From Fedora Project Wiki
Meeting Summary
- FIXME poelcat 01:07, 24 June 2009 (UTC)
#fedora-board-meeting log
| stickster | <meeting> | 04 Jun 13:00 |
|---|---|---|
| stickster | Roll call? | 04 Jun 13:00 |
| mdomsch | present and accounted for | 04 Jun 13:00 |
| notting | 04 Jun 13:01 | |
| * notting is here | 04 Jun 13:01 | |
| f13 | 04 Jun 13:01 | |
| * f13 none | 04 Jun 13:01 | |
| ctyler | 04 Jun 13:03 | |
| * ctyler here | 04 Jun 13:03 | |
| skvidal | 04 Jun 13:03 | |
| * skvidal is here | 04 Jun 13:03 | |
| stickster | I've pinged a couple people who should be here in a moment. | 04 Jun 13:03 |
| --- ChanServ (ChanServ@services.) changed mode: +v spot | 04 Jun 13:04 | |
| stickster | There's spot | 04 Jun 13:04 |
| stickster | caillon should be here in a moment | 04 Jun 13:04 |
| stickster | Harald doesn't seem to be online | 04 Jun 13:04 |
| stickster | Nor glezos | 04 Jun 13:04 |
| stickster | OK, let's proceed. | 04 Jun 13:05 |
| stickster | The first item on our agenda is set for 20 minutes | 04 Jun 13:05 |
| stickster | Followup on the mailing list moderation proposal. | 04 Jun 13:05 |
| stickster | I wanted to ensure that we had some sort of consensus on implementation | 04 Jun 13:06 |
| stickster | I show 4 items left to address: | 04 Jun 13:06 |
| stickster | 1. Public vs. private warnings | 04 Jun 13:06 |
| stickster | 2. Whether and how moderators are identified per action | 04 Jun 13:07 |
| --- ChanServ (ChanServ@services.) changed mode: +v caillon | 04 Jun 13:07 | |
| stickster | 3. Whether there's a requirement to record complaints or action taken | 04 Jun 13:07 |
| stickster | I showed a fourth, "use of a moderation FAS account," but honestly I think that's really part of #2. | 04 Jun 13:07 |
| stickster | Can we take each of these in turn and barrel through, stopping at ~1725 UTC? | 04 Jun 13:08 |
| mdomsch | good plan | 04 Jun 13:08 |
| stickster | OK, starting with #1, let's have at it. | 04 Jun 13:08 |
| mdomsch | [1] private +1 | 04 Jun 13:08 |
| ctyler | (1) Private warnings (3) Yes, if someone gets multiple warnings, there should be a record of it that's private to moderators so that a new moderator can see history | 04 Jun 13:08 |
| skvidal | 1. private warnings | 04 Jun 13:08 |
| skvidal | 2. if the moderators are comfortable being known, then so be it. | 04 Jun 13:08 |
| notting | i'd agree - private warnings - no need to start public flamewars | 04 Jun 13:09 |
| f13 | 1 private warnings. | 04 Jun 13:09 |
| stickster | My take on this was that public warnings are good, but after seeing other people's reflections I realize the bad outweighs the good. | 04 Jun 13:09 |
| skvidal | 3. having all the moderators cc a private list on what they've said sounds fair for later use | 04 Jun 13:09 |
| notting | 3. there should be a referable record | 04 Jun 13:09 |
| f13 | 2. I have no real input here, I guess I'd leave it up to the moderator. | 04 Jun 13:09 |
| stickster | The list members should be trusted to provide feedback viz. #1. | 04 Jun 13:09 |
| mdomsch | [2] moderator should use their name, not come from "a group" | 04 Jun 13:09 |
| mdomsch | skvidal: agreed | 04 Jun 13:10 |
| f13 | 3. referable record. | 04 Jun 13:10 |
| ctyler | question on (1) -- if a private person whines publicly, are the moderators free to publicly state why they were warned? i.e., if you make it public, it's fully public? | 04 Jun 13:10 |
| stickster | ctyler: I'd agree with that. | 04 Jun 13:10 |
| mdomsch | ctyler, yes | 04 Jun 13:10 |
| stickster | It's not a secret police action. | 04 Jun 13:10 |
| spot | sure | 04 Jun 13:10 |
| notting | ctyler: don't see why not | 04 Jun 13:10 |
| skvidal | ctyler: you call someone outin public , you should expect to be slapped in public :) | 04 Jun 13:10 |
| stickster | We are trying to be tactful and discreet, not hide what we're doing. | 04 Jun 13:10 |
| mdomsch | stickster, exactly | 04 Jun 13:11 |
| skvidal | stickster: wait, this isn't a secret police action? B/c I liked that aspect of it | 04 Jun 13:11 |
| f13 | ctyler: seems natural, but as I stated on list, I don't want to see the lists become a venue for arguments over moderations | 04 Jun 13:11 |
| * stickster notes that by "we" he means "the group of people charged with moderating," of which he may not be one. | 04 Jun 13:11 | |
