RFC: FESCo Future

Axel Thimm Axel.Thimm at ATrpms.net
Tue Apr 25 18:01:34 UTC 2006

On Tue, Apr 25, 2006 at 07:40:18PM +0200, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote:
> Am Dienstag, den 25.04.2006, 19:13 +0200 schrieb Axel Thimm:
> > 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
> [...]. But openness IMHO is more important.

I wasn't suggesting on going behind doors, I completely agree on
transparency and openness towards the outside of fesco.

A model that may keep fesco workload low could be the following:

o the community/fesco has some suggestions, these are evaluated by
  fesco and discussed with the community with a given time cut-off,
  where fesco has to come to a conclusion. All this happens in public,
  but if the discussion doesn't reach a consensus you have the time
  cut-off, where fesco members simply vote on the issue.

o When a decision is made to attack something then fesco can decide to
  create a task force to actually perform the work, e.g. outsource the
  workload, and move on.

o More often than not these task forces will be people from fesco or
  at least headed by them who should gather forces from the community,
  e.g. by calling for volunteers on a list this this one.

Does that make any sense? It keeps fesco workload down and tries to
involve the community as much as possible.
Axel.Thimm at ATrpms.net
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://listman.redhat.com/archives/fedora-extras-list/attachments/20060425/98e946ce/attachment.sig>

More information about the fedora-extras-list mailing list