FAQ Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
» Video Reviews

» Linux Archive

Linux-archive is a website aiming to archive linux email lists and to make them easily accessible for linux users/developers.


» Sponsor

» Partners

» Sponsor

Go Back   Linux Archive > Redhat > Fedora Advisory Board

 
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
 
Old 02-01-2008, 09:30 PM
John Poelstra
 
Default Fedora Board Recap 2008-JAN-29

== Roll Call ==

Attendees: Max Spevack, Jef Spaleta, John Poelstra, Paul Frields, Steve
Dickson, Seth Vidal, Bill Nottingham, Chris Aillon, Dennis Gilmore,
Karsten Wade, and Matt Domsch


Regrets: Jack Aboutboul

== Followup to Unresolved Business ==

=== Red Hat Summit and FUDCon ===
* Max & Greg are tracking down all details going forward.
* One or both of them attend an internal weekly meeting to discuss
status

* Tentative dates for FUDCon will be Thurs, Friday, and Saturday
* FUDCon part of conference will be free
* Still working out details so that FUDCon attendees can visit Expo floor

=== Contributor satisfaction ===
* Schedule session for FUDCon in June
* Unclear what best means of obtaining constructive feedback is
* People remain free to comment on mailing lists

=== Board Goals For This Year ===
* Brainstorming to be moved to fedora-board-list
* Will revisit once Paul is underway as Fedora Project Leader
* ACTION: check back on status in one month
* OWNER: Paul Frields

=== fedoraproject.org mail ===
* Take steps to approach changes that were requested in the past
* Could we create a better start and search page for Fedora mailing list?
* ACTION: check back on status in one month
* OWNER: Dennis Gilmore

== New Business ==

=== Timeliness & Format of Board Minutes ===
* Will seek to alleviate concerns raised on
fedora-advisory-board-list@redhat.com by holding public meetings

* Once each month
* Targeted start date March 2008.
* ACTIONS:
* Talk to Mike McGrath and Infrastructure team to determine
technical hurdles

* Engage community to help overcome technical hurdles
* OWNER: Paul Frields

=== Job of the Fedora Board ===
* Discussion resulted from fedora-advisory-board-list thread
* Clarify roles and responsibilities of the board and make wiki pages
more specific

* ACTION: check back on status in one month
* OWNER: Paul Frields

=== Use of Fedora Name/Trademark ===
* What is required for a package or a project to carry the Fedora name?
* Need to publish guidelines on wiki
* OWNER: Max Spevack
* ACTION: post proposal to fedora-advisory-board-list

=== Can Fedora Allow Anonymous Contributors? ===
* Discussion resulted from fedora-advisory-board-list thread
* The Board agreed unanimously with the consensus from the f-a-b
discussion of why anonymity does not work for Fedora
1. The ability to redistribute content is dependent on being able to
affirm the intellectual property rights of all the people who have
touched that content.
1. The Fedora Project cannot guarantee to protect the identity of
users in the account system.
* Reference:
http://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-advisory-board/2008-January/msg00179.html


=== Post-release updates of custom spins ===
* Should the board have to approve them?
* We will hosts as many spins as we have space for
* Need to determine the hosting requirements and limits
* How long will spins stay around?
* ACTION: Request that Rahul Sundaram write a policy that would meet
his requirements and those of others

* OWNER: Jef Spaleta

=== Approving XFCE spin ===
* http://sundaram.fedorapeople.org/livecd-fedora-8-xfce.ks
* ACTION: Board needs to verify spin and post results to
fedora-advisory-list

* OWNER: Seth Vidal

== Future Business ==

=== Google Start Page Update ===
* Project changing ownership within Red Hat to Greg Dekoenigsberg
* Have Greg make presentation to Fedora Board in two weeks
* OWNER: Karsten Wade

=== Community Architecture Update ===
* Max Spevack

=== Next Meeting Time & Date ===
* Wednesday @ 12 PM EST, Feburary 6, 2008

_______________________________________________
fedora-advisory-board mailing list
fedora-advisory-board@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-advisory-board
 
Old 02-02-2008, 12:09 AM
Rahul Sundaram
 
Default Fedora Board Recap 2008-JAN-29

John Poelstra wrote:

* ACTION: Request that Rahul Sundaram write a policy that would meet
his requirements and those of others

* OWNER: Jef Spaleta


I have submitted a proposal now.