| skvidal | 04 Jun 13:11 | |
| * skvidal was looking forward to the long leather jacket | 04 Jun 13:11 | |
| ctyler | f13: agreed | 04 Jun 13:11 |
| * stickster hands skvidal a black armband and motions him out to his squad car | 04 Jun 13:11 | |
| skvidal | so a recommendation | 04 Jun 13:11 |
| notting | as for #2... i'd agree that it should be left up to the moderators, but they should probably pick a consistent policy among themselves | 04 Jun 13:11 |
| skvidal | someone is an ass on f-d-l | 04 Jun 13:11 |
| ctyler | notting: +1 | 04 Jun 13:12 |
| skvidal | a moderator says - you were an ass you're messages are moderated and held for approval by the moderators for the next week - non-ass messages will be approved | 04 Jun 13:12 |
| skvidal | the person sends a non-ass-being but off-topic msg to the same list ranting about the moderation | 04 Jun 13:12 |
| mdomsch | in a similar vein: whenever a new mirror asks to sign up, they mail mirror-admin@fp.o; a person (me or Adrian generally) responds directly, leaving mirror-admin@fp.o on cc:. | 04 Jun 13:13 |
| mdomsch | so there is a record | 04 Jun 13:13 |
| skvidal | if I were a moderator, I would not let the message through and suggest that the person rant elsewhere | 04 Jun 13:13 |
| stickster | mdomsch: +1. | 04 Jun 13:13 |
| f13 | skvidal: I would agree with that | 04 Jun 13:13 |
| ctyler | skvidal: week? I thought we were talking 1-2 days | 04 Jun 13:13 |
| skvidal | ctyler: s/week/whatever-time-you-like/ | 04 Jun 13:13 |
| skvidal | ctyler: it's an example - the time is not important | 04 Jun 13:13 |
| caillon | lets do it in the gregorian calendar! | 04 Jun 13:14 |
| mdomsch | UTC-15 | 04 Jun 13:14 |
| ctyler | I think the duration is important in two ways: it affects the perceived weight of the warning, and it affects the moderator workload | 04 Jun 13:14 |
| stickster | As for #2, I feel that if the list of moderators is not known, we'd need a check. Moderators doing their work individually and openly is well and good. | 04 Jun 13:14 |
| stickster | Excuse me, I meant to say: | 04 Jun 13:15 |
| skvidal | ctyler: my example was only to talk about keeping messages about the moderation off of the list b/c they are offtopic | 04 Jun 13:15 |
| stickster | If the identity of an individual moderator from the *known list of moderators* is not known.... | 04 Jun 13:15 |
| ctyler | skvidal: yes, I get that, and agree | 04 Jun 13:15 |
| stickster | Is there anyone who disagrees with skvidal's suggestion, timelines aside? | 04 Jun 13:15 |
| spot | i'm fine with it. | 04 Jun 13:16 |
| stickster | OK, I take the lack of disagreement as consensus :-) | 04 Jun 13:16 |
| stickster | So far I have captured that: | 04 Jun 13:17 |
| f13 | no no means yes | 04 Jun 13:17 |
| stickster | heh | 04 Jun 13:17 |
| skvidal | f13: yes, silence is consent - classy | 04 Jun 13:17 |
| f13 | in a vacuum, nobody can hear you scream | 04 Jun 13:17 |
| notting | f13: no one can hear when you're screaming in digital? | 04 Jun 13:17 |
| skvidal | is that b/c the vacuum is very noisy when it is running? | 04 Jun 13:17 |
| spot | the aliens always hear you. | 04 Jun 13:18 |
| skvidal | oh - not THAT kind of vacuum | 04 Jun 13:18 |
| ctyler | question that hopefully will never matter: should we generalize this policy to include the planet? i.e., being decidedly non-excellent on the planet leads to suspension of feed? | 04 Jun 13:18 |
| f13 | 04 Jun 13:18 | |
| * f13 moderates everybody due to off-topic. | 04 Jun 13:18 | |
| skvidal | ctyler: no | 04 Jun 13:18 |
| spot | ctyler: i don't think we can moderate the planet. | 04 Jun 13:18 |
| ctyler | 04 Jun 13:18 | |
| * ctyler screams digitally 0100100100111011010011001010100111101010010010101 | 04 Jun 13:18 | |
| f13 | ctyler: no, the planet is less .... structured. | 04 Jun 13:18 |
| f13 | it's a read at your own risk kind of deal | 04 Jun 13:18 |
| stickster | The planet somewhat relies on people's self publishing | 04 Jun 13:18 |
| mdomsch | and impossible to drop single items from a feed | 04 Jun 13:18 |
| skvidal | mdomsch: indeed | 04 Jun 13:18 |
| skvidal | mdomsch: though I have thought about that a bit :-/ | 04 Jun 13:19 |
| f13 | that said, if you see somebody being an ass on planet, feel free to let them know | 04 Jun 13:19 |
