On 5/6/20 8:31 AM, Rich Bowen wrote: > I must lead with this: It is with great trepidation that I even write > this message, because I have no desire to burn bridges. I currently > enjoy a cordial working relationship with everyone on the board, and, > without exception, have great respect for each of them personally. But > it is my job to point out that the board's method of engaging with the > community isn't working. > > On 5/6/20 4:28 AM, john tatt via CentOS-devel wrote: >> At the first place, what kind of "issue" do you speak of ? > > 1) The website redesign > 2) The logo design process (we finally got a response from one > individual board member, but as yet no *decision* from the board) > 3) The open question as to what the board will do about the stated > policy that Red Hat must hold a majority of seats, given that one board > member has announced that he is leaving Red Hat. > > There are others, but those are the three most recent, and the most > pressing. > > Mostly, though, in this email, I do not seek to address those issues. I > seek to find out the correct way that the board wishes for us to engage > with them. > >> At the second place you tell you are not the only one to claim for >> replies. Where are the others ? Whey do they not countersign ? > > Two reasons. > > One, it's literally my job. I am paid, full time, to be the community > manager. That means that it's my job to represent the community's > interests, both externally (ie, to the public), internally (ie, to the > board and community), and to our major financial partner, Red Hat. > > Two, because the people in question have expressed frustration enough > times that they have quit trying. To me, this is a tragedy. > >> And at the third place I should say that tou can't ignore who are the >> people in charge. So why not just send a mail to them instead of using >> this public list ? > > I am most definitely not ignoring the people in charge. They have told > me that this is the correct place to raise issues to their attention. > But it's not working. > > On the one hand, I *do* send them email directly. Frequently. And I have > weekly meetings with several of them. But that is not how open source > projects work. Open source projects are, by name and philosophy, open. > Privately emailing board members is not transparent. > > Secondly, most of you, the community, don't have the level of access > that I have. It's not fair to assume that any one of the community can, > or should, email or call our board members directly. We need a process > by which the community can raise issues, publicly, transparently, and > expect that we will be heard. > >> Do you hear me Fabian and others ? > > Fabian is not a board member. If, by "others", you me the other board > members, then I ask the same question: Do you hear me? > > Please understand that I have no anger or animosity here. Just > frustration, and a desire to improve *our* project's communication and > processes. I am available, and at your disposal, for any way in which I > can be part of that improvement. > Rich, We have 4 people who are working on 'CentOS Linux' .. and 'CentOS Stream'. We just had Red Hat Summit (the CentOS team had major deliverables for that) and 2 major point releases drop (RHEL 7.8 and 8.2 releases) .. as well as creating the entire CentOS Stream process. There is really just not a lot of cycles right now for logos or website redesign talk. Thanks, Johnny Hughes -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 195 bytes Desc: OpenPGP digital signature URL: <http://lists.centos.org/pipermail/centos-devel/attachments/20200506/ed061644/attachment-0007.sig>