From kwade at redhat.com Thu Aug 2 02:12:57 2007 From: kwade at redhat.com (Karsten Wade) Date: Wed, 01 Aug 2007 19:12:57 -0700 Subject: thinking about the Fedora brand (WARNING: this is for you) Message-ID: <1186020777.3521.395.camel@erato.phig.org> This sweet presentation says so many things, I'll mainly let it speak for itself: http://www.peachpit.com/content/images/0321348109/goodies/The_Brand_Gap.pdf I recommend hitting F5 and doing the full-screen slideshow. Why read this? * If you think Fedora is a brand (it is) * If you care what other people *feel* about Fedora (you do) * If you have ever said, "I can't do/don't understand marketing, so I can't be involved in a discussion of the Fedora brand" (too late, you already are involved) * You like pithy formulas: T = r + d Trust = reliability + delight :) - Karsten -- Karsten Wade ^ Fedora Documentation Project Sr. Developer Relations Mgr. | fedoraproject.org/wiki/DocsProject quaid.108.redhat.com | gpg key: AD0E0C41 ////////////////////////////////// \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: This is a digitally signed message part URL: From jspaleta at gmail.com Thu Aug 2 20:43:08 2007 From: jspaleta at gmail.com (Jeff Spaleta) Date: Thu, 2 Aug 2007 12:43:08 -0800 Subject: Update on online/virtual FUDCon: tentatively postponed by one week. Message-ID: <604aa7910708021343w2d9b489by14705c9d97c5126@mail.gmail.com> There's been a late breaking glitch in plans for a virtual fudcon this weekend. Instead of going forward as planned, we will be tentatively postponing things by a week. Sorry for the confusion and the late feedback. I've heard back from the majority of the listed presenters today, I'll be working with them to reschedule sessions. -jef From mmcgrath at redhat.com Thu Aug 2 22:10:53 2007 From: mmcgrath at redhat.com (Mike McGrath) Date: Thu, 02 Aug 2007 17:10:53 -0500 Subject: Update on online/virtual FUDCon: tentatively postponed by one week. In-Reply-To: <604aa7910708021343w2d9b489by14705c9d97c5126@mail.gmail.com> References: <604aa7910708021343w2d9b489by14705c9d97c5126@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <46B2566D.4000601@redhat.com> Jeff Spaleta wrote: > There's been a late breaking glitch in plans for a virtual fudcon this > weekend. Instead of going forward as planned, we will be tentatively > postponing things by a week. Sorry for the confusion and the late > feedback. I've heard back from the majority of the listed presenters > today, I'll be working with them to reschedule sessions. > Question: Where is the official page on the wiki and how are we getting the word out: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/FUDCon/FUDConF8 (says canceled in favor of a week long hack fest but then lists friday - sunday) BTW all, we had our fedora-infrastructure meeting over sip today and it went very very well. If you are planning on using it for anything please contact the fedora-infrastructure-list or #fedora-admin to make sure that we get you set up and tested properly. At its peak we had 14 people on the call and with the exception of some misconfigured clients (of whom were quickly identified and muted) it went very well. I see this being especially useful for a panel discussion where people can ask questions in the IRC chatroom and listen to the answers. Those interested in trying it out: sip:infrastructure at fedoraproject.org Please make sure you come by #fedora-admin before using it, we're still doing many tests and can't promise it will be up until fudcon. -Mike From jspaleta at gmail.com Thu Aug 2 22:22:13 2007 From: jspaleta at gmail.com (Jeff Spaleta) Date: Thu, 2 Aug 2007 14:22:13 -0800 Subject: Update on online/virtual FUDCon: tentatively postponed by one week. In-Reply-To: <46B2566D.4000601@redhat.com> References: <604aa7910708021343w2d9b489by14705c9d97c5126@mail.gmail.com> <46B2566D.4000601@redhat.com> Message-ID: <604aa7910708021522s53474782j4cbed07d6f05b67b@mail.gmail.com> On 8/2/07, Mike McGrath wrote: > http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/FUDCon/FUDConF8 (says canceled in favor of > a week long hack fest but then lists friday - sunday) I'll update this today. thanks for the update on the sip server operation. -jef From poelstra at redhat.com Fri Aug 3 00:58:42 2007 From: poelstra at redhat.com (John Poelstra) Date: Thu, 02 Aug 2007 17:58:42 -0700 Subject: Fedora Board Recap 2007-JUL-31 Message-ID: <46B27DC2.5000501@redhat.com> http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Board/Meetings/2007-07-31 == Roll Call == * Attendees: Max Spevack, Seth Vidal, John Poelstra, Matt Domsch, Jef Spaleta, Karsten Wade, Jesse Keating, Dennis Gilmore Bill Nottingham, and Chris Aillon * Regrets: Steve Dickson, Chris Blizzard == Fedora 8 Test 1 == * Special report from Fedora Release Engineering--Jesse Keating * Going to slip * mostly due to ongoing kernel issue with booting * fix has been found * Pulling updated kernel code along with fix for booting * PPC * IDE support is not in good shape * must run with SELinux disabled * Lost a few days of rawhide due to changes in anaconda at last minute * Be a little stricter with freeze next time--trying to be lenient to accommodate people returning from Guadec. * If all goes well by Friday, will release to mirrors and go live with test release on Tuesday == Virtual FUDCon == * Have nine sessions listed so far--hope to have as many as twelve * Waiting for Red Hat IT to open ports to allow Asterisk so that audio can be provided == fedoraproject.org email == * Report from Max's meeting with Legal * fedoraproject.org email aliases are okay from a legal standpoint * Because only used as an alias and mail is forwarded to another address, Fedora is not required to archive mail. ACTION: Max to summarize the current multimedia issue from recent mail thread and take to Legal for review. == Target Market == * More discussion on fedora-advisory-board thread "Who is