| stickster | And it edges a little too close to the "speak your mind" rule. Posts that contain something illegal are one thing. There are talkbacks for everything else. | 04 Jun 13:19 |
| caillon | by being an ass right back | 04 Jun 13:19 |
| skvidal | mdomsch: having the feed generation be more database-y so you could tag a message as 'non post' | 04 Jun 13:19 |
| caillon | oh wait | 04 Jun 13:19 |
| mdomsch | skvidal, that's because at your heart you're really a censor in disguise | 04 Jun 13:19 |
| skvidal | mdomsch: oh my gosh yes. I like the quiet | 04 Jun 13:19 |
| ctyler | agreed that we don't want to censor planet, but a long non-excellent series of posts is quite possible | 04 Jun 13:19 |
| stickster | I would really like it if people could continue the practice of being excellent to each other on the Planet. | 04 Jun 13:20 |
| skvidal | mdomsch: I'm especially trying to keep the MAN from using his gnome-bias against me | 04 Jun 13:20 |
| stickster | And I feel that the community ought to encourage it. | 04 Jun 13:20 |
| mdomsch | stickster, I think that's generally true; in the few cases where that hasn't been, they've been handled privately | 04 Jun 13:20 |
| notting | but you can't be off-topic on the planet, so i don't think you should moderate it | 04 Jun 13:20 |
| mdomsch | and that's workd | 04 Jun 13:20 |
| skvidal | notting: true | 04 Jun 13:21 |
| stickster | OK guys, let me summarize at this point | 04 Jun 13:21 |
| stickster | 1. Warnings are private. If a moderated person takes feedback to another venue publicly, moderators can respond publicly, preferably in a noninflammatory fashion. | 04 Jun 13:21 |
| stickster | 2. Moderators can do their work individually, but should cc: <somewhere> to make a record. | 04 Jun 13:21 |
| stickster | Actually, that nails 2 and 3 if I'm reading this right. | 04 Jun 13:22 |
| --- ChanServ (ChanServ@services.) changed mode: +v caillon_ | 04 Jun 13:22 | |
| stickster | At what point does moderation become something more serious? | 04 Jun 13:22 |
| stickster | Should that matter be elevated to the Board? | 04 Jun 13:23 |
| stickster | And is it purely up to the moderator when to do that? | 04 Jun 13:23 |
| f13 | well, constant failure to come back in line should be brought to the board's attention | 04 Jun 13:23 |
| skvidal | but it doesn't HAVE to be right away | 04 Jun 13:23 |
| f13 | if moderation isn't working, escalate | 04 Jun 13:23 |
| notting | given i hope we'd never need to enact it, i think referring to the board is simpler than attempting to define something now to handle every contingency | 04 Jun 13:24 |
| stickster | Right, we really want moderation to be a sort of cool-down and lifted as soon as practicable. | 04 Jun 13:24 |
| skvidal | notting: nod | 04 Jun 13:24 |
| f13 | stickster: sounds right | 04 Jun 13:24 |
| ctyler | Repeated moderations or high volume of non-excellence during moderation both point toward escalation | 04 Jun 13:24 |
| stickster | I would hope (and, optimistically, expect) that we would rather not get to that "what if" situation. | 04 Jun 13:24 |
| stickster | But I feel like making a bunch of policy about what to do at that point is almost like shirking a responsibility. | 04 Jun 13:25 |
| stickster | I feel that we as a Board would want to take that (hopefully very rare) situation on a case by case basis. | 04 Jun 13:26 |
| f13 | yeah | 04 Jun 13:26 |
| mdomsch | agreed | 04 Jun 13:26 |
| skvidal | how about this | 04 Jun 13:26 |
| ctyler | yes | 04 Jun 13:26 |
| skvidal | no policy - unless there are chronic problems | 04 Jun 13:26 |
| stickster | I think Seth is right. | 04 Jun 13:26 |
| skvidal | we don't have to make it perfect right away | 04 Jun 13:26 |
| mdomsch | if it's chronic, we have bigger problems | 04 Jun 13:26 |
| stickster | Exactly. | 04 Jun 13:26 |
| stickster | And the Board is also responsible for watching the moderators, of course. | 04 Jun 13:27 |
| stickster | It's not a set-and-forget process. | 04 Jun 13:27 |
| skvidal | nod | 04 Jun 13:27 |
| stickster | OK, I feel like we arrived at the answers we needed. Followup to fedora-advisory-board@redhat.com is fine and encouraged. | 04 Jun 13:27 |
