Council

This charter was approved by the Fedora Project Board on Oct. 9th, 2014 and is in effect as of Nov. 26th, 2014.

Introduction

The Fedora Council is our top-level community leadership and governance body. It is responsible for stewardship of the Fedora Project as a whole, and supports the health and growth of the Fedora Community.

The Council is composed of a mix of representatives from different areas of the project, named roles appointed by Red Hat, and a variable number of seats connected to medium-term project goals. Decisions are made by a consensus process, in which we work together as a common team to find shared solutions and address concerns, with a focus on giving voice rather than on balance of power.

The Council is ultimately accountable for the Fedora Project as a whole, and is responsible for providing advice to and oversight of other Fedora governance bodies and teams as needed.

Responsibilities

The Council is responsible for issues of strategic importance for Fedora that require leadership and coordination across the various teams and subprojects to achieve.

Its primary role is to identify the short, medium, and long term goals of the Fedora community and to organize and enable the project to best achieve them. This is done in consultation with the entire Fedora community through transparent, public discussion.

The Council governs Fedora's financial resources, working with our sponsor(s) to establish an annual budget allocated to support Fedora initiatives, including Fedora Ambassadors, Fedora Premiere Events, and other activities which advance the project's goals.

The Council also decides on issues regarding use of the Fedora trademarks, is responsible for final arbitration of complaints related to project policies and for settling disputes escalated from other committees or subgroups, and may handle sensitive legal or personnel issues which require research and discussion to protect the interests of the Fedora Project or its sponsor(s).

Making Decisions

Consensus decision-making aims to be: Agreement Seeking: A consensus decision-making process attempts to help everyone get what they need. Collaborative: Participants contribute to a shared proposal and shape it into a decision that meets the concerns of all group members as much as possible. Cooperative: Participants in an effective consensus process should strive to reach the best possible decision for the group and all of its members, rather than competing for personal preferences. Egalitarian: All members of a consensus decision-making body should be afforded, as much as possible, equal input into the process. All members have the opportunity to present, and amend proposals. Inclusive: As many stakeholders as possible should be involved in the consensus decision-making process. Participatory: The consensus process should actively solicit the input and participation of all decision-makers — from Wikipedia on Consensus decision-making

Many basic decisions are made through a process known as "lazy approval", in which general consent is assumed unless valid objections are raised within a period of time — generally three to seven days, although the timeframe should be stated each time and should be proportionate to the impact of the action. This process is used for decisions with short-term consequences and which can be easily reversed. Any project member can ask for the deadline to be extended or the decision escalated to require full consensus.

More significant decisions are made through a process of full consensus. In order to pass, these decisions need three positive votes (+3) and no negative votes (-1). A negative vote immediately halts the process and requires discussion. Therefore, in order to remain valid, negative votes must be supported with a specific concerns about the poposal, and suggestions for what could be changed in order to make the proposal acceptable. A vote of "0" is sometimes used to indicate a disagreement but willingness to stand aside; this should also be accompanied with an explanation.

This model matches Fedora's "Friends" foundation, which calls for finding acceptable consensus to serve the interests of advancing free software. It works because we work together in a community of mutual respect even when we disagree.

In general, the Council conducts business in public discussion, and any Fedora project member can make negative or positive votes. It is the duty of the Council to take concerns raised in this way into serious consideration, but only Council members' votes are binding in the final tally.

When consensus can't be reached, the Council may ask the Fedora Project Leader to decide on a resolution. Such a request can be made when issues leading to negative votes are outstanding and all Council members agree that the Council is deadlocked, or if the dispute is unresolved after fourteen days and a simple majority of Council members are in favor of the request.

Composition

Objective Leads

On an ongoing basis, including sessions at Flock and in public online meetings, the Council will identify two to four key community objectives with a timeframe of approximately eighteen months, and appoint Objective Leads for each goal. These will serve as auxiliary Council members, with binding votes only over concerns relevant to their particular area.

Each objective will be documented with measurable goals, and the objective lead is responsible for coordinating efforts to reach those goals, evaluating and reporting on progress, and working regularly with all relevant groups in Fedora to ensure that progress is made.

