[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

Re: Where is the position of FESCo/its successor now/during/after the merge



Thorsten Leemhuis wrote:
> Hi,
> 
> it seems people are not completely sure (ยน) where the exact position and
> role of FESCo and its successor is now, during and after the merge with
> Core that was roughly outlined on the summit (and not yet official, but
> let's leave that fact out of here for now). Thus it might be a good idea
> to discuss this topic here to make sure we are all talking about the
> same stuff when we talk about FESCo and it's position in the future --
> there is afaics no need to go to much into the details, just the rough
> direction should be enough for now afaics (I'll send out a more detailed
> proposal how I imagine the FESCo future after this discussion is over).
> 
> I understood it like this until now:
> 
> - Core Packages move over to Extras
> - Extras is renamed to something more generic -- let's name it "Fedora
> Package Collection (FPC)" here for now
> - FESCo will govern over all the packages and the rules around them;
> will likely get a new name, too; maybe new members
> - no Core, thus no Core cabal then; some/all people from it maybe get
> integrated into FESCo
> - the things that the Core cabal did and does (release process, bring
> the tree in shape for release, plan feature to work on or the next
> release, ...) somehow need to be done by FESCo then; probably by
> sub-committees/groups (or something like that) that report to FESCo
> - problematic topics can be moved to the Fedora Board for further
> discussion/guidance (no, don't go into discussing details about this
> just yet -- but we need that path probably)
> 
> @Fedora Board: Is the above roughly correct?

Your summary pretty much matches my expectations for the new FESCo.

-- Rex


[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]