our target market?" * Our current documented strategy is to "Be the most innovative, open, and freely available Linux distribution". * Are there any professional marketing people that would be interested in helping that we know? * Could some internal Red Hat resources help with Open Marketing? * How can Fedora do better marketing and bring good attention to the projects? * Is fedora-marketing-list a good first place to send people? * Where do people go to find out current or upcoming Fedora events? * For example, Fedora events coming up at Linux World next week. * Is Fedora a Desktop or a Server? * Fedora is often classified as a desktop by default because it is not typically used as a server (support life-cycle is too short). * We are a "working environment" distro--you can slice it into many different purposes. * Would we want to enable something during firstboot to determine if you are installing a "server" or "desktop"? * To have a cutting edge desktop you have to carry your patches for a while sometimes that are not already upstream. * Could a future release be planned well in advance and targeted with a particular purpose in mind: "Fedora X will be targeted at being the best desktop possible" while focusing much less on server features. * Where in Fedora are we possibly favoring or protecting the server versus the desktop? Where are we doing work on the server where we could instead devote those resources to the desktop? * Network manager is not enabled by default * Why are people choosing Fedora? * Past familiarity with Red Hat and/or Fedora * For whatever reason they favor a Red Hat versus Debian based distribution * If we are banking on "past familiarity" then how we can we really reach new people? * We need to do a better job of explaining the relationship between Red Hat and Fedora? * Both need each other * Fedora tends to try and distance itself from Red Hat and stand on its own. * For Fedora 7 we built tools for people to spin their own distro--why hasn't this caught on more? * It isn't '''fun''' * It is difficult because of artwork and logo trademark issues * Maybe the tools are not as easy to use as we thought * If we want people to spin distros that are based on Fedora, but don't run into trademark issues, we need to: 1. Make a package providing non-{fedora,Red Hat} system logos 1. Include a set a pictures that do not include Red Hat or Fedora in them 1. Put package in a repo 1. Fix everything that relies on existing logos ACTION: For Fedora 8, is it possible to modify fedora logos and the packages that depend on to excluded the words "Fedora" or "Red Hat" everywhere (in the graphics and file names themselves). Who will do it? * Delegate to FESCo or Art Team? * Bill and Seth volunteered to take an initial look From luis at tieguy.org Fri Aug 3 01:10:18 2007 From: luis at tieguy.org (Luis Villa) Date: Thu, 2 Aug 2007 21:10:18 -0400 Subject: Fedora Board Recap 2007-JUL-31 In-Reply-To: <46B27DC2.5000501@redhat.com> References: <46B27DC2.5000501@redhat.com> Message-ID: <2cb10c440708021810o4a51cfe5o42e707f2bd531773@mail.gmail.com> On 8/2/07, John Poelstra wrote: > * For Fedora 7 we built tools for people to spin their own distro--why > hasn't this caught on more? > * It isn't '''fun''' > * It is difficult because of artwork and logo trademark issues > * Maybe the tools are not as easy to use as we thought (d) It is a niche activity. A very important niche activity, and one that Fedora is doing the right thing by pursuing. But still a niche activity. Ubuntu has pursued this incredibly actively for a couple years now, and still has basically no more than a handful of active projects doing it. Definitely keep working on it, and keep improving the tools where you get good feedback, but don't sweat the uptake quite yet. Luis (who used a f7-based Creative Commons liveCD last week and was very impressed) From msaksena at marvell.com Fri Aug 3 01:23:13 2007 From: msaksena at marvell.com (Manas Saksena) Date: Thu, 02 Aug 2007 18:23:13 -0700 Subject: Fedora Board Recap 2007-JUL-31 In-Reply-To: <2cb10c440708021810o4a51cfe5o42e707f2bd531773@mail.gmail.com> References: <46B27DC2.5000501@redhat.com> <2cb10c440708021810o4a51cfe5o42e707f2bd531773@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <46B28381.909@marvell.com> Luis Villa wrote: > On 8/2/07, John Poelstra wrote: > > * For Fedora 7 we built tools for people to spin their own distro--why > > hasn't this caught on more? > > * It isn't '''fun''' > > * It is difficult because of artwork and logo trademark issues > > * Maybe the tools are not as easy to use as we thought > > (d) It is a niche activity. I see two things here... I see the value of creating custom Live CDs. And, maybe people are creating them, just not advertising them. Especially, when distributing and advertising runs afoul of trademark issues. The second thing is that the kind of distros that can be done with the current set of tools is rather limited. To get real benefit, I think you have to enable users to build custom/derivative distributions where the derivative distro can make source level changes to packages, add new packages, etc. OLPC is doing this today. Fedora-ARM is relevant only if it is able to do this. There is not much needed from Fedora to support this -- and it does not really change much of what Fedora is. But, by explicitly supporting the activity, Fedora can increase its developer/user base. And, as ideas mature in those derivative projects, some of them can be adapted back into the main project (along with the developers/users who care about it in the first-place). Manas From jkeating at redhat.com Fri Aug 3 01:31:12 2007 From: jkeating at redhat.com (Jesse Keating) Date: Thu, 2 Aug 2007 21:31:12 -0400 Subject: Fedora Board Recap 2007-JUL-31 In-Reply-To: <46B28381.909@marvell.com> References: <46B27DC2.5000501@redhat.com> <2cb10c440708021810o4a51cfe5o42e707f2bd531773@mail.gmail.com> <46B28381.909@marvell.com> Message-ID: <20070802213112.3dfcfb36@ender> On Thu, 02 Aug 2007 18:23:13 -0700 Manas Saksena wrote: > The second thing is that the kind of distros that can be done with the > current set of tools is rather limited. To get real benefit, I think > you have to enable users to build custom/derivative distributions > where the derivative distro can make source level changes to > packages, add new packages, etc. > > OLPC is doing this today. Fedora-ARM is relevant only if it is able to > do this. > > There is not much needed from Fedora to support this -- and it does > not really change much of what Fedora is. But, by explicitly > supporting the activity, Fedora can increase its developer/user base. > And, as ideas mature in those derivative projects, some of them can > be adapted back into the main project (along with the > developers/users who care about it in the first-place). One of the things I continue to stress as we make these new compose tools is that they work from the basis of a yum repo. How one populates that yum repo is an exercise left up to the developer. Given that these great tools can be used with fedora rpms, with your own rpms, with Joe's rpms, etc.. so long as they are in yum repos available at compose time. We try to keep all the buildsystem specific junk out of these tools and in other specific tools designed to get you as far as a set of yum repos and hand off. -- Jesse Keating Release Engineer: Fedora -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: not available URL: From msaksena at marvell.com Fri Aug 3 01:45:00 2007 From: msaksena at marvell.com (Manas Saksena) Date: Thu, 02 Aug 2007 18:45:00 -0700 Subject: Fedora Board Recap 2007-JUL-31 In-Reply-To: <20070802213112.3dfcfb36@ender> References: <46B27DC2.5000501@redhat.com><2cb10c440708021810o4a51cfe5o42e707f2bd531773@mail.gmail.com><46B28381.909@marvell.com> <20070802213112.3dfcfb36@ender> Message-ID: <46B2889C.6070000@marvell.com> Jesse Keating wrote: > On Thu, 02 Aug 2007 18:23:13 -0700 > Manas Saksena wrote: > > > The second thing is that the kind of distros that can be done with the > > current set of tools is rather limited. To get real benefit, I think > > you have to enable users to build custom/derivative distributions > > where the derivative distro can make source level changes to > > packages, add new packages, etc. > > > > OLPC is doing this today. Fedora-ARM is relevant only if it is able to > > do this. > > > > There is not much needed from Fedora to support this -- and it does > > not really change much of what Fedora is. But, by explicitly > > supporting the activity, Fedora can increase its developer/user base. > > And, as ideas mature in those derivative projects, some of them can > > be adapted back into the main project (along with the > > developers/users who care about it in the first-place). > > One of the things I continue to stress as we make these new compose > tools is that they work from the basis of a yum repo. How one > populates that yum repo is an exercise left up to the developer. Given > that these great tools can be used with fedora rpms, with your own > rpms, with Joe's rpms, etc.. so long as they are in yum repos available > at compose time. We try to keep all the buildsystem specific junk out > of these tools and in other specific tools designed to get you as far > as a set of yum repos and hand off. Indeed. From the perspective of someone who wants to create derivative distros, this is a good thing. Especially, if it means that I can ride on all the tools being built -- rpm, yum, pilgrim, mock, revisor, wevisor, etc. So, what is needed is a recognition that this is a valid use-case that the Fedora project benefits from. And, that the world is more than x86 systems, using grub, running from hard-drive, etc. So, you dont restrict their use unnecessarily. And, if that is done, then the derivative distros can add the capabilities to these tools and push them back for everyone to benefit from. Along the same lines, the advantage of fedora for me is that in my local package repository, I only have to make changes if/when necessary. And, I can ride on the common package repository. So, for Fedora-ARM, I want the base repository to be identical to the Fedora repository. And, then, I want to be able to derive from it and create custom distributions. So, all that is needed is to not make this unnecessarily difficult. And, it is exactly what the OLPC project is doing. Manas From jkeating at redhat.com Fri Aug 3 01:49:17 2007 From: jkeating at redhat.com (Jesse Keating) Date: Thu, 2 Aug 2007 21:49:17 -0400 Subject: Fedora Board Recap 2007-JUL-31 In-Reply-To: <46B2889C.6070000@marvell.com> References: <46B27DC2.5000501@redhat.com> <2cb10c440708021810o4a51cfe5o42e707f2bd531773@mail.gmail.com> <46B28381.909@marvell.com> <20070802213112.3dfcfb36@ender> <46B2889C.6070000@marvell.com> Message-ID: <20070802214917.62993e90@ender> On Thu, 02 Aug 2007 18:45:00 -0700 Manas Saksena wrote: > So, what is needed is a recognition that this is a valid use-case that > the Fedora project benefits from. And, that the world is more than x86 > systems, using grub, running from hard-drive, etc. So, you dont > restrict their use unnecessarily. And, if that is done, then the > derivative distros can add the capabilities to these tools and push > them back for everyone to benefit from. > > Along the same lines, the advantage of fedora for me is that in my > local package repository, I only have to make changes if/when > necessary. And, I can ride on the common package repository. So, for > Fedora-ARM, I want the base repository to be identical to the Fedora > repository. And, then, I want to be able to derive from it and create > custom distributions. So, all that is needed is to not make this > unnecessarily difficult. And, it is exactly what the OLPC project is > doing. My question would have to be then, how are we