|[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]|
On 06/04/2012 02:51 PM, Paul W. Frields wrote:
This is a good explanation. I'd also reiterate that "against the community" is not supported by the fact that (1), and (2) the FPL continues to appoint quite a few non-Red Hat employees, over the Board's history.
Well the FPL is not elected by the community but is hired by Red Hat through some internal process they have that we ( the community ) know nothing about and Red Hat has a track record of inventing position within the community then more often then not hire people outside the community to fill those positions. ( Even thou the company has been getting better at rephrasing these job positions and choosing people within the community rather than outside in more recent times).
Arguably an better approach to choose an FPL is for the community to nominate individuals which then would be subjected to whatever process Red Hat uses internally to filter out and eventually get on it's payroll.
At least to me that's the only compromising solution that I can see working between both parties involved without one ruling over the other.
With regards to "the Fedora community has chosen to elect quite a few Red Hat employees" which I can certainly agree to since I my self have voted Red Hat employees over community candidates since I base my voting more on the individual work and technical knowledge rather than on some popularity contest.
But I still think that this is one thing that is wrong with our election process as in I feel that corporate entity's or individual from there in may not be allowed to hold majority of seats neither on the board nor in any of the committees within the community to prevent that corporates interest influence either directly or indirectly the projects direction and resources and that view of mine is not limited to Red Hat but to all sponsor, sponsoring the project ( if and then when Red Hat *decides* some other corporate can sponsor the project).
And here are few I think is wrong with election process and is needed to ensure fairness through out the community
1.The same election process should be used through out the whole project so famsco/fesco should follow the same process as do everyone else.
2. Individual may not serve on more then one committee at a time. 3.There needs to be a limit on how many release cycles or "terms" individuals may serve on the board/committees to ensure rotation and enough "fresh" ideas/approaches to any given task at hand.
4.Nominees cant change their "Introduction" once the nomination period has ended.
5.Nominees that seek re-elections should clearly state what work they did when serving their last election period.
JBG -- marketing mailing list marketing@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/marketing
[Fedora Mentors] [Fedora Legacy Announce] [Home] [Kernel List] [Fedora Legacy] [Fedora Packaging] [Fedora Desktop] [PAM] [Red Hat Development] [Red Hat 9 Bible] [Red Hat 9 Mailing List] [Big List of Linux Books] [Gimp] [Yosemite News]