Fedora Board Meeting, 2011 04 05
- Secretary: Jared Smith
- Meeting Type: Phone
Attendance
Present:
- Tom Callaway
- Jared Smith
- Jon Stanley
- David Nalley
- Jaroslav Reznik
- Toshio Kuratomi
- Stephen Smoogen
Not Present:
- Joerg Simon (regards)
- Máirín Duffy (regards)
- Rex Dieter (regards)
Agenda
- Updates
- Review of SXSW
- FPCA update
Notes/Summary
Updates
- Fedora 16 release schedule
- Beta freeze, 100% feature complete date
- Slipped a week due to NetworkManager 0.9 coming in late.
- Infrastructure went into freeze today until the day after Beta releases
- Update on FUDCon {LATAM/EMEA/APAC?} status
- FUDCon Panama going well
- Subsidy request meetings have happened, ticket buying has commenced
- FUDCon EMEA
- FAmSCo met on Sataturday, selected Milan as the winning bid
- FAMSCo talking with ambassadors to try to find a group of people who want to organize one in APAC
- North American bids:
- Next week is the wrap up of bids, then FAMSCo will go through bids
- Currently two bids -- Virginia Tech (Blacksburg, VA) and Olin (outside Boston, MA)
- Editor's note -- there's now a third bid for Las Vegas, NV
- Next week is the wrap up of bids, then FAMSCo will go through bids
- FUDCon Panama going well
Summary: Jared updated the Board on release schedule and FUDCon events
Review of SXSW
- Review of SXSW situation
- Budget
- where did the money come from?
- Media -- CommArch discretionary fund (use it or lose it)
- Travel -- RH and Opensource.com
- Booth -- Fedora Ambassadors Regional (FAMNa) (~$2K), RH
- Max has updated: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/SXSW_2011#Budget
- How much money did we spend? (And how can we do with less money if we did something like this again?)
- Other funding sources aren't listed (RH, opensource.com)
- Give away for nice wacom (but a lot of people weren't interested in)
- Didn't know how much media to need: bought 5K disks but may only need 2K disks
- where did the money come from?
- Learning
- Some things we didn't need (see above)
- Learned about what having a booth at the event was like
- Spin/Media Policies
- History
- Kickstart wasn't reviewed (mostly pruning for CD size, ex: email clients)
- History
- Budget
- Policy problems
- GPL compliance -- label says that you can get from everything repo
- cwickert remembers that spot had a discussion with him about this but spot doesn't recall that.
- Spot: Need to clarify what's necessary (discuss w/ cwickert & public -- publish as larger standard)
- Spin made with updates repo
- Smooge unsure whether we've kept things that were updates repo but were superceded
- Spot/smooge/nirik: Find out what's been purged in koji and create a policy
- Spot will make sure that every rpm that's on the CD is kept as well
- Spot also explains that following the GPL requirements is the worst case (ie: those packages that are not GPL do not *strictly* require source to be distributed)
- cwickert remembers that spot had a discussion with him about this but spot doesn't recall that.
- kickstart not in git repo (are avail on Spot's Fedora People page)
- kickstart is small changes, mostly
- Possible ideas
- Clarify the policy to define what "approval" means (from rel-eng, design team, QA, etc.) Public meeting, ticket, one person, etc?
- Modify test execution and timing (Test plan must be executed by someone and reviewed by another person who is on the QA team with sufficient time for remediation)
- Clarify whether previously-approved spins need to file QA test plans, get trademark approval, etc.
- Clarify and/or remove the scheduling requirement, and instead make it part of Rel-eng's approval
- Clarify and/or remove the Corresponding source requirement (if koji satisfies this)
- Clarification of what constitutes a new spin (SXSW based on design spin... is it new or not?)
- Clarification of what constitutes a "spin" (ec2 images? install image?)
- Clarify the policy to define what "approval" means (from rel-eng, design team, QA, etc.) Public meeting, ticket, one person, etc?
- Possible ideas
- PROPOSAL: Get rid of our rules and give the "checklist" to each group
- ie: If you get signoff from QA, design team, spin sig, and rel-eng then the Board will review
- What if one of those four becomes obstructionist? -- then it comes to Board
- Each group documents their approval process
- Process must include opening a ticket and posting approval in the ticket
- Board needs to define "When need for approval is triggered"?
- Scope is limited to something that is intended to run or install the distribution
- Possible examples of problems:
- RH Summit spin: custom artwork, updates tree, and custom content on the desktop
- Spins for each new Fedora release
- PROPOSAL: Get rid of our rules and give the "checklist" to each group
- Proposal will be discussed in 12 April 2011 IRC meeting
- Spot formally apologizes for any violations of the policy. It was not his intent
Summary: Various concerns were expressed about how the SXSW event was organized, and several ideas were discussed on how to provide better transparency, especially with regards to media creation. A proposal was made to create a checklist for approval from various groups within Fedora. The proposal will be discussed in the public IRC meeting on 4/12
FPCA Update
- FPCA update
- FAS is being updated for all new people sign the FPCA, not the CLA
- This is going to stg this week, pushed to production after the Beta freeze
- Initially, transition period: new people get FPCA. CLA signers, reminded to sign FPCA, either CLA or FPCA signing equivalent
- After transition period, CLA signers who have not signed the FPCA will lose groups (that depend on CLA), fedorapeople, email aliases.
- Transition period currently set at ~3months
- Will run packager and ambassador metrics to determine if we need to extend the transition
- Will look for ways to not strip group memberships but it may not be easy to do that; people may need to reapply for all lost groups
- https://fedorahosted.org/fedora-infrastructure/ticket/2481
- FAS is being updated for all new people sign the FPCA, not the CLA
Next Meeting
Next meeting: IRC meeting on Tuesday, April 12