getting in your way? I speak for myself but I know the feelings of many, and we /absolutely/ wish to see derivatives made of Fedora. More than just "I cut up the packages this way!". Actual changes. Cases we haven't thought of before, things we've been too afraid to try. We're doing things to make this easier, like a new campaign to make it even easier to swap out our Fedora branding for more generic ones or your own. What else can we do to foster this desire to play with the bits and make your own distribution? -- Jesse Keating Release Engineer: Fedora -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: not available URL: From msaksena at marvell.com Fri Aug 3 02:15:04 2007 From: msaksena at marvell.com (Manas Saksena) Date: Thu, 02 Aug 2007 19:15:04 -0700 Subject: Fedora Board Recap 2007-JUL-31 In-Reply-To: <20070802214917.62993e90@ender> References: <46B27DC2.5000501@redhat.com><2cb10c440708021810o4a51cfe5o42e707f2bd531773@mail.gmail.com><46B28381.909@marvell.com> <20070802213112.3dfcfb36@ender><46B2889C.6070000@marvell.com> <20070802214917.62993e90@ender> Message-ID: <46B28FA8.2050705@marvell.com> Jesse Keating wrote: > On Thu, 02 Aug 2007 18:45:00 -0700 > Manas Saksena wrote: > > > So, what is needed is a recognition that this is a valid use-case that > > the Fedora project benefits from. And, that the world is more than x86 > > systems, using grub, running from hard-drive, etc. So, you dont > > restrict their use unnecessarily. And, if that is done, then the > > derivative distros can add the capabilities to these tools and push > > them back for everyone to benefit from. > > > > Along the same lines, the advantage of fedora for me is that in my > > local package repository, I only have to make changes if/when > > necessary. And, I can ride on the common package repository. So, for > > Fedora-ARM, I want the base repository to be identical to the Fedora > > repository. And, then, I want to be able to derive from it and create > > custom distributions. So, all that is needed is to not make this > > unnecessarily difficult. And, it is exactly what the OLPC project is > > doing. > > My question would have to be then, how are we getting in your way? There are patches that we need to apply to packages that enables them to build on ARM. Most of these are trivial. And, they have been sitting in bugzilla for a while. See the ARM tracker bug for pointers to these. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=245418 If we can get these patches applied, we can move onto building packages for ARM per the secondary arch proposal. This simplifies our life, as we then have to only worry about failures (after a package initially builds). There are a couple that are more difficult. They are worthy of a more open discussion. For e.g., GCJ does not work on ARM today. We have a patch that disables that and goes on with life. When gcj on arm works on upstream, we can enable it again, and move on with life. Or, glibc upstream has a glibc-ports tarball that carries support for ARM, and some other architectures. We have a patch that adds the port tarball to glibc to build for ARM and it has been refused by the maintainer. See: https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=246800 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=246801 A slightly more friendly attitude their would be most welcome :-) > I > speak for myself but I know the feelings of many, and we /absolutely/ > wish to see derivatives made of Fedora. More than just "I cut up the > packages this way!". Actual changes. Cases we haven't thought of > before, things we've been too afraid to try. We're doing things to > make this easier, like a new campaign to make it even easier to swap > out our Fedora branding for more generic ones or your own. Good to know :-) > What else > can we do to foster this desire to play with the bits and make your own > distribution? A few things come to mind as things evolve in the future... 1. The VCS discussion should explicitly recognize this use-case. So, it should be possible for someone to clone the fedora src repo, and create derivatives from there, while staying synced up to the fedora repository. 2. As the compose tools evolve, hopefully they will not carry too much of an x86/PC class system bias. For e.g., revisor/wevisor are based on kickstart. I havent looked closely at it, but at first glance it seems to have too much of that bias. I dont know whether these are fixable or not. It would be useful, if using the same set of tools (with appropriate modifications) I can create, for e.g., jffs2 file system images. 3. It is useful to have Fedora packages stay close to upstream. And, if there is a need to put a desktop or server bias to them (by modifying them significantly from upstream sources) then maybe these should be considered in the same way -- i.e., as derivative distros of a base Fedora distro. Regards, Manas From skvidal at fedoraproject.org Fri Aug 3 06:06:28 2007 From: skvidal at fedoraproject.org (seth vidal) Date: Fri, 03 Aug 2007 02:06:28 -0400 Subject: thinking about the Fedora brand (WARNING: this is for you) In-Reply-To: <1186020777.3521.395.camel@erato.phig.org> References: <1186020777.3521.395.camel@erato.phig.org> Message-ID: <1186121188.998.200.camel@cutter> On Wed, 2007-08-01 at 19:12 -0700, Karsten Wade wrote: > This sweet presentation says so many things, I'll mainly let it speak > for itself: > > http://www.peachpit.com/content/images/0321348109/goodies/The_Brand_Gap.pdf > > I recommend hitting F5 and doing the full-screen slideshow. > > Why read this? > > * If you think Fedora is a brand (it is) > * If you care what other people *feel* about Fedora (you do) > * If you have ever said, "I can't do/don't understand marketing, so I > can't be involved in a discussion of the Fedora brand" (too late, you > already are involved) > * You like pithy formulas: T = r + d > Trust = reliability + delight > I watched the slideshow. Seems to be our brand is being defined for us by others - which is a way of saying we're not saying enough about what fedora is. -sv From jmbabich at gmail.com Fri Aug 3 10:55:56 2007 From: jmbabich at gmail.com (John Babich) Date: Fri, 3 Aug 2007 13:55:56 +0300 Subject: thinking about the Fedora brand (WARNING: this is for you) In-Reply-To: <1186121188.998.200.camel@cutter> References: <1186020777.3521.395.camel@erato.phig.org> <1186121188.998.200.camel@cutter> Message-ID: <9d2c731f0708030355x267dc139udec94528c7ae8a23@mail.gmail.com> Karsten: First of all, sorry if I'm posting to the wrong list. As part of our preparation for GITEX, I have had to think about two things recently: 1. Fedora's branding, and 2. Fedora's identity I viewed the excellent presentation (yes, I pressed F5). Here are some conclusions I drew from the slideshow: ONE: BRANDING Here is the crux of the matter: In a commercial context, this is the definition of BRANDING: The main purpose of branding is to get MORE people to buy MORE stuff for MORE years at a HIGHER price. This definition doesn't make sense for a FLOSS community distribution. This definition makes more sense in the Fedora Project context: The main purpose of branding is to get MORE people to produce AND consume MORE FLOSS for MORE years at a HIGHER rate. To further clarify, a strong Fedora brand will communicate the "Trust = Reliability and Delight" formula: Fedora: the Linux distro you can depend on (and more fun, too!) Reliability = Quality and dependability Delight = Cool technology with great design and the enjoyable gut feeling of "scratching the user's itch" TWO: IDENTITY As pointed out in the presentation, "Identity is not a logo". At the same time, we don't want to confuse people by mixing the Fedora and Red Hat logos together. I'm glad Fedora is sponsored by Red Hat. I also appreciate the need for Fedora to have its own identity. This goes beyond legal issues like trademarks to providing quality and reliability. I say the Fedora identity is the experience of being part of the Fedora Project community. The Fedora Project, warts and all, is a quality open source community that produces a quality distro. That's the differentiator. CONCLUSION The purpose of the Fedora Project is to produce and sustain a leading-edge linux distribution with excellent developer and user community support. That's what Fedora offers and sets Fedora apart. >From a 10-year linux user and 1-year Fedora Project member, John Babich Volunteer, Fedora Project From jkeating at redhat.com Fri Aug 3 11:48:35 2007 From: jkeating at redhat.com (Jesse Keating) Date: Fri, 3 Aug 2007 07:48:35 -0400 Subject: Fedora Board Recap 2007-JUL-31 In-Reply-To: <46B28FA8.2050705@marvell.com> References: <46B27DC2.5000501@redhat.com> <2cb10c440708021810o4a51cfe5o42e707f2bd531773@mail.gmail.com> <46B28381.909@marvell.com> <20070802213112.3dfcfb36@ender> <46B2889C.6070000@marvell.com> <20070802214917.62993e90@ender> <46B28FA8.2050705@marvell.com> Message-ID: <20070803074835.4fecea5e@ender> On Thu, 02 Aug 2007 19:15:04 -0700 Manas Saksena wrote: > There are patches that we need to apply to packages that enables them > to build on ARM. Most of these are trivial. And, they have been > sitting in bugzilla for a while. See the ARM tracker bug for pointers > to these. > > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=245418 > > If we can get these patches applied, we can move onto building > packages for ARM per the secondary arch proposal. This simplifies our > life, as we then have to only worry about failures (after a package > initially builds). A few of us were discussing this lately. We think we could pretty reasonably get the cvs access side of the secondary arch stuff in place relatively soon. This would allow you to have commit access to apply these changes yourself. > > There are a couple that are more difficult. They are worthy of a more > open discussion. For e.g., GCJ does not work on ARM today. We have a > patch that disables that and goes on with life. When gcj on arm works > on upstream, we can enable it again, and move on with life. Or, glibc > upstream has a glibc-ports tarball that carries support for ARM, and > some other architectures. We have a patch that adds the port tarball > to glibc to build for ARM and it has been refused by the maintainer. > > See: > > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=246800 > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=246801 > > A slightly more friendly attitude their would be most welcome :-) Yes, that is a problem and we should kindly speak to these maintainers and express to them what we're trying to accomplish in Fedora. It's often easy for maintainers to not "notice" new initiatives in Fedora and not be aware that we're trying for new things. Although upon closer look it seems like you have a reasonable path for the second one, and the first one just needs some expectations set for how long gcj would be disabled on arm. > > > I > > speak for myself but I know the feelings of many, and > > we /absolutely/ wish to see derivatives made of Fedora. More than > > just "I cut up the packages this way!". Actual changes. Cases we > > haven't thought of before, things we've been too afraid to try. > > We're doing things to make this easier, like a new campaign to make > > it even easier to swap out our Fedora branding for more generic > > ones or your own. > > Good to know :-) > > > What else > > can we do to foster this desire to play with the bits and make your > > own distribution? > > A few things come to mind as things evolve in the future... > > 1. The VCS discussion should explicitly recognize this use-case. So, > it should be possible for someone to clone the fedora src repo, > and create derivatives from there, while staying synced up to the > fedora repository. Yes, that is one of our forefront goals. Make it easier for