| ctyler | Hopefully moderation will be used only a couple times per year if at all, and the warnings will be effective. I hope it's rare enough that people forget the procedure and have to look back at the wiki to remember. | 04 Jun 13:27 |
| stickster | Can we hit the next item? | 04 Jun 13:27 |
| skvidal | nod | 04 Jun 13:28 |
| stickster | ctyler: +1 | 04 Jun 13:28 |
| mdomsch | roll | 04 Jun 13:28 |
| skvidal | tide | 04 Jun 13:28 |
| stickster | OK, the second item for 10 minutes | 04 Jun 13:28 |
| stickster | Board approval of changes to the succession wiki page | 04 Jun 13:28 |
| stickster | https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-advisory-board/2009-June/msg00004.html | 04 Jun 13:28 |
| skvidal | sure | 04 Jun 13:28 |
| spot | +1 | 04 Jun 13:28 |
| stickster | and http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Board/SuccessionPlanning | 04 Jun 13:28 |
| f13 | +1 | 04 Jun 13:29 |
| stickster | 1s are fine, or any feedback as well | 04 Jun 13:29 |
| ctyler | +1 | 04 Jun 13:29 |
| notting | +1 | 04 Jun 13:29 |
| * stickster should have sent a link out with the history diff | 04 Jun 13:30 | |
| mdomsch | =1 | 04 Jun 13:30 |
| mdomsch | +1 that is | 04 Jun 13:30 |
| caillon | +√1 | 04 Jun 13:30 |
| notting | stickster: http://fedoraproject.org/w/index.php?title=Board%2FSuccessionPlanning&diff=105274&oldid=17685 | 04 Jun 13:30 |
| stickster | caillon: Nice :-) | 04 Jun 13:30 |
| stickster | OK, I think that's unanimous vote by all present. | 04 Jun 13:31 |
| stickster | That's >2/3, which means the changes are approved. | 04 Jun 13:31 |
| stickster | I want to particularly thank inode0 for helping eagle-eye the text where needed. | 04 Jun 13:31 |
| mdomsch | hear hear | 04 Jun 13:31 |
| stickster | The point of the changes was to emphasize that the Board is not some artificial split of Red Hat vs. volunteers. | 04 Jun 13:31 |
| stickster | And also to add a handler for the (again hopefully rare) case where we don't get enough nominations to fill the open elected seats. | 04 Jun 13:32 |
| stickster | So, that wraps up that one. | 04 Jun 13:32 |
| stickster | Wow, we're efficient today! Thanks for bearing with my whip-cracking, guys. :-) | 04 Jun 13:32 |
| mdomsch | hasn't happened yet, though nominations tend to come in at the last minute :-) | 04 Jun 13:32 |
| stickster | Exactly. | 04 Jun 13:32 |
| stickster | And unless someone has something else dire, I think that brings us to Q&A! | 04 Jun 13:33 |
| f13 | quack | 04 Jun 13:33 |
| stickster | I'll have you know I have a license to practice | 04 Jun 13:34 |
| mdomsch | while waiting on questions; let me note: I'm quite pleased we had such a large turnout for the FESCo and Board nominations | 04 Jun 13:34 |
| stickster | Not only that, but the town halls as well | 04 Jun 13:35 |
| mdomsch | 5 for board (3 slots); 11 for FESCo (5 slots) | 04 Jun 13:35 |
| mdomsch | yeah, >40 people for those each | 04 Jun 13:35 |
| f13 | do we have any q's? | 04 Jun 13:35 |
| notting | stickster: who's our question-gathering moderator today? | 04 Jun 13:35 |
| stickster | While we may have had a couple "oldie moldie" questions in the town hall meetings, there were many new ones too. | 04 Jun 13:35 |
| stickster | notting: I am | 04 Jun 13:35 |
| --- ChanServ (ChanServ@services.) changed mode: +o stickster | 04 Jun 13:35 | |
| --- stickster (n=paul@fedora/stickster) changed mode: +v jjmcd | 04 Jun 13:35 | |
| jjmcd | I was wondering whether there is a feeling that the muiltiple delays are due to too ambitious a feature set | 04 Jun 13:36 |
| stickster | jjmcd: I'm not sure your question is 100% Board-relevant, but you're clear to ask anyway :-) | 04 Jun 13:36 |
| notting | in the case of Fedora 11... probably, yes. | 04 Jun 13:36 |
| jjmcd | But it would be good to hear the perceptions | 04 Jun 13:36 |
| caillon | jjmcd, some of it was actually due to mirrors requesting a delay | 04 Jun 13:37 |
| mdomsch | 04 Jun 13:37 | |
| * mdomsch gets nervous whenever he hears "complete rewrite of..." in regard to a release-critical feature | 04 Jun 13:37 | |
| f13 | caillon: I don't think that actually played into our decision to slip | 04 Jun 13:37 |
| stickster | mdomsch: agreed. | 04 Jun 13:37 |
| skvidal | jjmcd: I don't think it is too ambitious of a feature set - it was a difficulty in punting when the drop-dead date showed up | 04 Jun 13:37 |