=== Approving XFCE spin ===
* http://sundaram.fedorapeople.org/livecd-fedora-8-xfce.ks
* ACTION: Board needs to verify spin and post results to
fedora-advisory-list

* OWNER: Seth Vidal


Isn't technical verification managed by rel-eng?

Rahul

_______________________________________________
fedora-advisory-board mailing list
fedora-advisory-board@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-advisory-board
 
Old 02-02-2008, 01:39 AM
Josh Boyer
 
Default Fedora Board Recap 2008-JAN-29

On Sat, 02 Feb 2008 06:39:59 +0530
Rahul Sundaram <sundaram@fedoraproject.org> wrote:

> > === Approving XFCE spin ===
> > * http://sundaram.fedorapeople.org/livecd-fedora-8-xfce.ks
> > * ACTION: Board needs to verify spin and post results to
> > fedora-advisory-list
> > * OWNER: Seth Vidal
>
> Isn't technical verification managed by rel-eng?

That depends on what you mean by "technical verification" I guess.
Ideally rel-eng would do this, yes. It won't scale though.
Particularly as more spins come along, and especially during
alpha/beta/preview/release times.

I see no reason to disallow other extended members of our technical
community to do verification.

josh

_______________________________________________
fedora-advisory-board mailing list
fedora-advisory-board@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-advisory-board
 
Old 02-02-2008, 01:48 AM
Josh Boyer
 
Default Fedora Board Recap 2008-JAN-29

On Fri, 01 Feb 2008 14:30:08 -0800
John Poelstra <poelstra@redhat.com> wrote:

> === Contributor satisfaction ===
> * Schedule session for FUDCon in June

That seems a bit late and a bit too exclusive to me.

> * Unclear what best means of obtaining constructive feedback is
> * People remain free to comment on mailing lists


>
> === Timeliness & Format of Board Minutes ===

I'd like to state that these minutes are improved from the ones in the
recent past. Thank you.

> * Will seek to alleviate concerns raised on
> fedora-advisory-board-list@redhat.com by holding public meetings
> * Once each month
> * Targeted start date March 2008.

Wonderful.

> * ACTIONS:
> * Talk to Mike McGrath and Infrastructure team to determine
> technical hurdles
> * Engage community to help overcome technical hurdles

Technical hurdles such as what? Every other SIG/Committee gets by with
public IRC meetings just fine...

> === Use of Fedora Name/Trademark ===
> * What is required for a package or a project to carry the Fedora name?
> * Need to publish guidelines on wiki
> * OWNER: Max Spevack
> * ACTION: post proposal to fedora-advisory-board-list

What about a relaxed trademark policy? Something like that could also
tie in with the subject below.

> === Post-release updates of custom spins ===
> * Should the board have to approve them?
> * We will hosts as many spins as we have space for

What determines priority? E.g. does a main secondary arch spin take
precedent over a language spin? Thoughts?

> * Need to determine the hosting requirements and limits
> * How long will spins stay around?

Suggestion: The EOL and are removed when the release they are based on
does.


> === Community Architecture Update ===
> * Max Spevack

Was there an update or is this something that is being added to the
Board's agenda in the future?

josh

_______________________________________________
fedora-advisory-board mailing list
fedora-advisory-board@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-advisory-board
 
Old 02-02-2008, 03:23 AM
John Poelstra
 
Default Fedora Board Recap 2008-JAN-29

Josh Boyer said the following on 02/01/2008 06:48 PM Pacific Time:


=== Community Architecture Update ===
* Max Spevack


Was there an update or is this something that is being added to the
Board's agenda in the future?



