On Thu, 01 Oct 2009 14:35:33 -0700
John Poelstra <[email protected]> wrote:
> The current FESCo might also want to consider taking more of a
> leadership role in monitoring the release processes, tracking the
> schedule, and evaluating the quality of the release under development
> and our ability to release on time. As the group responsible for
> guiding the technical direction of our releases I think this is
> something they should be more involved in. I'd be glad to help
> gather data they might need to do this and there might be others who
> would be willing to help too.
I would love to. Can you show me the 28 hour days so I have some extra
Seriously tho, I think many of the FESCo folks _DO_ stay involved in
lots of things, some of them might not be as visible as people think
they would be. Or did you mean at some higher level?
> I'm suggesting more proactive leadership from FESCo and clear
> initiatives to take Fedora to the next level versus only being
> responsible for approving features, proven packagers, and policy
> This is also my vision for the Fedora Board.
I think move involvement wherever we can get it great, but I don't
think we should try and force people to do X hours of work on Y.
Also, if we want to require fesco and/or the board to be more involved
and proactive, we should note these requirements for the next election.
A possible idea for the next cycle:
- Wait until we have the list of approved features.
- Divide them up amoung fesco and have a 'point contact' for each that
is a fesco member.
- Each member is responsible for testing/tracking/talking to the
feature owner and getting them what they need to get things done as
well as knowing if something is not ready/etc.
I don't know how feasible this is given the large list of features
fedora-devel-list mailing list