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 Development

 
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
 
Old 02-02-2010, 03:28 PM
Adam Miller
 
Default Board efforts: scope, concept, and permission?

Hello all,
I wanted to bring a few things up and I wanted to bring them up on
devel@lists.fp.o because this is where most people spend their time.

First off: "Does letting thousands of contributors do what they
want have a negative impact on our OS? (Mike)"[0]
- I would prefer that this be rephrased to a quote I read that
originated from John Rose (inode0) "isn't it amazing how thousands of
contributors doing whatever they want created such a spectacular OS?"
and I would prefer a focus be turned towards something like "Why was
that the result of doing something that is essentially chaotic?" ....
I guess my main question is: "Why are we fixing something that isn't
broken?"

Second: "The Board has been working on defining a target audience
for Fedora. In response to this, some people feel that Fedora should
allow sub-groups to define their own target audience"[1]
- I don't entirely understand this, don't SIGs or (sub groups)
essentially exist purely because there is some target audience?
Clarification on this not would be appreciated.

Now, we come to the part that I feel is going to be viewed as a
touchy subject by many..... Why are there words like "letting" and
"allow" being thrown around so often? I understand there are
guidelines and policies for certain things of technical or legal
nature in Fedora, but it feels a little like there is an attempt here
to dictate how myself, as well as all others, spend their time
contributing to The Fedora Project.

[0] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Unfinished_Board_issues
[1] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Walters/SpinsSigsRemixes_TargetAudience

I would just like to know other contributors thoughts on these topics.

Thank you for your time,
-AdamM

--
http://maxamillion.googlepages.com
---------------------------------------------------------
() ascii ribbon campaign - against html e-mail
/ www.asciiribbon.org - against proprietary attachments
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
 
Old 02-02-2010, 03:37 PM
Toshio Kuratomi
 
Default Board efforts: scope, concept, and permission?

On Tue, Feb 02, 2010 at 10:28:37AM -0600, Adam Miller wrote:
> Hello all,
> I wanted to bring a few things up and I wanted to bring them up on
> devel@lists.fp.o because this is where most people spend their time.
>
> First off: "Does letting thousands of contributors do what they
> want have a negative impact on our OS? (Mike)"[0]
> - I would prefer that this be rephrased to a quote I read that
> originated from John Rose (inode0) "isn't it amazing how thousands of
> contributors doing whatever they want created such a spectacular OS?"
> and I would prefer a focus be turned towards something like "Why was
> that the result of doing something that is essentially chaotic?" ....
> I guess my main question is: "Why are we fixing something that isn't
> broken?"
>
> Second: "The Board has been working on defining a target audience
> for Fedora. In response to this, some people feel that Fedora should
> allow sub-groups to define their own target audience"[1]
> - I don't entirely understand this, don't SIGs or (sub groups)
> essentially exist purely because there is some target audience?
> Clarification on this not would be appreciated.
>
> Now, we come to the part that I feel is going to be viewed as a
> touchy subject by many..... Why are there words like "letting" and
> "allow" being thrown around so often? I understand there are
> guidelines and policies for certain things of technical or legal
> nature in Fedora, but it feels a little like there is an attempt here
> to dictate how myself, as well as all others, spend their time
> contributing to The Fedora Project.
>
> [0] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Unfinished_Board_issues
> [1] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Walters/SpinsSigsRemixes_TargetAudience
>
> I would just like to know other contributors thoughts on these topics.
>
> Thank you for your time,

Thyank you Adam, I cannot say anything to this but, I agree with you and
inode0 100% on these points.

-Toshio
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
 
Old 02-02-2010, 03:41 PM
Jesse Keating
 
Default Board efforts: scope, concept, and permission?

On Tue, 2010-02-02 at 10:28 -0600, Adam Miller wrote:
> Now, we come to the part that I feel is going to be viewed as a
> touchy subject by many..... Why are there words like "letting" and
> "allow" being thrown around so often? I understand there are
> guidelines and policies for certain things of technical or legal
> nature in Fedora, but it feels a little like there is an attempt here
> to dictate how myself, as well as all others, spend their time
> contributing to The Fedora Project.
>
>

In my mind this comes into play where the interests of one sig and
another conflict as to how a package or configuration should perform.
When there are more than one group trying to modify the behavior of a
package, or asking the maintainer to change it in some way, and these
modifications conflict with eachother, how is the maintainer to decide?
How is FESCo to decide if it is brought to them for moderation? How is
the board to decide if it gets escalated up to that level?

When viewing these discussions what strikes me is that none of it really
applies until you have conflict. Without conflict there is no reason to
worry, but when there is conflict, some general help in deciding who
gets the change and who doesn't is welcome.

