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

Re: Succession planning change proposal



On Mon, Jun 01, 2009 at 10:45:14AM -0500, inode0 wrote:
> On Mon, Jun 1, 2009 at 9:09 AM, Paul W. Frields <stickster gmail com> wrote:
> > On Fri, May 29, 2009 at 06:36:08PM -0500, inode0 wrote:
> >> In the Composition section it says "All seats are occupied by Fedora
> >> community members." This is correct and this is the language I prefer.
> >> So could we also say that in the blue box at the top of the page
> >> rather than "The Fedora Project Board is made up of a mix of Red Hat
> >> employees and Fedora community contributors?"
> >
> > Actually, I think of Red Hat employees as *part* of the Fedora
> > community, so really it's made up of a mix of Red Hat employees and
> > either a group called "other Fedora community contributors," or called
> > "volunteer contributors."  I would lean toward the former, because I
> > would bet there are some people out there who contribute to Fedora in
> > part not as volunteers but paid by some non-Red Hat entity, like a
> > hypothetical employer who pays for someone to spend 15% of his or her
> > time on Fedora.
> 
> Red Hat employees who serve on the board *are* part of the Fedora
> community. Singling them out for special mention as Red Hat employees
> in this context emphasizes the distinction that I would like to see
> de-emphasized on the board.
> 
> Red Hat seats and community seats did make a certain sense. There are
> seats appointed by a Red Hat employee and there are seats elected by
> the community. However, calling them that in light of who gets
> appointed and who gets elected highlights the wrong thing.
> 
> Can we find a way to acknowledge Red Hat's contribution without
> splitting the description of the board into Red Hat employees and
> those other contributors? Any construction that begins with "Red Hat
> employees" and ends with some other generic group of contributors does
> not sound like a unified community to me.
> 
> That will be my last two cents on this one.

Now I better understand what you were trying to tell me earlier.  I've
made additional changes to remove these references, which I agree are
unnecessary.  The changes will be subject to Board approval.

Paul


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