| skvidal | back pre-beta | 04 Jun 13:37 |
| skvidal | it was hard to punt the feature | 04 Jun 13:37 |
| f13 | jjmcd: over ambitions, maybe. Although at least at some level we knew some things were going to risk the end game. | 04 Jun 13:37 |
| mdomsch | regardless of how good the engineers are to accomplish said feature | 04 Jun 13:37 |
| skvidal | but it wasn't cooked yet | 04 Jun 13:37 |
| f13 | anaconda and KMS were really risky things, but very high value as well | 04 Jun 13:37 |
| f13 | so we accepted the risk, knowing full well that it may lead to slips | 04 Jun 13:38 |
| jjmcd | Coming from big corp IT it is still pretty amazing | 04 Jun 13:38 |
| mdomsch | f13 good point | 04 Jun 13:38 |
| stickster | Overall the storage rewrite is going to make future Fedora that much more flexible. | 04 Jun 13:38 |
| f13 | (and fixable) | 04 Jun 13:38 |
| stickster | 1. | 04 Jun 13:38 |
| --- stickster (n=paul@fedora/stickster) changed mode: -v jjmcd | 04 Jun 13:39 | |
| spot | 04 Jun 13:39 | |
| * spot nods in agreement | 04 Jun 13:39 | |
| --- stickster (n=paul@fedora/stickster) changed mode: +v jwb | 04 Jun 13:39 | |
| jwb | has the board considered my request for use of the existing ppc builders for a secondary arch effort? | 04 Jun 13:39 |
| f13 | jjmcd: this cycle has exposed some weak points in our development process, which I hope to address in next week's FAD | 04 Jun 13:39 |
| notting | f13: and then we can try and quantify the value lost in the slip vs the value gained in having the feature in earlier | 04 Jun 13:39 |
| notting | jwb: Oops. | 04 Jun 13:39 |
| skvidal | jwb: were waiting until you're on the board for you to solve it | 04 Jun 13:39 |
| notting | jwb: (i.e., not yet) | 04 Jun 13:39 |
| f13 | jwb: not yet | 04 Jun 13:39 |
| stickster | Election rigging! POLICE! | 04 Jun 13:40 |
| caillon | skvidal, hey, don't give away that we're stacking the election | 04 Jun 13:40 |
| skvidal | jwb: or better yet for when you're on the board so the board can say "conflict of interest" and punt ppc further | 04 Jun 13:40 |
| f13 | I think we were waiting for FESCo's decision on PPC, and then forgot to bring it back to the table. | 04 Jun 13:40 |
| mdomsch | where's our item-tracking wunderbar secretary? | 04 Jun 13:40 |
| jwb | humbly requesting again. i realize they will likely need to be split to cope with f11 and f12 | 04 Jun 13:40 |
| jwb | stickster, move on :) | 04 Jun 13:40 |
| --- stickster (n=paul@fedora/stickster) changed mode: -v jwb | 04 Jun 13:41 | |
| mdomsch | I don't see a reason _not_ to grant such | 04 Jun 13:41 |
| stickster | As you wish! | 04 Jun 13:41 |
| stickster | I'll make sure this gets added to our schedule for next week. | 04 Jun 13:41 |
| --- stickster (n=paul@fedora/stickster) changed mode: +v abadger1999 | 04 Jun 13:41 | |
| ctyler | 04 Jun 13:42 | |
| * ctyler thinks secondary arch may be more important as non-x86 netbooks gain momentum, which may eventually expose the server space to more alternate CPU designs as well | 04 Jun 13:42 | |
| f13 | mdomsch: the big thing is if we say yes to PPC, why wouldn't we host ia64 builders? | 04 Jun 13:42 |
| notting | f13: one time "well, we already have the hardware" exception, i would expect | 04 Jun 13:42 |
| caillon | abadger1999, in case you didn't notice, it's your turn ;) | 04 Jun 13:42 |
| f13 | notting: that's my thought on it too. | 04 Jun 13:42 |
| ctyler | f13: for PPC, it's existing equipment | 04 Jun 13:42 |
| mdomsch | f13, it shouldn't be a requirement for Infra to host secondary items; but if they can, great. | 04 Jun 13:42 |
| abadger1999 | What does the Board feel their role is in deciding what packages/pieces of packages can be in Fedora Repositories? | 04 Jun 13:43 |
| * stickster thinks abadger1999 is making sure we're done with this topic :-) | 04 Jun 13:43 | |
| stickster | or not :-D | 04 Jun 13:43 |
| mdomsch | that would also be subject to Infra _continuing_ to have the ability to host those builders | 04 Jun 13:43 |
| stickster | I feel like the Board has an overall role in making sure that Fedora maintains Fedora's ability to be redistributed | 04 Jun 13:43 |
| mdomsch | if for some reason they couldn't, they wouldn't be required to | 04 Jun 13:43 |