--
Jesse Keating
Fedora -- Freedom˛ is a feature!
identi.ca: http://identi.ca/jkeating
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
 
Old 02-02-2010, 03:45 PM
Mike McGrath
 
Default Board efforts: scope, concept, and permission?

On Tue, 2 Feb 2010, Adam Miller wrote:

> Hello all,
> I wanted to bring a few things up and I wanted to bring them up on
> devel@lists.fp.o because this is where most people spend their time.
>
> First off: "Does letting thousands of contributors do what they
> want have a negative impact on our OS? (Mike)"[0]
> - I would prefer that this be rephrased to a quote I read that
> originated from John Rose (inode0) "isn't it amazing how thousands of
> contributors doing whatever they want created such a spectacular OS?"
> and I would prefer a focus be turned towards something like "Why was
> that the result of doing something that is essentially chaotic?" ....
> I guess my main question is: "Why are we fixing something that isn't
> broken?"
>

citation needed. I've worked hard on this question to find data and so
far I've not been able to find any. I'm not about to answer this question
with an opinion and I'd expect the same from everyone else. I'm sure the
question makes contributors feel uneasy, after all it's putting our work
into question. But if people are unwilling to ask it then there's no
limit to what we can't accomplish.

And to answer your question about what "isnt' broken". I suggest you look
at our http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Statistics page. We've only seen
growth in 2 of our last 6 releases. Think about that.

-Mike
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
 
Old 02-02-2010, 03:52 PM
David Nalley
 
Default Board efforts: scope, concept, and permission?

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

On Tue, Feb 2, 2010 at 11:45 AM, Mike McGrath wrote:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.10 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Use GnuPG with Firefox : http://getfiregpg.org (Version: 0.7.10)

iEYEARECAAYFAktoWG8ACgkQkZOYj+cNI1d6MwCeOBegidrasL G6OgROhPdR1sRd
MtUAnjMVImF7vKuZLX9Oi78Rvc+gDUo0
=5y4r
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

<snip>
> And to answer your question about what "isnt' broken". *I suggest you look
> at our http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Statistics page. *We've only seen
> growth in 2 of our last 6 releases. *Think about that.


Is that how we measure success??
I am not suggesting it should or shouldn't be, but what is the measure
of success for Fedora?
I'd likely argue that's probably about as varied as the goals of contributors.
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
 
Old 02-02-2010, 03:54 PM
inode0
 
Default Board efforts: scope, concept, and permission?

On Tue, Feb 2, 2010 at 10:45 AM, Mike McGrath <mmcgrath@redhat.com> wrote:
> And to answer your question about what "isnt' broken". *I suggest you look
> at our http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Statistics page. *We've only seen
> growth in 2 of our last 6 releases. *Think about that.

While I don't see that as directly relating to the mission of the
Fedora Project I understand it is important to many people and I
understand there is an indirect link with the mission. But what
indicates that is a problem with the distribution as opposed to a
marketing problem?

John
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
 
Old 02-02-2010, 04:01 PM
Mike McGrath
 
Default Board efforts: scope, concept, and permission?

On Tue, 2 Feb 2010, inode0 wrote:

> On Tue, Feb 2, 2010 at 10:45 AM, Mike McGrath <mmcgrath@redhat.com> wrote:
> > And to answer your question about what "isnt' broken". *I suggest you look
> > at our http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Statistics page. *We've only seen
> > growth in 2 of our last 6 releases. *Think about that.
>
> While I don't see that as directly relating to the mission of the
> Fedora Project I understand it is important to many people and I
> understand there is an indirect link with the mission. But what
> indicates that is a problem with the distribution as opposed to a
> marketing problem?
>

This is the fundamental difference between the two of us I think. I'm
asking the questions[1] and trying to find the answers. You seem to think
we don't need to ask the questions. That's why "does X cause Y" is a good
question while "Isn't it great how?" isn't.

This particular question has already been answered, I've not yet put it on
the wiki yet. The notes from our last meeting yesterday hasn't gone to
the list, I'll update the wiki today though.

-Mike

[1] I'm asking these questions because I'm not happy with the state of
our operating system. It's almost the entire reason I ran for the board.--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
 
Old 02-02-2010, 04:02 PM
Adam Miller
 
Default Board efforts: scope, concept, and permission?