derivative development. > 2. As the compose tools evolve, hopefully they will not carry too much > of an x86/PC class system bias. For e.g., revisor/wevisor are > based on kickstart. I havent looked closely at it, but at first > glance it seems to have too much of that bias. I dont know whether > these are fixable or not. It would be useful, if using the same set > of tools (with appropriate modifications) I can create, for e.g., > jffs2 file system images. I have to ask how you think a kickstart file is bias? We have an external parser in pykickstart. The choice of using kickstart files is so that all things take that as an input. livecd-tools, eventually pungi, anaconda itself, etc... If the same config syntax and parser is used everywhere then we gain the value of code sharing and lower complexity for people creating new configs. I have to wonder though how this would be a bias against arm... > > 3. It is useful to have Fedora packages stay close to upstream. And, > if there is a need to put a desktop or server bias to them (by > modifying them significantly from upstream sources) then maybe these > should be considered in the same way -- i.e., as derivative distros > of a base Fedora distro. That is one of the stated goals of Fedora itself, to stay as close to upstream as possible. And yes, to start out with it would be nice to hand the desktop team the infrastructure needed for them to play with system level changes across the board while trying to create the Desktop derivative. Eventually those changes may be able to make it into upstream, or we can find creative ways to make them for Desktop spins. -- Jesse Keating Release Engineer: Fedora -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: not available URL: From kanarip at kanarip.com Fri Aug 3 12:31:43 2007 From: kanarip at kanarip.com (Jeroen van Meeuwen) Date: Fri, 03 Aug 2007 14:31:43 +0200 Subject: thinking about the Fedora brand (WARNING: this is for you) In-Reply-To: <1186020777.3521.395.camel@erato.phig.org> References: <1186020777.3521.395.camel@erato.phig.org> Message-ID: <46B3202F.9000106@kanarip.com> Karsten Wade wrote: > This sweet presentation says so many things, I'll mainly let it speak > for itself: > > http://www.peachpit.com/content/images/0321348109/goodies/The_Brand_Gap.pdf > > I recommend hitting F5 and doing the full-screen slideshow. > > Why read this? > > * If you think Fedora is a brand (it is) > * If you care what other people *feel* about Fedora (you do) > * If you have ever said, "I can't do/don't understand marketing, so I > can't be involved in a discussion of the Fedora brand" (too late, you > already are involved) > * You like pithy formulas: T = r + d > Trust = reliability + delight > > :) - Karsten > > In particular I like sheets 95&96, saying: Question: When do you know an idea is innovative? Answer: When it scares the hell out of everybody. ;-) Kind regards, Jeroen van Meeuwen -kanarip From sds at tycho.nsa.gov Fri Aug 3 12:34:53 2007 From: sds at tycho.nsa.gov (Stephen Smalley) Date: Fri, 03 Aug 2007 08:34:53 -0400 Subject: Fedora Board Recap 2007-JUL-31 In-Reply-To: <46B27DC2.5000501@redhat.com> References: <46B27DC2.5000501@redhat.com> Message-ID: <1186144493.2434.197.camel@moss-spartans.epoch.ncsc.mil> On Thu, 2007-08-02 at 17:58 -0700, John Poelstra wrote: > http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Board/Meetings/2007-07-31 > > == Roll Call == > > * Attendees: Max Spevack, Seth Vidal, John Poelstra, Matt Domsch, Jef > Spaleta, Karsten Wade, Jesse Keating, Dennis Gilmore Bill Nottingham, > and Chris Aillon > > * Regrets: Steve Dickson, Chris Blizzard > > == Fedora 8 Test 1 == > * Special report from Fedora Release Engineering--Jesse Keating > * Going to slip > * mostly due to ongoing kernel issue with booting > * fix has been found > * Pulling updated kernel code along with fix for booting > * PPC > * IDE support is not in good shape > * must run with SELinux disabled Is the ppc selinux problem a recurrence of the execmem denials due to broken compiler toolchain? Is there a bug report on it? If you just dropped linux-2.6-selinux-mprotect-checks.patch from the Fedora kernel would it allow you to leave selinux enabled on ppc? -- Stephen Smalley National Security Agency From jkeating at redhat.com Fri Aug 3 12:50:06 2007 From: jkeating at redhat.com (Jesse Keating) Date: Fri, 3 Aug 2007 08:50:06 -0400 Subject: Fedora Board Recap 2007-JUL-31 In-Reply-To: <1186144493.2434.197.camel@moss-spartans.epoch.ncsc.mil> References: <46B27DC2.5000501@redhat.com> <1186144493.2434.197.camel@moss-spartans.epoch.ncsc.mil> Message-ID: <20070803085006.1ef4e57a@ender> On Fri, 03 Aug 2007 08:34:53 -0400 Stephen Smalley wrote: > Is the ppc selinux problem a recurrence of the execmem denials due to > broken compiler toolchain? Is there a bug report on it? > If you just dropped linux-2.6-selinux-mprotect-checks.patch from the > Fedora kernel would it allow you to leave selinux enabled on ppc? It's due to using wrong compiler flags for ppc32 binaries resulting in every binary wanting execmem. Selinux obviously denies this. I'm not sure if there is a bug # yet, I've asked jakub to keep me informed when there is one so that we can track it for the mass rebuild that will be necessary. -- Jesse Keating Fedora -- All my bits are free, are yours? -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: not available URL: From gdk at redhat.com Fri Aug 3 13:32:51 2007 From: gdk at redhat.com (Greg Dekoenigsberg) Date: Fri, 3 Aug 2007 09:32:51 -0400 (EDT) Subject: thinking about the Fedora brand (WARNING: this is for you) In-Reply-To: <9d2c731f0708030355x267dc139udec94528c7ae8a23@mail.gmail.com> References: <1186020777.3521.395.camel@erato.phig.org> <1186121188.998.200.camel@cutter> <9d2c731f0708030355x267dc139udec94528c7ae8a23@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: On Fri, 3 Aug 2007, John Babich wrote: > CONCLUSION > > The