extend/renew their commitment to writing
content. I shall be the first one to pledge this commitment (renew option).

The other important thing that we seem lacking is a way of measuring
accountability. I realise we are all volunteers with a variety of other,
more pressing commitments in our lives and that it is extremely
difficult to enforce this. But I am also pretty sure that every single
one of us had at least a vague idea of what are we getting ourselves into.

It's only fair to establish this in some way. Project leaders cannot be
the only individuals with accountability attached to their roles.

Then, to make project leader's life bearable, do what FDSCo page says:

"As roles are defined in the process documentation, the chair will
delegate various roles to the members of the FDSCo to manage."

Share the burden, guys, then do the similar down the hierarchy ladder in
your assigned areas.

Try to set the milestones for every written bit, not only stuff that's
closely tied to $release. Do this with DUG, SAG, everything.

It shouldn't be too hard to get some momentum going, though - stuff is
in a good shape, just needs a little bit more effort from all of us.

Vladimir

> ... or ...
> 
> B. Reduce complexity and scope of leadership to focus on a SIG and just
> getting stuff done
> 
> I've been trying to find my way back to A, and if that is our consensus,
> I'll work harder at making it happen.
> 
> thx - Karsten
> 
> [1] http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/DocsProject/Policy/FDSCoElections
> 

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 251 bytes
Desc: OpenPGP digital signature
URL: <http://listman.redhat.com/archives/fedora-docs-list/attachments/20071119/a9160245/attachment.sig>