FESCo election nominations now open

John J. McDonough wb8rcr at arrl.net
Thu May 21 16:10:09 UTC 2009


----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Josh Boyer" <jwboyer at gmail.com>
To: "Development discussions related to Fedora" 
<fedora-devel-list at 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.

--McD




More information about the fedora-devel-list mailing list