*Originally posted on Fedora Discussion <https://discussion.fedoraproject.org/t/fedora-council-statement-on-the-future-of-community-initiatives-and-the-ai-developer-desktop-proposal/195402>.*
*TL;DNR: Effective immediately, the Fedora Council is proposing we pause the Community Initiatives process as an official project process. A replacement process will need to be designed, in time, with community input. Existing approved Initiatives will continue to run their scheduled term.* The Fedora Council would like to close the discussion regarding the AI developer desktop proposal, as we have come to the conclusion that the current community initiatives process is ineffective and therefore this work should not be proposed through this mechanism. When/if the AI Desktop work matures, it can follow our current path to becoming an official offering, whether through a proposal as a Remix or otherwise, namely first filing a Council ticket for trademark/branding approval followed by a Change Proposal for FESCo technical review. Until those steps occur, this remains an independent exploration rather than an official Fedora offering. We would like to encourage the proposer and those interested in this work to consider working on this anyway in and for Fedora. This includes having an open space to talk about the work, holding meetings, and collaborating with other groups, such as the AI/ML SIG, that have similar or the same interests. Fedora is such a wonderful project *because* we have so much choice. Should we someday add an AI developer desktop as a Fedora offering, we expect it will be inline with the project's Four Foundations <https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/#_what_is_fedora_all_about>. This would certainly add another interesting flavour to our already diverse ecosystem. The Fedora Objectives/Initiatives framework was never intended as a mandatory prerequisite to do the work in Fedora. It supposed to help by focusing the community on a certain work when needed, not to decide what is allowed. The AI developer desktop initiative proposal highlighted that the Community Initiatives process has failed to serve as a good framework in Fedora where new ideas can surface, receive respectful feedback, and gain Council support for work that fits the project's present and/or future. This is something that the Council must address. As a first step, we would like to halt the community initiative process immediately. Existing initiatives in flight (Fedora Forge, Atomic, and Fedora Docs 2026) will continue with full Council backing. Their underlying work will be completed as planned in their current timeboxed state, though the administrative framework around them may evolve. As a second step, we would like to work out a new mechanism to allow Council to set strategic direction in an open, transparent way that more intentionally includes the community voice. We recognise that we have to be better at being more open in our discussions and decision making. Part of this work will involve addressing our implict social norms. Currently, a lot of great work, happens under the radar before official approval processes kick in. While our current approval pipeline (Council trademark review, then FESCo change proposal) works well, we are missing early and inclusive discussion for everyone across the project. We want to bring these ideas and this work to light at the beginning, where the community can discuss them, so they can be championed earlier (and attract more contributors!). To that effect, Council will be looking at the Initiatives Lifecycle or 'sandbox' proposal <https://discussion.fedoraproject.org/t/a-modest-proposal-a-technology-innovation-lifecycle-process-for-fedora/182435> closely, as this may have potential to be either a better way, or be complimentary to another process we may develop, that can surface these initiative-style ideas and work items in Fedora early. Your feedback on this proposal is most welome so we can try to understand how the Fedora Community needs these kinds of processes to behave to be successful. Council intends to return to the conversation of whether Community initiatives should be retired or revamped once this discussion has reached some kind of conclusion. — Aoife, on behalf of the Fedora Council. -- *Justin Wheeler* (*he/him*) || 📧 [email protected] || 🔗 jwheel.org *Formerly Justin W. Flory* *Fedora* Community Architect TZ=America/Atlanta (UTC-4) 🕗 *Fedora is a registered Digital Public Good <https://app.digitalpublicgoods.net/a/12003>* While I may be sending this email outside my normal office hours, I have no expectation to receive a reply outside yours.
-- _______________________________________________ devel-announce mailing list -- [email protected] To unsubscribe send an email to [email protected] Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/[email protected] Do not reply to spam, report it: https://forge.fedoraproject.org/infra/tickets/issues/new