Yes, you cut out the primary heading which was "Future Business"

My apologies for leaving out the wiki link too... it is a little easier
on the eyes.

http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Board/Meetings/2008-01-29

John


_______________________________________________
fedora-advisory-board mailing list
fedora-advisory-board@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-advisory-board
 
Old 02-02-2008, 02:48 PM
"Karsten 'quaid' Wade"
 
Default Fedora Board Recap 2008-JAN-29

On Fri, 2008-02-01 at 20:39 -0600, Josh Boyer wrote:
> On Sat, 02 Feb 2008 06:39:59 +0530
> Rahul Sundaram <sundaram@fedoraproject.org> wrote:
>
> > > === Approving XFCE spin ===
> > > * http://sundaram.fedorapeople.org/livecd-fedora-8-xfce.ks
> > > * ACTION: Board needs to verify spin and post results to
> > > fedora-advisory-list
> > > * OWNER: Seth Vidal
> >
> > Isn't technical verification managed by rel-eng?
>
> That depends on what you mean by "technical verification" I guess.
> Ideally rel-eng would do this, yes. It won't scale though.
> Particularly as more spins come along, and especially during
> alpha/beta/preview/release times.
>
> I see no reason to disallow other extended members of our technical
> community to do verification.

OTOH, relying upon another small group of people to do testing doesn't
scale very well, either. I'd prefer it if spin owners could do this
themselves. Do we have a checklist to follow? Is it easy to check the
sanity of a spin? Cf. packaging review process, where many can be
trained to review packages.

- Karsten
--
Karsten Wade, Developer Community Mgr.
Dev Fu : http://developer.redhatmagazine.com
Fedora : http://quaid.fedorapeople.org
gpg key : AD0E0C41

_______________________________________________
fedora-advisory-board mailing list
fedora-advisory-board@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-advisory-board
 
Old 02-02-2008, 02:59 PM
"Karsten 'quaid' Wade"
 
Default Fedora Board Recap 2008-JAN-29

On Fri, 2008-02-01 at 20:48 -0600, Josh Boyer wrote:
> On Fri, 01 Feb 2008 14:30:08 -0800
> John Poelstra <poelstra@redhat.com> wrote:

> >
> > === Timeliness & Format of Board Minutes ===
>
> I'd like to state that these minutes are improved from the ones in the
> recent past. Thank you.

Thanks backatcha; knowledge of where something sucks helps in knowing
what to improve.

> > * ACTIONS:
> > * Talk to Mike McGrath and Infrastructure team to determine
> > technical hurdles
> > * Engage community to help overcome technical hurdles
>
> Technical hurdles such as what? Every other SIG/Committee gets by with
> public IRC meetings just fine...

For example, we discussed having an audio call that people could listen
in on (live) and record for later. IRC is an obvious fall-back, but it
is definitely a lower resolution format than teleconference. IME, a
rough estimate is that an IRC meeting can only address 30% of the
material that you can cover in a voice call. This would reduce the
amount of business that can be handled by ~16% month-over-month.
Teleconferences also give room for going over the allotted time without
bumping against someone else waiting to use the meeting channel; the
Board calls occasionally go over 1 hour in order to fit in all business.

One of the reasons I am excited about Fedora using VoIP for contributors
is the increased amount of business that can be done while forming
stronger social bonds. The risk is the increased difficulty in others
listening in, participating, and catching up later for meetings.
Resolving this better for Board calls should help everyone who uses
teleconf for meetings.

> > === Use of Fedora Name/Trademark ===
> > * What is required for a package or a project to carry the Fedora name?
> > * Need to publish guidelines on wiki
> > * OWNER: Max Spevack
> > * ACTION: post proposal to fedora-advisory-board-list
>
> What about a relaxed trademark policy? Something like that could also
> tie in with the subject below.

What is a relaxed trademark policy?

- Karsten
--
Karsten Wade, Developer Community Mgr.
Dev Fu : http://developer.redhatmagazine.com
Fedora : http://quaid.fedorapeople.org
gpg key : AD0E0C41

_______________________________________________
fedora-advisory-board mailing list
fedora-advisory-board@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-advisory-board
 
