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 03-28-2012, 09:11 PM
Stephen John Smoogen
 
Default board followup to "Connotation analysis for Fedora Project codename"

On 28 March 2012 15:09, Rex Dieter <rdieter@math.unl.edu> wrote:
> The board discussed the feedback stemming from the "Connotation analysis for
> Fedora Project codename" thread, and has agreed to add a period of community
> comment and feedback of at least one week, prior to putting up a final list
> of release names for community vote. ¬*This will take effect starting with
> the F19 naming process.

Cool and thanks. One question though..

Where should the community comment and give feedback? A trac ticket,
the wiki page or this email thread?

> In practical terms, we envision starting this community feedback period at
> the same time that Red Hat legal is vetting names, and that reviewing said
> feedback will require adding one week to future (F19+) naming schedules.
>
> -- rex
> _______________________________________________
> advisory-board mailing list
> advisory-board@lists.fedoraproject.org
> https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/advisory-board



--
Stephen J Smoogen.
"The core skill of innovators is error recovery, not failure avoidance."
Randy Nelson, President of Pixar University.
"Years ago my mother used to say to me,... Elwood, you must be oh
so smart or oh so pleasant. Well, for years I was smart. I
recommend pleasant. You may quote me." ¬*‚ÄĒJames Stewart as Elwood P. Dowd
_______________________________________________
advisory-board mailing list
advisory-board@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/advisory-board
 
Old 03-28-2012, 09:17 PM
Josh Boyer
 
Default board followup to "Connotation analysis for Fedora Project codename"

On Wed, Mar 28, 2012 at 5:09 PM, Rex Dieter <rdieter@math.unl.edu> wrote:
> The board discussed the feedback stemming from the "Connotation analysis for
> Fedora Project codename" thread, and has agreed to add a period of community
> comment and feedback of at least one week, prior to putting up a final list
> of release names for community vote. *This will take effect starting with
> the F19 naming process.
>
> In practical terms, we envision starting this community feedback period at
> the same time that Red Hat legal is vetting names, and that reviewing said
> feedback will require adding one week to future (F19+) naming schedules.

Why at the same time as legal review? If the Board/community is going
to disallow a name due to connotation, then it's a waste of resources
(both human and financial) to have lawyers vetting that name.

josh
_______________________________________________
advisory-board mailing list
advisory-board@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/advisory-board
 
Old 03-28-2012, 09:36 PM
Bruno Wolff III
 
Default board followup to "Connotation analysis for Fedora Project codename"

On Wed, Mar 28, 2012 at 17:17:28 -0400,
Josh Boyer <jwboyer@gmail.com> wrote:


Why at the same time as legal review? If the Board/community is going
to disallow a name due to connotation, then it's a waste of resources
(both human and financial) to have lawyers vetting that name.


I would expect removals to be rare at that step, so it may be worth
risking some lawyer time to make things happen faster.
_______________________________________________
advisory-board mailing list
advisory-board@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/advisory-board
 
Old 03-28-2012, 10:17 PM
Rex Dieter
 
Default board followup to "Connotation analysis for Fedora Project codename"

Josh Boyer wrote:

>> In practical terms, we envision starting this community feedback period
>> at the same time that Red Hat legal is vetting names, and that reviewing
>> said feedback will require adding one week to future (F19+) naming
>> schedules.
>
> Why at the same time as legal review? If the Board/community is going
> to disallow a name due to connotation, then it's a waste of resources
> (both human and financial) to have lawyers vetting that name.

Though it's an implementation detail, we felt by allowing public comment and
legal vetting in parallel would expedite the whole process, and minimize
delays in the whole process.

-- rex


_______________________________________________
advisory-board mailing list
advisory-board@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/advisory-board
 
Old 03-28-2012, 10:21 PM
Rex Dieter
 
Default board followup to "Connotation analysis for Fedora Project codename"

Stephen John Smoogen wrote:

> On 28 March 2012 15:09, Rex Dieter <rdieter@math.unl.edu> wrote:
>> The board discussed the feedback stemming from the "Connotation analysis
>> for Fedora Project codename" thread, and has agreed to add a period of
>> community comment and feedback of at least one week, prior to putting up
>> a final list of release names for community vote. This will take effect
>> starting with the F19 naming process.
>
> Cool and thanks. One question though..
>
> Where should the community comment and give feedback? A trac ticket,
> the wiki page or this email thread?