On Tue, Feb 2, 2010 at 10:41 AM, Jesse Keating <jkeating@redhat.com> wrote:
<snip>
>
> In my mind this comes into play where the interests of one sig and
> another conflict as to how a package or configuration should perform.
> When there are more than one group trying to modify the behavior of a
> package, or asking the maintainer to change it in some way, and these
> modifications conflict with eachother, how is the maintainer to decide?
> How is FESCo to decide if it is brought to them for moderation? *How is
> the board to decide if it gets escalated up to that level?
>
> When viewing these discussions what strikes me is that none of it really
> applies until you have conflict. *Without conflict there is no reason to
> worry, but when there is conflict, some general help in deciding who
> gets the change and who doesn't is welcome.
>
<snip>

I will agree with that, I can see an application space for certain
decisions when presented with conflict, but how often does this happen
and how is it currently, as well as how has it been in the past,
handled and resolved?

-AdamM

--
http://maxamillion.googlepages.com
---------------------------------------------------------
() ascii ribbon campaign - against html e-mail
/ www.asciiribbon.org - against proprietary attachments
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
 
Old 02-02-2010, 04:08 PM
Robyn Bergeron
 
Default Board efforts: scope, concept, and permission?

On Tue, Feb 2, 2010 at 9:28 AM, Adam Miller
<maxamillion@fedoraproject.org> wrote:
> Hello all,
> * *I wanted to bring a few things up and I wanted to bring them up on
> devel@lists.fp.o because this is where most people spend their time.
>
> * *First off: "Does letting thousands of contributors do what they
> want have a negative impact on our OS? (Mike)"[0]
> - I would prefer that this be rephrased to a quote I read that
> originated from John Rose (inode0) "isn't it amazing how thousands of
> contributors doing whatever they want created such a spectacular OS?"
> and I would prefer a focus be turned towards something like "Why was
> that the result of doing something that is essentially chaotic?" ....
> I guess my main question is: "Why are we fixing something that isn't
> broken?"
>
> * *Second: "The Board has been working on defining a target audience
> for Fedora. In response to this, some people feel that Fedora should
> allow sub-groups to define their own target audience"[1]
> - I don't entirely understand this, don't SIGs or (sub groups)
> essentially exist purely because there is some target audience?
> Clarification on this not would be appreciated.
>
> * *Now, we come to the part that I feel is going to be viewed as a
> touchy subject by many..... Why are there words like "letting" and
> "allow" being thrown around so often? I understand there are
> guidelines and policies for certain things of technical or legal
> nature in Fedora, but it feels a little like there is an attempt here
> to dictate how myself, as well as all others, spend their time
> contributing to The Fedora Project.

I don't think the goal is to dictate how the community spends their
time. I'd like to think of it as more of a starting point for
attracting new contributors; "here are our broader goals, how you can
help, and why you should invest your time in our community, rather
than elsewhere."

The open-source concept isn't exactly niche anymore; there is an
increasing number of people out there who want to contribute, but
unlike days long since past where people would contribute because
something was broken or non-existent, they're just here to contribute,
learn how community works. Finding those potential contributors and
giving them a pathway to success is essential to Fedora's long-term
growth and reaching our goals (whatever those may be).

>
> [0] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Unfinished_Board_issues
> [1] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Walters/SpinsSigsRemixes_TargetAudience
>
> I would just like to know other contributors thoughts on these topics.
>
> Thank you for your time,
> -AdamM
>
> --
> http://maxamillion.googlepages.com
> ---------------------------------------------------------
> () *ascii ribbon campaign - against html e-mail
> / *www.asciiribbon.org * - against proprietary attachments
> --
> devel mailing list
> devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
> https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
>
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
 
Old 02-02-2010, 04:15 PM
Jesse Keating
 
Default Board efforts: scope, concept, and permission?

On Tue, 2010-02-02 at 11:02 -0600, Adam Miller wrote:
> I will agree with that, I can see an application space for certain
> decisions when presented with conflict, but how often does this happen
> and how is it currently, as well as how has it been in the past,
> handled and resolved?
>

As sigs and spins grow in size or numbers the potential for this to
happen is great. There have been cases of the Desktop sig wanting to
bring in newer versions of some software, which the KDE sig was not
ready for, there are conflicts between the traditional Unix folks and
the future looking Desktop folks, there are conflicts between the
"everything should work to it's fullest extent out of the box" folks and
"our installs should be as slim and trim as possible with all optional
functionality in separate and not installed by default packages" folks,
and so on. Because we decree that our spins cannot make material
changes to the packages and only some minor config changes, we put them
in an awkward situation if they want to target an audience that is
vastly different than the other audiences. To me, that's why it's
important to define the overall target audience who "trumps" other
audiences when there is a conflict. So that we can say "You are free to
do whatever meets your needs, so long as it doesn't disrupt the needs of
our target audience".

--
Jesse Keating
Fedora -- Freedom˛ is a feature!
identi.ca: http://identi.ca/jkeating
--
devel mailing list
devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
 

Thread Tools




All times are GMT. The time now is 12:13 AM.

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