Old 02-02-2008, 03:26 PM
Jeremy Katz
 
Default Fedora Board Recap 2008-JAN-29

On Sat, 2008-02-02 at 07:48 -0800, Karsten 'quaid' Wade wrote:
> On Fri, 2008-02-01 at 20:39 -0600, Josh Boyer wrote:
> > On Sat, 02 Feb 2008 06:39:59 +0530
> > Rahul Sundaram <sundaram@fedoraproject.org> wrote:
> >
> > > > === Approving XFCE spin ===
> > > > * http://sundaram.fedorapeople.org/livecd-fedora-8-xfce.ks
> > > > * ACTION: Board needs to verify spin and post results to
> > > > fedora-advisory-list
> > > > * OWNER: Seth Vidal
> > >
> > > Isn't technical verification managed by rel-eng?
> >
> > That depends on what you mean by "technical verification" I guess.
> > Ideally rel-eng would do this, yes. It won't scale though.
> > Particularly as more spins come along, and especially during
> > alpha/beta/preview/release times.
> >
> > I see no reason to disallow other extended members of our technical
> > community to do verification.
>
> OTOH, relying upon another small group of people to do testing doesn't
> scale very well, either. I'd prefer it if spin owners could do this
> themselves. Do we have a checklist to follow? Is it easy to check the
> sanity of a spin? Cf. packaging review process, where many can be
> trained to review packages.

There are a lot of years of experience of looking at packages to know
what's sane vs what's not. Spins are, by comparison, incredibly new and
thus there isn't really anything that can be checklist-y at present

Jeremy

_______________________________________________
fedora-advisory-board mailing list
fedora-advisory-board@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-advisory-board
 
Old 02-02-2008, 03:33 PM
Jeremy Katz
 
Default Fedora Board Recap 2008-JAN-29

On Fri, 2008-02-01 at 20:48 -0600, Josh Boyer wrote:
> > === Use of Fedora Name/Trademark ===
> > * What is required for a package or a project to carry the Fedora
> name?
> > * Need to publish guidelines on wiki
> > * OWNER: Max Spevack
> > * ACTION: post proposal to fedora-advisory-board-list
>
> What about a relaxed trademark policy? Something like that could also
> tie in with the subject below.

IANAL, but what I remember of trademark law is that you either defend
your trademark or you lose it. The concept of a relaxed trademark
policy doesn't really exist :-/

Jeremy

_______________________________________________
fedora-advisory-board mailing list
fedora-advisory-board@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-advisory-board
 
Old 02-03-2008, 01:30 PM
"Russell Harrison"
 
Default Fedora Board Recap 2008-JAN-29

On Feb 2, 2008 10:59 AM, Karsten 'quaid' Wade <kwade@redhat.com> wrote:
> > Technical hurdles such as what? Every other SIG/Committee gets by with
> > public IRC meetings just fine...
>
> For example, we discussed having an audio call that people could listen
> in on (live) and record for later. IRC is an obvious fall-back, but it
> is definitely a lower resolution format than teleconference. IME, a
> rough estimate is that an IRC meeting can only address 30% of the
> material that you can cover in a voice call. This would reduce the
> amount of business that can be handled by ~16% month-over-month.
> Teleconferences also give room for going over the allotted time without
> bumping against someone else waiting to use the meeting channel; the
> Board calls occasionally go over 1 hour in order to fit in all business.

+1

Another problem I discovered while I was trying to attend the
marketing meeting this we was that people would keep coming over to my
desk and asking for stuff during the chat. Even though I said I was
attending a meeting people would still ask their questions. I assume
expecting that I would be able to read the backlog and catch up. For
a normal conversation that started randomly in any of the SIG channels
they'd be right. In #fedora-meeting two screens behind and you might
as well just give up. I only figured out at the very end of the
meeting I should just put my headset on even though I wasn't using it.
It would be nice if it wasn't a prop... ;-)

> One of the reasons I am excited about Fedora using VoIP for contributors
> is the increased amount of business that can be done while forming
> stronger social bonds. The risk is the increased difficulty in others
> listening in, participating, and catching up later for meetings.
> Resolving this better for Board calls should help everyone who uses
> teleconf for meetings.

There's an awful lot that is conveyed in a person's voice. Being able
to tell that someone was teasing you rather than actually criticizing
is a good example. I know at my work I often leave things out of
emails or chats that I'll go ahead and say in a conference call.
--
Russell Harrison
Systems Administrator -- Linux Desktops
Cisco Systems, Inc.

Note: The positions or opinions expressed in this email are my own.
They are not necessarily those of my employer.

_______________________________________________
fedora-advisory-board mailing list
fedora-advisory-board@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-advisory-board
 

Thread Tools




All times are GMT. The time now is 05:29 PM.

VBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO ©2007, Crawlability, Inc.
Copyright 2007 - 2008, www.linux-archive.org