Representatives

The Council also includes four representative seats, an Engineering Representative, an Outreach Representative, and two Elected Representatives.

"Engineering" and "Outreach" are broad areas roughly encompassing two of the major areas of activity in Fedora. Engineering is the technical work related to building and releasing the Fedora operating system and the infrastructure related to that. Outreach includes marketing, support, and Fedora Ambassadors — largely activities that happen between Fedora and the world at large, with the distribution release cycle serving as a fuel source, not the thing that's being worked on.

The engineering and outreach representatives' responsibility is to represent their areas collectively, not to be just an individual voice that happens to be voted-in by some subset of Fedora. They are selected by the people active in those areas, coordinated by the Fedora Engineering Steering Committee (FESCo) and the Fedora Ambassadors Steering Committee (FAmSCo) respectively, and serve for terms to be determined by those committees.

The elected positions cover Fedora's subprojects not under the engineering or outreach banners (Documentation, Translation, etc.), and the community at large. One specific responsibility is to represent the voice of individual contributors to the Fedora project. Each representative will also work on specific goals which she or he brings to the Council as highlighted during the election process.

Elections are held twice a year, in concert with the joint Fedora election cycle. One seat is selected at each election, and each position has a two-election (approximately one year) term. No person who currently holds another Council seat can be elected. If a seat becomes vacant, the Council will arrange for a temporary replacement.

Appointed Leadership Positions

Fedora Project Leader

The Fedora Project Leader serves as the chair of the Council, organizing discussion agendas, bringing issues to the table, and facilitating the consensus process. He or she is accountable for success in all areas of the project, but is not a dictator, benevolent or otherwise. The FPL often serves as the public face and collective voice of the project, and has a corresponding duty to listen to, understand, and fairly represent the collective views and needs of project contributors and stakeholders.

The Fedora Project Leader is hired by Red Hat with the advice and consent of the Council.

Fedora Community Action and Impact Coordinator

Red Hat's Open Source and Standards group funds a full-time position to lead initiatives to grow the Fedora user and developer communities, and to make Red Hat / Fedora interactions even more transparent and positive. The Fedora community budget comes to us through OSAS, and this position facilitates decision-making on how to best focus that to meet our collective objectives.

Auxiliary Seats

As with the objective leads, the next two appointed positions are auxiliary seats. They are intended to have significant positive impact on the project as a whole, but in order to minimize the overall influence of appointed positions vs. those selected by the community, their votes in the consensus process are expected to be related to the scope of the respective role.

Diversity Advisor

Fedora's Diversity Advisor works on initiatives to assess and promote equality and inclusion within the Fedora contributor and user communities, and helps develop project strategy on diversity issues. Additionally, the Diversity Advisor administers and is the point of contact for Fedora's participation in third-party outreach programs and events.

This position is appointed by the Fedora Project Leader, with the approval of the Council.

Fedora Program Manager

The FPgM coordinates the planning and scheduling of Fedora releases, and tracks changes and features during the development and testing cycle. He or she also assists with the creation, maintenance, and execution of formal, repeatable Fedora processes. Additionally, the FPgM serves as record keeper and secretary for Fedora Council Meetings.

This position is funded by and hired for by Red Hat, with the approval of the Council.

Current Members

• Elected Representative: Rex Dieter (f22, f23)
• Elected Representative: Langdon White (f22)
• Engineering Representative: Josh Boyer
• Outreach Representative: Christoph Wickert
• Fedora Project Leader: Matthew Miller
• Fedora Community Action and Impact Coordinator: Remy DeCausemaker
• Fedora Program Manager: Jaroslav Reznik
• Objective Lead: Stephen Gallagher

Contact Info

The Fedora Council uses two mailing lists.

council-discuss (formerly "board-discuss") is a public list. Subscription is open to anyone, as are the archives. This list is the main discussion point for the Fedora Council, and the goal of the list is to either reach a decision, or to delegate the thread to a more appropriate location. For example, engineering-specific threads may get some comments on council-discuss, before being redirected to the devel list for in-depth discussion.

council-private is a private list. Its membership is restricted to the current Council members, and its archives are private. This list is only used for topics that cannot be discussed on the public council-discuss list.