Any of those are ok, as long as the voices are expressed (and heard by the
board) prior to making any decision... though I suppose if one wants to be
most careful to get the board's consideration, a formal board trac ticket
would be safest.

-- rex


_______________________________________________
advisory-board mailing list
advisory-board@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/advisory-board
 
Old 03-28-2012, 10:22 PM
Toshio Kuratomi
 
Default board followup to "Connotation analysis for Fedora Project codename"

On Wed, Mar 28, 2012 at 05:17:28PM -0400, Josh Boyer wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 28, 2012 at 5:09 PM, Rex Dieter <rdieter@math.unl.edu> wrote:
> > The board discussed the feedback stemming from the "Connotation analysis for
> > Fedora Project codename" thread, and has agreed to add a period of community
> > comment and feedback of at least one week, prior to putting up a final list
> > of release names for community vote. *This will take effect starting with
> > the F19 naming process.
> >
> > In practical terms, we envision starting this community feedback period at
> > the same time that Red Hat legal is vetting names, and that reviewing said
> > feedback will require adding one week to future (F19+) naming schedules.
>
> Why at the same time as legal review? If the Board/community is going
> to disallow a name due to connotation, then it's a waste of resources
> (both human and financial) to have lawyers vetting that name.
>
The thought was that the timeline for vetting names looks usually like this:

* [several weeks] Name suggestions made
* Naming closed
* [Few days] Board vettes names for obvious problems (no is-a relationship,
legal conflicts, obvious offensivness).
* Passed onto Legal
* [One or more weeks] Legal vettes the names
* [Few days] Legal returns the list of names, we setup the election, vote.

Community feedback about problems with certain names can be raised at any
time prior to the Board vetting the names and then the Board can use that
feedback to strike that name from the list that goes to Legal. However,
names may be added to that list until very close to the Board vetting so
formally asking some group to vette the names and receive feedback about
whether there's a problem at that time would be a bit of a rush.

Making sure that some at least somewhat multicultural group have a list of
names to vette seemed to be good to do in parallel with the legal review due
to:

* An alternative would be to do the community vetting before the list goes
to Legal. But that means that we delay the whole naming process by that
timeout period.
* The list of names that actually pass the Board's check for conflicts is
usually quite small. So having one or two names less doesn't seem that
large of a win.
* The Legal review is a largely non-transparent portion of the process. We
never know how long it's going to take. It just seems efficient to get
something else done while we're waiting.

None of these are knockout reasons but hopefully all together they explain
why we think it's a good idea to run them together like this.

-Toshio
_______________________________________________
advisory-board mailing list
advisory-board@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/advisory-board
 
Old 03-28-2012, 10:42 PM
Josh Boyer
 
Default board followup to "Connotation analysis for Fedora Project codename"

On Wed, Mar 28, 2012 at 6:22 PM, Toshio Kuratomi <a.badger@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Why at the same time as legal review? *If the Board/community is going
>> to disallow a name due to connotation, then it's a waste of resources
>> (both human and financial) to have lawyers vetting that name.
>>
> The thought was that the timeline for vetting names looks usually like this:

<snip stuff I already know, having run the name game for multiple releases>

> Community feedback about problems with certain names can be raised at any
> time prior to the Board vetting the names and then the Board can use that
> feedback to strike that name from the list that goes to Legal. *However,
> names may be added to that list until very close to the Board vetting so
> formally asking some group to vette the names and receive feedback about
> whether there's a problem at that time would be a bit of a rush.

The point where I'm confused is why there is a separate week time period
at all. The group(s) doing connotative analysis on the names can very
well just do it as the names come in. Just add a field on the wiki for
"connotation" comments and off they go. Very similar to "Themeable" and
"Initial Approval", neither of which wait until all the names are there.

(Though looking at the F17 page, it seems people aren't doing the
Initial approval thing at all, which is a shame because it was a great
help to the Board previously.)

