On Wed, Sep 1, 2010 at 11:54 PM, sankarshan
This is something that I have been planning to write in to FAmSCo
about for a while.
The question is somewhat simple - does the FAmSCo take time out to
introspect as to whether it has been an agent, a catalyst of positive
change within The Fedora Project ? I realize that there are monthly
reports from the FAmSCo on its activities (and, I am thankful for
them), but this is a bit deeper - do the tasks/activities bubble up to
make the project a better place than it was a month before ? What
changes were brought forth ? Were they articulated ? Do they tie in
with the vision of the project the Board has ? Or, the Project Leader
has ? Does the FAmSCo hold conversations with the Board, the Project
At the end of the day they perhaps sound existential, but essentially,
I believe these are thoughts FAmSCo (and perhaps all the *SCo) need to
Interesting question. I am copying f-a-l on this as I think it might
be of interest to others.
There have been periods of introspection, and they tend to be infrequent.
In my time on FAmSCo the discussion started as: is FAmSCo still
relevant when the most active budget regions are making their own
decisions, and what are we actually doing. I think that the resultant
changes in process had their start there.
The largest change that came from that is mentoring, and I think
that's been a positive change that is hopefully benefitting us.
At the beginning of this year, Susmit took us to task for
shortcomings, and I think we responded appropriately, and think that
alot of benefit has come from that analysis. I think that specically
led to better accountability (the report you referenced) and certainly
better attendance at regional and famsco meetings.
Joerg also recently upbraided us, and again called on us to refocus
ourselves. We'll see what comes of that. You can see that email in the
FAmSCo archives I believe.
In addition there's been a number of conversations at FADs, and on
f-a-b about the possibility of shifting some of FAmSCo's
responsibilities and constituency to reflect that FAmSCo is
essentially Fedora's fiduciary body.
As for aligning ourselves with the boards vision, it appears that the
board's vision is still a work in progress, though we've seen the FPLs
blog post on the subject for his take on the subject.
As for the communication between Board, FPL, etc. I don't know that
we've ever officially sat down and had a purposeful FAmSCo-[Board,FPL]
session, perhaps that needs to change. However, the FPL is of course
subscribed to the FAmSCo list and occasionally participates in
conversations. Regularly the FPL is consulted, particularly around
personnel issues (that don't show up in the mailing list for obvious
reasons). Additionally, I think most FAmSCo members have a good
relationship with most board members and the FPL, and conversations
naturally occur when we're together or on IRC.
Of course I am speaking for myself, and this is my perspective.
Thanks for bringing this up Sankarshan