Not logged in
Log in now
Create an account
Subscribe to LWN
LWN.net Weekly Edition for May 16, 2013
A look at the PyPy 2.0 release
PostgreSQL 9.3 beta: Federated databases and more
LWN.net Weekly Edition for May 9, 2013
(Nearly) full tickless operation in 3.10
Jared Smith steps down as Fedora project leader
Posted Feb 8, 2012 0:47 UTC (Wed) by mspevack (subscriber, #36977)
This includes Robyn, whose first work with Fedora was as a volunteer contributor to the Fedora Marketing team. She led all of the Fedora Marketing efforts for several releases of Fedora. Additionally, she helped to organize multiple FUDCons, and was the primary owner of FUDCon Tempe owner of the incredibly successful FUDCon Tempe in January 2011, all as a community member.
Eventually, Robyn was hired by Red Hat to be Fedora's Program Manager and Schedule Guru, and she has been part of the core Fedora leadership team ever since. She's a fantastic choice for Fedora Project Leader, and she shouldn't be penalized or excluded from that role simply because she *already* works at Red Hat.
Red Hat has proven its bona fides in hiring community members time and again, and continues to do so.
Posted Feb 8, 2012 4:41 UTC (Wed) by lxoliva (subscriber, #40702)
The response totally fails to answer the question: is it still a community distro if a company (rather than the community itself) gets to decide who its leader is?
Whether the appointed person is or is not a company associate is not even relevant. The question AFAICT is about who/what gets to appoint the leader, and how.
Posted Feb 8, 2012 15:00 UTC (Wed) by rfontana (subscriber, #52677)
Surely no one would claim that non-democratic meritocratic or pseudomeritocratic leadership-emergence models represents "the community deciding" on leadership; that would be indulging in mythology in a rather disturbing way.
Posted Feb 8, 2012 18:32 UTC (Wed) by lxoliva (subscriber, #40702)
They are elected by Fedora community members, except for one (?) seat appointed by Red Hat. Well, I guess one could argue that since there's only one position of leader, this standard is already applied: Red Hat appoints one, and the remaining are elected. But although mathematically correct, this wouldn't be a very honest argument, now would it? :-)
Now, please note I'm not saying the leader must be elected democratically by the community for Fedora to be a community project. It is however a measure of how much control over the project Red Hat wishes to withhold from the community. Maybe it would avoid such undesirable comparisons with the democratically-elected project leaders in democratic community projects if the position had a different title, say “community hoarder for Red Hat”. That would be not only more accurate, but also leave room for the community to choose their own leaders, which any actual community *will* naturally do, regardless of whatever sponsors wish and whatever positions it controls under whatever title.
Posted Feb 8, 2012 18:51 UTC (Wed) by rahulsundaram (subscriber, #21946)
They are elected by Fedora community members, except for one (?) seat appointed by Red Hat."
That's not true.
"There are nine Board members: five elected by the community and four appointed by Red Hat. Volunteers and Red Hat employees are eligible for all seats, and often volunteers are appointed or Red Hat employees are elected."
I would say that, Red Hat can continue to appoint a leader if there is a real need to do so but the veto right is no longer necessary and should be removed but that argument needs more support from the community and not externally.
Posted Feb 8, 2012 19:27 UTC (Wed) by lxoliva (subscriber, #40702)
Posted Feb 8, 2012 14:44 UTC (Wed) by mmcgrath (subscriber, #44906)
I don't think it's fair to call Fedora a 100% community distro. On the Fedora Project's website it says in several locations that Fedora is sponsored by Red Hat.
I'd say Fedora is a partnership between Red Hat and the community. It works out well for both since Red Hat gets so many talented contributors from the community and the community doesn't have to bare the full cost of creating Fedora.
Even though much of Fedora's leadership is chosen from the community by the community, the actual "Leader" position is not.
Posted Feb 8, 2012 15:09 UTC (Wed) by rfontana (subscriber, #52677)
Posted Feb 11, 2012 13:59 UTC (Sat) by jospoortvliet (subscriber, #33164)
In any case, using the term 'sponsor' or not, Fedora is a community. Not a community-led distro like Debian, Gentoo or openSUSE, but neither is it a closed development thing like RHEL and SLE are. So THAT word, community distribution - fine.
Posted Feb 12, 2012 4:00 UTC (Sun) by rahulsundaram (subscriber, #21946)
Hold on. How is openSUSE community led while Fedora is not?
Posted Feb 9, 2012 8:27 UTC (Thu) by airlied (subscriber, #9104)
Copyright © 2013, Eklektix, Inc.
Comments and public postings are copyrighted by their creators.
Linux is a registered trademark of Linus Torvalds