Fedora Board Recap - 2012-07-25
 

Fedora Board Meeting - 2012-07-25 @ 18:30 UTC

== Attendance ==
Attendees:
* Robyn Bergeron
* David Nalley
* Eric Christensen (leaving early)
* Toshio Kuratomi (leaving early)
* John Rose
* Garrett Holmstrom (leaving early)
* Peter Robinson (gobby only)

* Regrets: Christoph, Jaroslav

* Absent: Nick

Today's lucky secretary: David
=======================================

Agenda:
* Announcements
* Follow-up: Fedora Italian Communities mail
* Follow-up: FUDCon discussion, Budget situation
* Secure Boot ticket
* Open Floor / Your suggestion here / Who's got good news?
* Next meeting: IRC, 2012-08-01

== Announcements ==
Fedora Summer of hardware fun
http://spot.livejournal.com/321537.html
https://fedoraproject.org/openhw2012

== Followup ==
=== Italian Communities situation ===
* Referring to CWG (response by: Robyn)

=== FUDcon discussion ===
* Proposal yet to be funded
* Willingness to fund appears to be present - from OSAS - without
diverting from other funds, but could all be a pipe dream

=== Budget ===
http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Accounting/DraftFY13

== Secure Boot ==
* attempt to get a Board statement out by the next IRC board meeting.
* there are outstanding questions from Board members.
* lots of discussion.

== Open Floor ==

* FYI: elections app has a new owner. ianweller porting to flask and
taking over

== Next Meeting - IRC - 2012-08-01 ==
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Board_public_IRC_meetings
_______________________________________________
advisory-board mailing list
advisory-board@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/advisory-board

Fedora Board Recap - 2012-07-25
 

On 07/25/2012 04:40 PM, David Nalley wrote:

> * there are outstanding questions from Board members.

Are these posted in public someplace? I'd like to address any questions that
remain, but it's fairly difficult to answer questions that aren't put anywhere
we can see them.

--
Peter


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

Fedora Board Recap - 2012-07-25
 

On Wed, Jul 25, 2012 at 04:50:59PM -0400, Peter Jones wrote:
> On 07/25/2012 04:40 PM, David Nalley wrote:
>
> > * there are outstanding questions from Board members.
>
> Are these posted in public someplace? I'd like to address any questions that
> remain, but it's fairly difficult to answer questions that aren't put anywhere
> we can see them.
>
After last week's IRC meeting I made sure they made it into the Board
ticket:
https://fedorahosted.org/board/ticket/138

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

Fedora Board Recap - 2012-07-25
 

On Jul 25, 2012 5:30 PM, "Toshio Kuratomi" <a.badger@gmail.com> wrote:>



> After last week's IRC meeting I made sure they made it into the Board

> ticket:

> https://fedorahosted.org/board/ticket/138

>

Problem being that people that aren't board members can't see that.

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

Fedora Board Recap - 2012-07-25
 

On Wed, Jul 25, 2012 at 09:11:14PM -0400, Jon Stanley wrote:
>
> On Jul 25, 2012 5:30 PM, "Toshio Kuratomi" <a.badger@gmail.com> wrote:>
>
> > After last week's IRC meeting I made sure they made it into the Board
> > ticket:
> > https://fedorahosted.org/board/ticket/138
> >
>
> Problem being that people that aren't board members can't see that.
>
Correct. Maybe now that there's a new Board and new FPL I should ask if we
want to have a board and board-public trac instance?

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

Fedora Board Recap - 2012-07-25
 

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On 07/25/2012 09:31 PM, Toshio Kuratomi wrote:
> On Wed, Jul 25, 2012 at 09:11:14PM -0400, Jon Stanley wrote:
>>
>> On Jul 25, 2012 5:30 PM, "Toshio Kuratomi" <a.badger@gmail.com>
>> wrote:>
>>
>>> After last week's IRC meeting I made sure they made it into the
>>> Board ticket: https://fedorahosted.org/board/ticket/138
>>>
>>
>> Problem being that people that aren't board members can't see
>> that.
>>
> Correct. Maybe now that there's a new Board and new FPL I should
> ask if we want to have a board and board-public trac instance?
>
> -Toshoi

Is there a way to be able to flip a switch to make some tickets public?

- -Eric

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Fedora Project - https://fedoraproject.org

Member of:
* Fedora Board
* Documentation Project

097C 82C3 52DF C64A 50C2 E3A3 8076 ABDE 024B B3D1
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.12 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/