I don't see the need to delay for a week for something that can be done
on the fly. It's creating an unnecessary delay.

josh
_______________________________________________
advisory-board mailing list
advisory-board@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/advisory-board
 
Old 03-28-2012, 11:18 PM
Toshio Kuratomi
 
Default board followup to "Connotation analysis for Fedora Project codename"

On Wed, Mar 28, 2012 at 06:42:10PM -0400, Josh Boyer wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 28, 2012 at 6:22 PM, Toshio Kuratomi <a.badger@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> Why at the same time as legal review? *If the Board/community is going
> >> to disallow a name due to connotation, then it's a waste of resources
> >> (both human and financial) to have lawyers vetting that name.
> >>
> > The thought was that the timeline for vetting names looks usually like this:
>
> <snip stuff I already know, having run the name game for multiple releases>
>
> > Community feedback about problems with certain names can be raised at any
> > time prior to the Board vetting the names and then the Board can use that
> > feedback to strike that name from the list that goes to Legal. *However,
> > names may be added to that list until very close to the Board vetting so
> > formally asking some group to vette the names and receive feedback about
> > whether there's a problem at that time would be a bit of a rush.
>
> The point where I'm confused is why there is a separate week time period
> at all. The group(s) doing connotative analysis on the names can very
> well just do it as the names come in. Just add a field on the wiki for
> "connotation" comments and off they go. Very similar to "Themeable" and
> "Initial Approval", neither of which wait until all the names are there.
>
> (Though looking at the F17 page, it seems people aren't doing the
> Initial approval thing at all, which is a shame because it was a great
> help to the Board previously.)
>
> I don't see the need to delay for a week for something that can be done
> on the fly. It's creating an unnecessary delay.
>
That can still happen. As I said, there's nothing stopping people from
hitting refresh on the wiki page and making comments whenever they notice
that a new name has been added that says, please don't use this, it's
offensive to $XXX.

But following changes in mediawiki is notoriously hard. And the Board can
do its vetting for legal very soon after the list closes for new naming
suggestions (this cycle, the Board had vetted the names less than 24 hours
after suggestions closed.) So why should we limit the time that people have
to object to names to the period before the names go to Legal? Why not push
the period of objections back as far as possible? Which seems to be up
until the name goes for a vote (or in the case of extra-ordinarily bad
names, perhaps even the week after the vote completes -- before we get to
theming the release).

Letting objections come in concurrent with Legal checking for their own
issues with the names seems to be just such an extension without a timeout.

If we cut off the period for objections to be before the names went to
legal, we'd need to ensure that the volunteers who were vetting had a chance
to look over the list of names and raise their objections despite whatever
other obligations they had.

-Toshio
_______________________________________________
advisory-board mailing list
advisory-board@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/advisory-board
 
Old 03-29-2012, 09:05 AM
Pierre-Yves Chibon
 
Default board followup to "Connotation analysis for Fedora Project codename"

On Wed, 2012-03-28 at 16:09 -0500, Rex Dieter wrote:
>
> In practical terms, we envision starting this community feedback
> period at the same time that Red Hat legal is vetting names, and that
> reviewing said feedback will require adding one week to future (F19+)
> naming schedules.

I am curious about this, would it be much trouble to already apply it
for F18?

Pierre
_______________________________________________
advisory-board mailing list
advisory-board@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/advisory-board
 
Old 03-29-2012, 10:50 AM
Rex Dieter
 
Default board followup to "Connotation analysis for Fedora Project codename"

On 03/29/2012 04:05 AM, Pierre-Yves Chibon wrote:

On Wed, 2012-03-28 at 16:09 -0500, Rex Dieter wrote:


In practical terms, we envision starting this community feedback
period at the same time that Red Hat legal is vetting names, and that
reviewing said feedback will require adding one week to future (F19+)
naming schedules.


I am curious about this, would it be much trouble to already apply it
for F18?


We already have a (very) tight schedule for naming, there's no time this
cycle to potentially add another week for reviewing extra feedback...


-- rex
_______________________________________________
advisory-board mailing list
advisory-board@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/advisory-board
 

Thread Tools




All times are GMT. The time now is 12:18 PM.

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