| skvidal | abadger1999: the roll feels to me like an appeal court for relatively insoluble issues at fesco and the fpc | 04 Jun 13:44 |
| stickster | oops, I overused the word "Fedora." | 04 Jun 13:44 |
| ctyler | abadger1999: I think the board sets high-level policy (e.g., guidelines for legal reasons, overall direction), FESCo sets technical policy and enforces the high level policy. | 04 Jun 13:44 |
| notting | the board is responsible for the long term success/health of the project; as such, they're certainly responsible for setting legal practices, and probably the best body for setting any non-legal practices as well. (defining the audience, if it is so decided, etc.) | 04 Jun 13:45 |
| notting | for example, the firmware exception came from the board, not from fesco | 04 Jun 13:46 |
| f13 | also the board should be that "make the hard choice" place when FPL/FESCo can't agree on something. | 04 Jun 13:46 |
| stickster | I can't agree on it with myself? | 04 Jun 13:46 |
| mdomsch | we shouldn't be trying to mandate "taste", though some of the software noted recently has poor taste code-wise as well. | 04 Jun 13:47 |
| abadger1999 | So I'm wondering what constitutes high level policy -- does the Board feel like it should work through goals or through decrees? | 04 Jun 13:47 |
| abadger1999 | firmware exception is a decree. | 04 Jun 13:47 |
| skvidal | I like either of them | 04 Jun 13:47 |
| skvidal | decree == stick | 04 Jun 13:47 |
| skvidal | goal == carrot | 04 Jun 13:47 |
| notting | abadger1999: well, it was a decree that came about due to a goal | 04 Jun 13:47 |
| notting | abadger1999: just to muddy the waters further | 04 Jun 13:47 |
| f13 | stickster: FPC sorry | 04 Jun 13:47 |
| stickster | f13: heh, np | 04 Jun 13:47 |
| abadger1999 | notting: Right. But it could have been stated as a goal and left to others to formulate how to actually implement it. | 04 Jun 13:47 |
| ctyler | abadger1999: feels like there's a question lurking under your question :-) | 04 Jun 13:48 |
| abadger1999 | That's kinda what I'm asking. | 04 Jun 13:48 |
| f13 | it probably would have been better if the board stuck to the goal | 04 Jun 13:48 |
| f13 | and left the decree up to the technical bodies | 04 Jun 13:48 |
| f13 | the board isn't supposed to be a technical body | 04 Jun 13:48 |
| skvidal | and yet it sometimes needs to be | 04 Jun 13:48 |
| notting | abadger1999: hm... my memory may be failing me, but i believe the original policies prohibited firmware, the board looked at goal (make fedora more useable by everyone), decreed that firmware was now OK, and then did leave the implementation up to others | 04 Jun 13:48 |
| ctyler | "non-technical body" within a technical community is a bit hard to do | 04 Jun 13:48 |
| notting | (who may have been board members at the time) | 04 Jun 13:49 |
| f13 | ctyler: i guess it depends on your definition of "technical" | 04 Jun 13:49 |
| caillon | HALP I CANT FIND THE ANY KEY | 04 Jun 13:49 |
| f13 | I thought the board should be figuring out what we want to do, and the technical body like FESCo would figure out /how/ to do it | 04 Jun 13:49 |
| f13 | or the FPC, releng, etc... | 04 Jun 13:49 |
| notting | abadger1999: though it is interesting to note the guidelines say the final yay/nay vote on content inclusion (vis-a-vis code inclusion) is FESCo | 04 Jun 13:50 |
| abadger1999 | notting: I don't remember either.... But if the Board decrees firmware == ok, it's implementation. If the Board says, firmware is not software for the definition of "free software" | 04 Jun 13:50 |
| * stickster finds it's interesting this very question came up in a recent interview he did. | 04 Jun 13:50 | |
| abadger1999 | Err... sorry... I was erasing that, but hit return | 04 Jun 13:50 |
| mdomsch | in the case of firmware, the board had to make an exception to the "only free software" rule it had in place and FESCo had been enforcing, in order to accomplish the goal of it being usable anywhere. | 04 Jun 13:50 |
| f13 | I don't read it quite like that | 04 Jun 13:50 |
| abadger1999 | Was going to agree with notting instead :-) | 04 Jun 13:51 |
| ctyler | f13: agreed, but the lines are always a bit blurry. Frankly I think that can be pragmatic, and not a real problem. | 04 Jun 13:51 |