purpose of the Fedora Project is to produce and sustain a > leading-edge linux distribution with excellent developer and user > community support. Very good. I'd make one change: s/a leading edge/THE leading edge Because our purpose is to be THE leading edge Linux distribution. Let's not be modest about this goal, since other distros aren't modest about theirs. --g -- Greg DeKoenigsberg Community Development Manager Red Hat, Inc. :: 1-919-754-4255 "To whomsoever much hath been given... ...from him much shall be asked" From mmcgrath at redhat.com Fri Aug 3 13:54:05 2007 From: mmcgrath at redhat.com (Mike McGrath) Date: Fri, 03 Aug 2007 08:54:05 -0500 Subject: thinking about the Fedora brand (WARNING: this is for you) In-Reply-To: References: <1186020777.3521.395.camel@erato.phig.org> <1186121188.998.200.camel@cutter> <9d2c731f0708030355x267dc139udec94528c7ae8a23@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <46B3337D.4070707@redhat.com> Greg Dekoenigsberg wrote: > On Fri, 3 Aug 2007, John Babich wrote: > >> CONCLUSION >> >> The purpose of the Fedora Project is to produce and sustain a >> leading-edge linux distribution with excellent developer and user >> community support. > > Very good. I'd make one change: > > s/a leading edge/THE leading edge > > Because our purpose is to be THE leading edge Linux distribution. > Let's not be modest about this goal, since other distros aren't modest > about theirs. Where is the appropriate place to put this on the website? wiki/Overview is completely unfocused. -Mike From sundaram at fedoraproject.org Fri Aug 3 14:26:14 2007 From: sundaram at fedoraproject.org (Rahul Sundaram) Date: Fri, 03 Aug 2007 19:56:14 +0530 Subject: thinking about the Fedora brand (WARNING: this is for you) In-Reply-To: <46B3337D.4070707@redhat.com> References: <1186020777.3521.395.camel@erato.phig.org> <1186121188.998.200.camel@cutter> <9d2c731f0708030355x267dc139udec94528c7ae8a23@mail.gmail.com> <46B3337D.4070707@redhat.com> Message-ID: <46B33B06.8000206@fedoraproject.org> Mike McGrath wrote: > Where is the appropriate place to put this on the website? > wiki/Overview is completely unfocused. Frontpage of Fedora already has this: "The Fedora Project is out front for you, leading the advancement of free, open software and content." Maybe a short form of this should be our slogan? Rahul From gdk at redhat.com Fri Aug 3 14:25:36 2007 From: gdk at redhat.com (Greg Dekoenigsberg) Date: Fri, 3 Aug 2007 10:25:36 -0400 (EDT) Subject: thinking about the Fedora brand (WARNING: this is for you) In-Reply-To: <46B33B06.8000206@fedoraproject.org> References: <1186020777.3521.395.camel@erato.phig.org> <1186121188.998.200.camel@cutter> <9d2c731f0708030355x267dc139udec94528c7ae8a23@mail.gmail.com> <46B3337D.4070707@redhat.com> <46B33B06.8000206@fedoraproject.org> Message-ID: On Fri, 3 Aug 2007, Rahul Sundaram wrote: >> Where is the appropriate place to put this on the website? wiki/Overview >> is completely unfocused. > > Frontpage of Fedora already has this: > > "The Fedora Project is out front for you, leading the advancement of free, > open software and content." > > Maybe a short form of this should be our slogan? Something pithy. Bold, but true and defensible. Fedora. Leading by example. Fedora. Leaders of the Free World. Can we do it in five words? :) --g -- Greg DeKoenigsberg Community Development Manager Red Hat, Inc. :: 1-919-754-4255 "To whomsoever much hath been given... ...from him much shall be asked" From skvidal at fedoraproject.org Fri Aug 3 14:51:17 2007 From: skvidal at fedoraproject.org (seth vidal) Date: Fri, 03 Aug 2007 10:51:17 -0400 Subject: thinking about the Fedora brand (WARNING: this is for you) In-Reply-To: References: <1186020777.3521.395.camel@erato.phig.org> <1186121188.998.200.camel@cutter> <9d2c731f0708030355x267dc139udec94528c7ae8a23@mail.gmail.com> <46B3337D.4070707@redhat.com> <46B33B06.8000206@fedoraproject.org> Message-ID: <1186152677.998.208.camel@cutter> On Fri, 2007-08-03 at 10:25 -0400, Greg Dekoenigsberg wrote: > On Fri, 3 Aug 2007, Rahul Sundaram wrote: > > >> Where is the appropriate place to put this on the website? wiki/Overview > >> is completely unfocused. > > > > Frontpage of Fedora already has this: > > > > "The Fedora Project is out front for you, leading the advancement of free, > > open software and content." > > > > Maybe a short form of this should be our slogan? > > Something pithy. Bold, but true and defensible. > > Fedora. Leading by example. > > Fedora. Leaders of the Free World. > > Can we do it in five words? :) Fedora. Because if you're not in the front the view never changes? -sv From sundaram at fedoraproject.org Fri Aug 3 14:56:18 2007 From: sundaram at fedoraproject.org (Rahul Sundaram) Date: Fri, 03 Aug 2007 20:26:18 +0530 Subject: thinking about the Fedora brand (WARNING: this is for you) In-Reply-To: References: <1186020777.3521.395.camel@erato.phig.org> <1186121188.998.200.camel@cutter> <9d2c731f0708030355x267dc139udec94528c7ae8a23@mail.gmail.com> <46B3337D.4070707@redhat.com> <46B33B06.8000206@fedoraproject.org> Message-ID: <46B34212.7040200@fedoraproject.org> Greg Dekoenigsberg wrote: > > Fedora. Leading by example. > > Fedora. Leaders of the Free World. > > Can we do it in five words? :) > Leading by example doesn't say what kind of example we are trying to set. "Free world" is a bit too vague too and a bit amusing with the patents on software situation. "Leading Free Software" can be interpreted to mean that we are leading the advancement of Free software or we are leaders in Free software. I like both these meanings. The only problem I can see is free vs gratis confusion in that. If you want to try another angle "Leading Software Freedom" "Leading Software Libre" How is that any different from one of those FSF endorsed distributions? Do end users care enough about the Free software aspect of it? I don't want us to be struck on debates on definitions