Council members are also often present on the #fedora-council IRC channel on irc.freenode.net

If you have an issue to be worked on by the Council you can also open a ticket on the Council trac instance. This is a public issue tracker. If you have a particularly privacy- or security-sensitive issue, you may use the council-private trac instance instead. If an issue is not sensitive the discussion should be in the open, in the public trac or the council-discuss list.

Coda

Meetings

The Fedora Council is not driven by meetings or by tickets, but does hold semi-regular public IRC meetings to discuss current issues, to clear through anything outstanding which can be quickly resolved, and to ensure that nothing important is left in limbo. All members are be expected to regularly communicate what's going on in their area, through blog posts or other public updates.

Additionally, the Fedora Project Leader will set aside regular times on IRC to meet with the community. Attendance is not mandatory for all members but is encouraged.

Transparency

The general policy of the Fedora Council is to default to open. Meetings are held in public IRC channels, and open to all Fedora users and contributors. Discussion is held in on a public mailing list open to all subscribers, and formal decisions will be recorded in a public ticket tracking system.

Occasionally, when personal, private, or sensitive issues need to be discussed, a phone call might be used. A private mailing list and ticket tracking instance also exist for these situations, but will also only be used when dealing with these uncommon issues.

Time Commitment

Serving on the Fedora Council is a significant commitment of time and energy. Workload for the various roles will vary, but each will require a number of hours every week, and in most cases, the more, the better a Council member is able to do the job fully.

We recognize that most Fedora community members do not have the luxury of working on Fedora full-time or as part of a paid position. The time commitment required for these roles comes simply from what is required to lead a large project like Fedora, and is not intended to be an artificial limit on who can participate. We know that that it can be a pragmatic limit, and for that reason, the Council is responsible for extra effort to receive, recognize, be responsive to, and meaningfully reward the input of contributors offering their individual time.

Governance Philosophy

To advance free software, we need to provide a sustainable integration of free software without cutting corners. By providing a positive first impression before and during installation and real use, we support Fedora's reputation as a leading and reliable product that attracts future users and contributors. To provide that integration and experience we must have a clear set of priorities to help all contributors decide how to allocate resources and resolve conflicts. These priorities are not meant to be exclusive, or to keep contributors from working on the parts of Fedora that matter to them.

These priorities will sometimes expose gaps where contributors need additional assistance, and allow them to seek it both within the community and by bringing in additional contributors to help, exclusively on their particular interest area if desired. While narrowing our focus in some areas, though, we must provide opportunities for exploration to all contributors within the framework of our core values and without impeding progress.

History

The previous previous governance structure (Fedora Board) had five members directly appointed by Red Hat and five elected at large. The current structure is more complicated but has a much greater proportion of members selected by the community by election or merit. In the previous board structure, the Fedora Project leader had a special veto power; in the current model, all voting members can block on issues, with a valid reason. The FPL does not have a special veto, but does have a limited power to "unstick" things if consensus genuinely can't be reached and a decision needs to be made.

Initial Selection of Elected Seats

The initial elected representatives will be selected in a single election, with the candidate with the most votes selected for a full term (through the release of F23) and the runner-up for a half term (through the release of F22). As with the Fedora Board archive, we'll establish a history page and this paragraph will move to that page after the first election.

tl;dr?

1. Active body tasked with identifying and enabling strategic objectives.
2. Handles governance issues like budget and project structure as well.
3. Consensus-based decision-making ensures that all voices are heard.
4. 6 members with full voting:
   • 2 appointed by community for engineering and outreach project areas,
   • 2 elected by community at large, and
   • 2 appointed and paid by Red Hat (FPL and FCAI).

1. 4-6 members with binding votes in areas related to their role:
   • 2-4 appointed by the Council
   • 1 hired by Red Hat, and
   • 1 appointed by the Council