| f13 | abadger1999: "firmware must be in a package named -firmware and ....." is an implementation | 04 Jun 13:51 |
| stickster | "We disagree with lumping this blob in with code run on the CPU" is not. | 04 Jun 13:51 |
| --- stickster (n=paul@fedora/stickster) changed mode: -v abadger1999 | 04 Jun 13:52 | |
| mdomsch | 04 Jun 13:52 | |
| * mdomsch doesn't like the firmware example; it's quite dated now... | 04 Jun 13:52 | |
| stickster | yes. | 04 Jun 13:52 |
| stickster | But it saved us from saying gnaughty. | 04 Jun 13:52 |
| --- stickster (n=paul@fedora/stickster) changed mode: +v nirik | 04 Jun 13:52 | |
| f13 | *bonk* | 04 Jun 13:52 |
| ctyler | d'oh! | 04 Jun 13:52 |
| nirik | can the board talk a bit about the 'who is fedora for?' discussion they have been having? is that close to a endpoint? or is there much more to discuss? will there be an opening for outside the board feedback on that topic at some point? Also, how will newly elected people figure into this topic? | 04 Jun 13:53 |
| skvidal | nirik: not even remotely close to an endpoint | 04 Jun 13:53 |
| skvidal | 04 Jun 13:53 | |
| * skvidal tries to figure out how old he'll be when the board is finished | 04 Jun 13:53 | |
| ctyler | but good progress on some points | 04 Jun 13:53 |
| nirik | ok, good to know. It's hard to see that from minutes. | 04 Jun 13:53 |
| mdomsch | the target audience is "yes" :-) | 04 Jun 13:53 |
| notting | i believe spot was writing up a proposal for next week-ish | 04 Jun 13:53 |
| f13 | nirik: there are some conflicting ideas in the current board | 04 Jun 13:53 |
| f13 | and some proposals being drafted | 04 Jun 13:53 |
| spot | yeah, that hasn't happened yet. i need more hours in the day. | 04 Jun 13:54 |
| nirik | so the new board could further shape that discussion? | 04 Jun 13:54 |
| f13 | don't we all | 04 Jun 13:54 |
| spot | nirik: yes | 04 Jun 13:54 |
| f13 | nirik: or muddy it further | 04 Jun 13:54 |
| nirik | or change it. ;) | 04 Jun 13:54 |
| stickster | It feels like this topic is so vital for the community, but the Board is trying to make sure we are not alienating parts thereof. | 04 Jun 13:54 |
| f13 | I'm going to leak my thoughts here | 04 Jun 13:54 |
| stickster | I think there's generally agreement that "Fedora is not for your Aunt Tillie." | 04 Jun 13:54 |
| skvidal | f13: eww | 04 Jun 13:54 |
| spot | 04 Jun 13:54 | |
| * spot gets a mop | 04 Jun 13:54 | |
| f13 | Ideally we'd have one spin or one target that is THE target for Fedora | 04 Jun 13:54 |
| notting | that being said, if we end up rewriting the "who is fedora for" each 6 months with each new board, we're going to do irreparable harm to the project | 04 Jun 13:55 |
| f13 | anything we do gets measured against that target. If it helps, great. If it doesn't help, but doesn't hurt, great. If it hurts, we need special attention on what is being proposed to see if the hurt is outweighed by the good done elsewhere. | 04 Jun 13:55 |
| f13 | that's still very hand wavy | 04 Jun 13:56 |
| f13 | and since I'm on my way out of the board, who knows if that will be carried forward. | 04 Jun 13:56 |
| spot | f13: fwiw, that seems in line with what i was going to draft, except less hand-wavy | 04 Jun 13:56 |
| notting | f13: i'm sure someone will pick up the flag for you. | 04 Jun 13:56 |
| f13 | I do think the board is getting a better understanding at how defining a target will help the project | 04 Jun 13:56 |
| notting | whoops, i said flag | 04 Jun 13:56 |
| skvidal | notting: taiwanese flag | 04 Jun 13:56 |
| f13 | which is one of the harder parts | 04 Jun 13:57 |
| spot | 04 Jun 13:57 | |
| * spot moderates notting for trolling | 04 Jun 13:57 | |
| f13 | knowing what problem we're solving helps us solve the problem | 04 Jun 13:57 |
| stickster | One way we've talked about this recently is in the context of making sure that, if we have a definitive "more equal than others" approach to THE Fedora target, other groups should be somewhat freed up to explore other options | 04 Jun 13:57 |
| stickster | In other words, I think we're obligated to make sure that we are not imposing the restrictions of that target unnecessarily on SIGs or spins. | 04 Jun 13:58 |
| nirik | 04 Jun 13:58 | |
| * nirik nods. | 04 Jun 13:58 | |
