On Sun, Aug 24, 2008 at 2:23 PM, Russell Miller <duskglow@xxxxxxxxx> wrote: > I think (and it's just my opinion) that most here would simmer down and be > content if they were at least sure that RedHat had taken the community into > consideration and that there were valid concerns that trumped that. And how exactly do you propose as a mechanism to 'to be sure' that community was considered? What is it gonna take, having a randomly selected user shadow the CEO every day making sure he's not penning an internal memo that specifically reads "everyone, think of 10 ways to screw the Fedora users today..and have the lists on my desk by 5 pm sharp or you will get docked an hour's pay." The fact that Paul was hired out of the at-large community specifically to be the FPL lead, because he was active in the community, instead of shuffling the deckchairs inside Red Hat doesn't say enough about Red Hat's commitment to community consideration? Paul suddenly became the enemy of community when before he was hired he was its champion? Honestly I don't know of anything more significant than that that a corporate entity can do to show they are committed to the community. There is absolutely no question in my mind that Red Hat thinks about community when its making decisions which impact Fedora. None. Call me a shill if you like. But I'm sitting here outside the fenceline and I'm not going to walk away over this. Did we have a communication problem? Maybe. But communication problems are not equivalent to trust issues. But considering that was a first of its kind event for us as a project, I don't think its necessarily unexpected to see some miscommunication. I don't think any of us, either inside Red Hat or outside had talked through how this sort of thing should be handled. I don't remember a serious public discussion about how to deal with communication of an event like this before having an event like this. And I'm not going to let the assumption stand that to do things differently should have been obvious to those in a position to deal with the information. We aren't going to get anywhere by wringing our hands at how this specific was (mis)handled. Certainly attempting to assign blame towards someone as to miscommunication isn't going to help with the dialogue that should happen to prevent future miscommunication. If people want things to be better, if god forbid something like this happens again, then a serious effort to write a communication process has to be written up and it must be agreeable to legal as a workable process that won't set off any legal liability landmines. -jef"I keep coming back to thinking of Fedora project as a marriage between Red Hat and the community... and in that light comparing it to the day to day workings of my own marriage. Miscommunications happen. What is obvious to one spouse, isn't so to the other. But when I am miscommunicated to, I don't assume it was done out of malice or neglect or a disregard for my feelings. Miscommunications happen because different people have different priorities and thus see things in different ways, its as simple as that. But when it happens, and when its over something that is important to me..which truthfully is pretty much every little thing...then I make the effort to better communicate my own point of view and expectations in a way that is attempts to show sincere interest in better communication. Instead of in a way that is biased with frustration, anger or entitlement...instead of assuming that the other person in the partnership should just automatically know where I'm coming from. In that way I don't think its fair to automatically assume that everyone who Paul has to deal with inside Red Hat automatically 'gets it' when it comes to the needs of the community. Not because they don't believe in the community..but because they focus primarily on the needs of the corporation and so prioritize things differently. And its not going to help Paul make his case if we hammer at this issue from the community side with frustration, anger and entitlement. We have to find a more sincere positive voice to communicate the process we'd like to see, and we have to communicate a process that addresses what we perceive are the roadblocks to disclosure from the corporate point of view. "spaleta -- fedora-list mailing list fedora-list@xxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe: https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-list
