#447 Fedora Council Policy proposal: equalize “auxiliary” positions
Closed: approved a year ago by bcotton. Opened a year ago by mattdm.

In 2014, when the Fedora Board first approved the new Council structure, we intentionally kept the scope small, creating just six “core” positions: two hired by Red Hat, two selected from community leadership committees, and two elected at-large. Other roles — the Fedora Program Manager, DEI Advisor, and Initiative Leads (formerly Objective Leads) were designated as “auxiliary”. These positions came with this restriction: “votes in the consensus process are expected to be related to the scope of the respective role.”

At the time, some members of the Board were worried about the possibility of undue influence from appointed seats, or with someone exerting control over parts of the project outside their own area of expertise. In practice, in all of the eight years of the Council’s existence, we’ve never had any such problem. (And, if we ever did, our consensus-based decision-making process is an effective check.) On the other hand, this limitation has had negative effects: people in these roles feel less empowered to act, and unsure about their standing as a “real” member of the Council.

At our hackfest earlier this year, the Council agreed that we want to drop the distinction, and instead have all members on an equal footing. Since this is a formal change to our policies, this announcement and subsequent community discussion are part of our policy change process.

After two weeks (April 21), we’ll vote on this using our full consensus process — another week to collect official votes in the Council ticket (April 28, unless everyone has voted earlier than that). And following that, I’ll make a PR to update the text of the Council Charter.


I've created a topic on Fedora Discussion for this ticket.

Please keep this ticket focused. Discuss there, and record votes and decisions here. Thanks!

Metadata Update from @bcotton:
- Issue assigned to bcotton

a year ago

After two weeks (April 21)

Guess I'd better get the Community Blog post out then!

Metadata Update from @bcotton:
- Issue tagged with: policies

a year ago

+1

We discussed this in-depth at February's hackfest too.

The two-week community comment period has passed. Council members, please record your vote here by 1300 UTC on Friday 28 April. We will use a full consensus vote for this.

Metadata Update from @bcotton:
- Issue tagged with: ticket-vote

a year ago

+1

I'm looking forward to being a real boy!

After a week, the vote is

APPROVED (+8,0,-0)

Metadata Update from @bcotton:
- Issue untagged with: ticket-vote

a year ago

Metadata Update from @bcotton:
- Issue close_status updated to: approved
- Issue status updated to: Closed (was: Open)

a year ago

Log in to comment on this ticket.

Metadata