iQIcBAEBAgAGBQJQEKjaAAoJEIB2q94CS7PRAi0P/0Qg3zqoeO+TGkBCKVS3voBJ
NJGLO7fjrLyNoG7I69D/GX5WlG1XOavSMB2GPaAjKPDtbSnNUt09w2qlrTmCZoxt
YnmJY5XCydULulYoPD4KMPQ20COPTiadO4OBsUmMQYME51vwiA rdfNpAtdfs1LHD
orqqUDDg8GIR10W36Nkw8ALWIdA1ixYweyZZXFBSpDh4OG3w08 OcNlQLmNqSW5MF
dslLBgOPlTn6ziW/RKC9vGsyog28tEHUR6QUjOYDA/eNfC/OGMXN8gEtsCTvCUx1
JNMhTd3jMJxUtV3PKS4nZdwDNfxAn5uvLBT2v9+xeUFMfrAVAG eBX10aclKISqPW
pCriXy+mWGczJZggxaUGmpJuZZQhk/ZVv3gUoS0hfLmRRiJSj460wrqxlciv7ASb
fR4Lg+D1KOZiak/aRuoJBr6saywY4zZw/0yC4C/tHO3lIEyW21UMNKRVi2VV4obv
WDnDyHAl4E/2dQ7ZOs0gStjbl+mNcXPYDdzPs3zWdUm4Lcsuks9w4zF5vN7dZ 6t8
rjWIqiRquhqlNY0LkhdqQMJYtGaXJwTaUlzbw+2BRm9xgomAE3 Br8W8pf3d5BCGd
9rj/LdssYhsxfhgA2ZUZK9K+b+HwjMVO0iskyyAVTElte2gUoej/+ehckKGsn5hr
qWWXk5KVFGoNmHRupQpq
=XhZ2
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
_______________________________________________
advisory-board mailing list
advisory-board@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/advisory-board

Fedora Board Recap - 2012-07-25
 

On Wed, Jul 25, 2012 at 10:18:02PM -0400, Eric "Sparks" Christensen wrote:
> > Correct. Maybe now that there's a new Board and new FPL I should
> > ask if we want to have a board and board-public trac instance?
> >
> > -Toshoi
>
> Is there a way to be able to flip a switch to make some tickets public?
>
There wasn't when we set this up. I believe that was before Fedora
Infrastructure updated trac but I also believe someone looked and still
didn't see any way to make that possible on a ticket-by-ticket basis.

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

Fedora Board Recap - 2012-07-25
 

On Jul 25, 2012 10:31 PM, "Toshio Kuratomi" <a.badger@gmail.com> wrote:

> There wasn't when we set this up. *I believe that was before Fedora

> Infrastructure updated trac but I also believe someone looked and still

> didn't see any way to make that possible on a ticket-by-ticket basis.

While I'm not sure if track has this function, as much as I hate to suggest it, Bugzilla does. A new group would need to be created and maintained, but the functionality does exist in something that we have deployed today if RHT would let us use it for that.


$0.02

-Jon

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

Fedora Board Recap - 2012-07-25
 

On 07/26/2012 02:01 PM, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" wrote:
> On 07/26/2012 02:31 AM, Toshio Kuratomi wrote:
>> There wasn't when we set this up. I believe that was before Fedora
>> Infrastructure updated trac but I also believe someone looked and still
>> didn't see any way to make that possible on a ticket-by-ticket basis.
>
> Remind me a again what is preventing all ticket from becoming public?

If someone posted a ticket with the expectation that it would be
private, opening them up to public is quite rude. Future tickets could
be public however and I urge the board to consider this.

Rahul


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

Fedora Board Recap - 2012-07-25
 

On 07/26/2012 07:38 AM, "Jóhann B. Guðmundsson" wrote:

On 07/26/2012 09:55 AM, Rahul Sundaram wrote:

If someone posted a ticket with the expectation that it would be
private, opening them up to public is quite rude. Future tickets could
be public however and I urge the board to consider this.


Perhaps only active tickets should remain private and the board simply
ask the requester if they can be made public, all closed ticket be
opened up for public then all future tickets be made public?

The problems here are:

* The tickets filed with the Board are, at least a reasonable percentage
of the time, of a nature that they should be kept private (legal stuff,
personnel/sensitive/conflict, etc.).


* The Board trac instance (and trac in general within our
infrastructure) doesn't have a way to manage fine-grained permissions
beyond all-or-nothing for groups in the permissions list. In other
words: We can't apply permissions to tickets one-by-one. And I don't
think that having 2 separate ticket queues would be useful.


That said, it looks like http://trac-hacks.org/wiki/SecureTicketsPlugin
*might* be able to help - the opener of the ticket, or those with
existing permissions to modify a ticket, could set the component to be
one where permissions could be granted to a certain group beyond the
default private settings (ie: maybe anyone authenticated via FAS).


I realize that it's not quite as open as "seeing every single ticket
that comes across," but it does at least still provide those filing
sensitive tickets with a sense of privacy, which makes them more likely
to still file a ticket when needed, rather than deter them from pursuing
resolution to an issue.


That said:

I don't know if this particular plugin, when enabled, will allow someone
authenticated to do a full report view or if the report view will only
show tickets set with the appropriate component to make them public.
Sometimes tickets can reveal privacy things simply based on the subject,
so that wouldn't be very awesome to those ticket submitters. And I'm not
sure that the "authenticated" group would work properly, but I think it
probably should, but the worst case is that we could theoretically
create another fas group where those wanting to opt-in to seeing tickets
could apply.


I realize it's not ideal, but I think maintaining privacy for some
tickets is important, and ticket submitters could select automatically
to have it public, and we could always verify if it looks to be
something that can be public if the submitter is okay with that and then
make it so. But it would be an improvement.


Of course, someone would actually have to package the plugin, and then
we'd need to get infra to add it to the plugins list. And then we'd have
to test it and hope it works as advertised :D




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



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