[fab] agenda for tomorrow

Tue Jun 6 00:34:31 UTC 2006

On Monday 05 June 2006 19:02, Jeremy Katz <katzj at redhat.com> wrote:
> > I've been really pressed for time lately, but I'd still like to work on
> > my planned revamp of the Account System to introduce some of the
> > requested features, add a lot more checking to avoid tracebacks and other
> > potential problems, and to make the whole system a lot easier to use and
> > interface with.  If someone else beats me to it, I won't be hurt.  ;-) 
> > The Infrastructure team has also been looking at options to integrate the
> > Account System with some other services for single sign-on.
>
> *nod*  I think it makes some degree of sense.  I was also talking with
> Mike McGrath (one of the infrastructure/sysadmin) guys while at the
> Summit about the account system.  He was interested into looking at
> using LDAP and specifically, Fedora Directory Server to backend it and
> try to get us to where we could have a more consistent login
> infrastructure.  So talk with him.

Yep.  Honestly, I don't really care if the backend is LDAP or PostgreSQL, as 
long as it stores the information in an accessible way.  The current system 
is a homebrew solution, which might cause some problems in integrating other 
services, but being SQL means there shouldn't be too much work involved.  
Mike's ideas are great, and he's shown a ton of initiative.  If he can come 
up with a solid backend, I'd be happy to work with in the production of the 
front-end, but this is a discussion for another list...  :-)

>
> > One very big question here:  Do we need to continue requiring GPG-signed
> > CLAs, or can we look at click-through options?
>
> I have a feeling that we'll need to continue requiring GPG-signed CLAs,
> but we can run that up the legal flagpole to investigate.

That was my original thinking, too, but I've become more convinced that 
click-through forms are acceptable, so I'd really like to hear a Legal 
opinion on this.

The other aspect of this question lies in how low we want the barrier for new 
contributors.  The CLA has been an automatic test of technical capacity for 
new contributors.  In some cases, we might want that sort of stumbling block 
to give our new contributors a chance to prove themselves in some small way.  
I don't think that this is really a good reason to keep requiring GPG 
signatures, but it's something to think about.

>
> > > * We've talked about finishing the f.r.c migration, now it's time to
> > > assign ownership and *make it happen*.
> > >  	- what are the blockers?
> >
> > The biggest roadblock we face in making the f.r.c migration happen is the
> > Plone site.  We need that site themed suitably, and we need its content
> > built.  I've worked a little on this, but we don't even have any clear
> > decisions about how, exactly, the site is supposed to interact with the
> > wiki and what features we really want to use.  We need some coordination
> > between Fedora Documentation and Fedora Websites to figure out what goes
> > where and to get the Plone content written.  Once the Plone site is
> > ready, we'll migrate the wiki to the new server, along with giving it an
> > upgrade, and we'll wrap the Plone site around it.  Depending upon the
> > timetable, we might even be able to integrate some of the MoinMoin
> > DocBook work that is being done as part of Google's Summer of Code.  That
> > would give the Docs team some more power and flexibility with the wiki.
>
> I think this is a lot of the crux of the discussion points around all of
> plone/f.r.c.  And I think part of this needs someone to step up and take
> charge of the situation, including arm-twisting as necessary...
>
> > Once we have feedback from this meeting, I think Karsten and I need to
> > meet up and talk about making things happen.
>
> Volunteering to run with this? :)
>

I'm willing to take it as far as I can.  If I can get the help of the Docs 
team, and later the Infrastructure team, we should be able to knock out the 
barriers and make some real progress.  At this point, we just need to make a 
few strategic decisions, and I think Karsten and I can figure out the big 
questions that stand in the way.  We've knocked around a few ideas in the 
past about how to handle this, but we didn't yet have anything to experiment 
with at that time.  Now, we can work out real solutions and put the ideas to 
practical use.

-- 
Patrick "The N-Man" Barnes
nman64 at n-man.com

http://www.n-man.com/

LinkedIn:
http://www.linkedin.com/in/nman64

Have I been helpful?  Rate my assistance!
http://rate.affero.net/nman64/
-- 

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://listman.redhat.com/archives/fedora-advisory-board/attachments/20060605/e13087c5/attachment.sig>