| stickster | And by the same token, the things that SIG does can't inflict themselves on people using that central target as their entry point into Fedora. | 04 Jun 13:58 |
| notting | stickster: no Fedora dpkg sig? | 04 Jun 13:59 |
| stickster | Because if we break that experience, which presumably is what most people would get, we're cutting off our nose to spite our face. | 04 Jun 13:59 |
| --- stickster (n=paul@fedora/stickster) changed mode: -v notting | 04 Jun 13:59 | |
| --- stickster (n=paul@fedora/stickster) changed mode: +v notting | 04 Jun 13:59 | |
| stickster | ha! | 04 Jun 13:59 |
| notting | i'm sure there's probably a less drastic example to what you're suggesting | 04 Jun 14:00 |
| nirik | I still think fedora can and is for many people. It's fine to concentrate on some central theme, but should try whereever possible to not quash other themes if people are willing to work on them. | 04 Jun 14:00 |
| stickster | I agree. | 04 Jun 14:00 |
| --- stickster (n=paul@fedora/stickster) changed mode: -v nirik | 04 Jun 14:01 | |
| stickster | (with his concurrence) | 04 Jun 14:01 |
| f13 | I agree with nirik, so long as what other people are willing to work on don't risk the experience for our central theme | 04 Jun 14:02 |
| mdomsch | notting: you see febootstrap now in debian :-) | 04 Jun 14:02 |
| stickster | Right, I think abadger1999 said it well elsewhere when he mentioned "tradeoffs." | 04 Jun 14:02 |
| stickster | Which is a better expression than my nose-cutting example. | 04 Jun 14:03 |
| stickster | I think that's it for questions, Board members. | 04 Jun 14:03 |
| f13 | man, nothing good to lame duck... | 04 Jun 14:03 |
| spot | whee! | 04 Jun 14:03 |
| spot | 04 Jun 14:03 | |
| * spot runs away screaming | 04 Jun 14:03 | |
| ctyler | in a vacuum | 04 Jun 14:04 |
| stickster | Thanks very much for attending, both Board and community alike. | 04 Jun 14:04 |
| ctyler | Thank you all, good discussion. | 04 Jun 14:04 |
| * stickster notes that Board members have an important email in their box | 04 Jun 14:04 | |
| skvidal | oh dear | 04 Jun 14:04 |
| skvidal | 04 Jun 14:04 | |
| * skvidal looks | 04 Jun 14:04 | |
| skvidal | no, no I don't | 04 Jun 14:04 |
| stickster | I sent it out right before the meeting | 04 Jun 14:04 |
| skvidal | oh | 04 Jun 14:04 |
| skvidal | stickster: hey - when do I get kicked off the various lists? | 04 Jun 14:05 |
| stickster | Good question skvidal. Let me note that before we close | 04 Jun 14:05 |
| skvidal | ie: when is the official transition date from old board | 04 Jun 14:05 |
| stickster | The final Board appointment will happen around the time I'm in Berlin. | 04 Jun 14:05 |
| skvidal | umm | 04 Jun 14:05 |
| stickster | I would propose that the first meeting of the new Board will be the first or second week in July. | 04 Jun 14:05 |
| skvidal | can you use dates that are not relative to where you are? | 04 Jun 14:06 |
| skvidal | :) | 04 Jun 14:06 |
| stickster | skvidal: No. As you well know, the universe revolves around me. | 04 Jun 14:06 |
| skvidal | righto | 04 Jun 14:06 |
| stickster | But more seriously... | 04 Jun 14:06 |
| stickster | All I meant was that, I'll be sending that email from Berlin. | 04 Jun 14:06 |
| stickster | Does "first or second week in July" work for everyone still here? | 04 Jun 14:06 |
| skvidal | then I expect it to be sent w/a german accent | 04 Jun 14:06 |
| stickster | Schnell! | 04 Jun 14:07 |
| * stickster hears no one screaming in pain, so first or second week in July. | 04 Jun 14:07 | |
| stickster | In all honesty, I suspect that the first week in July will be a recovery week for me after spending ~22 days of June away from home. | 04 Jun 14:08 |
| stickster | I'll float this around to FAB for general knowledge. | 04 Jun 14:08 |
| stickster | All right, here endeth the meeting. Thank you everyone, and remember that the Board nominees for this election will be in the town hall meeting tonight/tomorrow morning at 0200 UTC, 10:00pm US-Eastern. | 04 Jun 14:09 |
| stickster | I believe inode0 is moderating at that session. | 04 Jun 14:09 |
| stickster | Until next time, be excellent to each other! ;-) | 04 Jun 14:09 |
| stickster | </meeting> | 04 Jun 14:09 |
Generated by irclog2html.py 2.6 by Marius Gedminas - find it at mg.pov.lt!