Am 11.02.2021 um 17:28 schrieb Neal Gompa
<ngompa13(a)gmail.com>:
On Thu, Feb 11, 2021 at 11:02 AM Peter Boy <pboy(a)uni-bremen.de> wrote:
>
> Folks, we have now spent some time housekeeping and organization, so far without
viable result. The only solution I see is a restart with the help of FESCo and/or
Council.
>
>
> For these areas we would need to find someone who commits to "… N hours a week
to do whatever is needed…" and "...sitting in multiple meetings in a week to
reach a consensus..." (Stephen Smoogen).
>
Not being a WG would be a serious blow to the Server Edition,
including potentially endangering its prominence on the main website
and in marketing. I would rather it stay being a working group. That
said, the charter for the Server WG is kind of onerous compared to the
Workstation WG and perhaps we need to fix the governance of the Server
WG to be more lightweight. We made similar adjustments in the
Workstation WG a few years ago, and it made things considerably
easier.
Sorry if my wording was misleading. I was *not* suggesting that the Working Group should
be dispensed with. I was suggesting to keep the WG the way it is suggested by Fedora
procedures (
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Leadership#Working_Groups). Not everyone who
likes to participate will be willing and able to do the same high level of work that is
expected of the Working Group. Hence the proposal to re-establish both, SIG and WG. This
avoids misunderstandings, failures and disappointed expectations.