RFC: FESCo Future

[Thorsten Leemhuis]

Am Dienstag, den 25.04.2006, 19:13 +0200 schrieb Axel Thimm:
> On Sun, Apr 23, 2006 at 08:53:09PM +0200, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote:
> > - How many members should FESCo have?
> > 
> > FESCO currently has 17 members. The general consensus is that the number
> > of members should remain odd. Thrown into the ring during the last
> > IRC-Meeting were 9, 11, 13, 15 or 17 members. 
> > Reasons for a smaller group: More people make it harder to make
> > decisions. 
> > Reasons for a big group: More people can make more things happen and the
> > load per member is a bit lower. 
> 
> given the thread's development as an example, I think less people with
> faster communication and decision making time is better, otherwise you
> may end up like Debian where important decisions are stalled by
> endless threads ("less" as an absolute measure, I'm not comparing to
> any specific number like 17 or 9).

Well, you might have a point here. But we are 17 people in the current
FESCo and the problem seldom was that we couldn't find a agreement --
the problem was that much work wasn't done as good as I'd have liked (or
wasn't done at all). 

I'm still for 13 members for the next FESCo and can live with 15 also.
But I don't want less -- if it doesn't work we can agree on a smaller
FESCo when the next election happens. 

> If there is fear of too high workload per person then some work
> activities of fesco should be checked whether they belong
> elsewhere.

True, but that didn't worked well in the past. I hope we can improve
that with the next FESCo.

> If fesco feels on some specific issue at hand that it is too small in
> numbers to make a decision it can always escalate to the next larger
> entity to get more opinions like it is happening now.

I would prefer if nearly all discussion would be on public places. Yes,
that leads to sometimes endlessly discussion like this (we still have no
system how to actually do the FESCo vote -- does really nobody here have
experiences how to actually do something like that?). But openness IMHO
is more important.

CU
thl
-- 
Thorsten Leemhuis <fedora at leemhuis.info>