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

Re: FESCo election nominations now open

----- Original Message ----- From: "Josh Boyer" <jwboyer gmail com> To: "Development discussions related to Fedora" <fedora-devel-list redhat com>
Sent: Thursday, May 21, 2009 11:44 AM
Subject: Re: FESCo election nominations now open

On Thu, May 21, 2009 at 09:08:58PM +0530, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
On 05/21/2009 08:58 PM, Jesse Keating wrote:
On Thu, 2009-05-21 at 20:45 +0530, Rahul Sundaram wrote:
IMO, it made sense only during the time when it was a steering committee for the Fedora Extras repository. Now FESCo duties are broad and I don't
see why someone only involved with artwork, L10N or documentation but
not packaging shouldn't be a leader.

That would make sense if they were making decisions and guidance over
those groups, only I don't think they are.

FESCo has grown from being a group concerned only about packages in a
add-on repository into something much larger. FESCo is responsible for
all technical decisions in Fedora including those that affect these groups.

Not that I'm disagreeing with you, but what technical decisions effect artwork
or translations or the management of documentation?

Since when does FESCo limit itself to technical decisions? FESCo makes decisions on policy, features, schedules, OK, maybe the occasional technical decision sneaks in there. One could argue that Docs, being on the tail end of that train, gets whipped around by those decisions more than anyone. (Obviously a personal perspective, maybe L10N is even worse).

Even so, I guess I'm a fan of having those decisions made by folks with a strong technical background, so I don't have a problem with the requirement. But let's not labor under the illusion that FESCo's decisions are solely technical.


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