On 3/6/07, Dimitris Glezos <dimitris(a)glezos.com> wrote:
O/H Francesco Ugolini έγραψε:
> Mirjam Wäckerlin ha scritto:
> I have a "little" question: Will he be a permanent Coordinator? If yes,
> i agree, because i think that it's necessary continuity to make a work
> well, not only, he would be a reference point to all Ambassadors. (In my
> opinion a Central Europe's Ambassador would be perfect, because the big
> events are there).
I don't think that the exact geographical situation is important,
since most of the work will have to been done online. Of course, the
person should have some knowledge about the most important events and
also a good general knowledge about European countries.
Best thing would be to have a Steering Committee instead of one
One person (or one person and a replacement person in case of
emergency) would IMO be best in terms of coordination. If you have
Steering Committee they always would have to communicate and
coordinate a lot between themselves and would lose a lot of time
instead of really moving forward.
a way these persons be chosen under meritocracy .
Meritocracy is in general appreciated in FOSS but it's more important
to have someone who fits all the requirements,meaning someone with all
the needed competences, than to choose someone who's already very busy
within the Ambassadors project. The most merited people already have a
load of work and maybe not the time to invest constantly a lot of
To ensure continuity, in the recent Docs elections, the four top vote
serve on FDSCo for a larger period of time (say, 12 months) than the next three
vote receivers (6 months). This way we make sure active members on the FDSCo but
also a continuity of involvement. Maybe this is a good idea for a FEuSCo (Fedora
Europe Steering Committee).
A reelection is a good idea, but a cycle of 6 months is too short for
such a task. I propose a cycle of one year.
FEuSCo sounds like a european localised subgroup/substitution for
FAMSCo but this is not the idea of the European Coordinator (I agree
I suggest we expand on the Draft to have a much clearer image on what
proposal actually proposes. As I noted in Chitlesh's talk, Europe has some very
important characteristics (locality, multilinguality, different laws) that we
should make sure the new "Fedora Office" will strategically address.
The proposal is only a draft and should get more detailed (ideas are
appreciated!). But the task of the executive is not to organise the
events and know every detail (this will be left to the local
Ambassadors), but to coordinate them and distribute resources.
Is there a compelling reason we should rush to do it before Linuxtag
There will be a FudCon at LinuxTag where the final decision could be
made. If we can't make it by then, it may take a very long time to put
the idea into effect.