of freedom forever either. Rahul From jkeating at redhat.com Fri Aug 3 14:55:06 2007 From: jkeating at redhat.com (Jesse Keating) Date: Fri, 3 Aug 2007 10:55:06 -0400 Subject: thinking about the Fedora brand (WARNING: this is for you) In-Reply-To: References: <1186020777.3521.395.camel@erato.phig.org> <1186121188.998.200.camel@cutter> <9d2c731f0708030355x267dc139udec94528c7ae8a23@mail.gmail.com> <46B3337D.4070707@redhat.com> <46B33B06.8000206@fedoraproject.org> Message-ID: <20070803105506.30ee1dc7@ender> On Fri, 3 Aug 2007 10:25:36 -0400 (EDT) Greg Dekoenigsberg wrote: > Can we do it in five words? :) See my sig. -- Jesse Keating Fedora -- All my bits are free, are yours? -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: not available URL: From davej at redhat.com Fri Aug 3 14:57:23 2007 From: davej at redhat.com (Dave Jones) Date: Fri, 3 Aug 2007 10:57:23 -0400 Subject: thinking about the Fedora brand (WARNING: this is for you) In-Reply-To: References: <1186020777.3521.395.camel@erato.phig.org> <1186121188.998.200.camel@cutter> <9d2c731f0708030355x267dc139udec94528c7ae8a23@mail.gmail.com> <46B3337D.4070707@redhat.com> <46B33B06.8000206@fedoraproject.org> Message-ID: <20070803145723.GB21379@redhat.com> On Fri, Aug 03, 2007 at 10:25:36AM -0400, Greg Dekoenigsberg wrote: > On Fri, 3 Aug 2007, Rahul Sundaram wrote: > > >> Where is the appropriate place to put this on the website? wiki/Overview > >> is completely unfocused. > > > > Frontpage of Fedora already has this: > > > > "The Fedora Project is out front for you, leading the advancement of free, > > open software and content." > > > > Maybe a short form of this should be our slogan? > > Something pithy. Bold, but true and defensible. > > Fedora. Leading by example. > > Fedora. Leaders of the Free World. I dunno, this comes off as sounding really arrogant to me. Something like "Where innovation happens" sounds a lot more easy to quantify. What exactly we are "leading" is open to question. Dave -- http://www.codemonkey.org.uk From sds at tycho.nsa.gov Fri Aug 3 15:41:22 2007 From: sds at tycho.nsa.gov (Stephen Smalley) Date: Fri, 03 Aug 2007 11:41:22 -0400 Subject: Fedora Board Recap 2007-JUL-31 In-Reply-To: <20070803085006.1ef4e57a@ender> References: <46B27DC2.5000501@redhat.com> <1186144493.2434.197.camel@moss-spartans.epoch.ncsc.mil> <20070803085006.1ef4e57a@ender> Message-ID: <1186155682.2434.225.camel@moss-spartans.epoch.ncsc.mil> On Fri, 2007-08-03 at 08:50 -0400, Jesse Keating wrote: > On Fri, 03 Aug 2007 08:34:53 -0400 > Stephen Smalley wrote: > > > Is the ppc selinux problem a recurrence of the execmem denials due to > > broken compiler toolchain? Is there a bug report on it? > > If you just dropped linux-2.6-selinux-mprotect-checks.patch from the > > Fedora kernel would it allow you to leave selinux enabled on ppc? > > It's due to using wrong compiler flags for ppc32 binaries resulting in > every binary wanting execmem. Selinux obviously denies this. I'm not > sure if there is a bug # yet, I've asked jakub to keep me informed when > there is one so that we can track it for the mass rebuild that will be > necessary. Ok, but note that upstream, those checks are disabled for ppc32 entirely because of this; only Fedora enables them in its ppc32 kernel (and only because they fixed the toolchain and rebuilt earlier). So the other option if a mass rebuild isn't feasible is to just disable those checks in the ppc32 kernel (just drop the current patch from the Fedora kernel and rebuild, reverting to upstream behavior). -- Stephen Smalley National Security Agency From jkeating at redhat.com Fri Aug 3 15:46:48 2007 From: jkeating at redhat.com (Jesse Keating) Date: Fri, 3 Aug 2007 11:46:48 -0400 Subject: Fedora Board Recap 2007-JUL-31 In-Reply-To: <1186155682.2434.225.camel@moss-spartans.epoch.ncsc.mil> References: <46B27DC2.5000501@redhat.com> <1186144493.2434.197.camel@moss-spartans.epoch.ncsc.mil> <20070803085006.1ef4e57a@ender> <1186155682.2434.225.camel@moss-spartans.epoch.ncsc.mil> Message-ID: <20070803114648.677ec902@ender> On Fri, 03 Aug 2007 11:41:22 -0400 Stephen Smalley wrote: > Ok, but note that upstream, those checks are disabled for ppc32 > entirely because of this; only Fedora enables them in its ppc32 > kernel (and only because they fixed the toolchain and rebuilt > earlier). So the other option if a mass rebuild isn't feasible is to > just disable those checks in the ppc32 kernel (just drop the current > patch from the Fedora kernel and rebuild, reverting to upstream > behavior). We have to do a rebuild anyway for various other things coming down the pipeline so its not that much of an onus to rebuild for this too. -- Jesse Keating Fedora -- All my bits are free, are yours? -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: not available URL: From notting at redhat.com Fri Aug 3 16:09:53 2007 From: notting at redhat.com (Bill Nottingham) Date: Fri, 3 Aug 2007 12:09:53 -0400 Subject: thinking about the Fedora brand (WARNING: this is for you) In-Reply-To: <46B33B06.8000206@fedoraproject.org> References: <1186020777.3521.395.camel@erato.phig.org> <1186121188.998.200.camel@cutter> <9d2c731f0708030355x267dc139udec94528c7ae8a23@mail.gmail.com> <46B3337D.4070707@redhat.com> <46B33B06.8000206@fedoraproject.org> Message-ID: <20070803160953.GA21944@nostromo.devel.redhat.com> Rahul Sundaram (sundaram at fedoraproject.org) said: > Frontpage of Fedora already has this: > > "The Fedora Project is out front for you, leading the advancement of free, > open software and content." Isn't the guy who leads the charge waving the flag the one that gets shot first? Bill From kwade at redhat.com Fri Aug 3 16:25:43 2007 From: kwade at redhat.com (Karsten Wade) Date: Fri, 03 Aug 2007 09:25:43 -0700 Subject: thinking about the Fedora brand (WARNING: this is for you) In-Reply-To: <20070803160953.GA21944@nostromo.devel.redhat.com> References: <1186020777.3521.395.camel@erato.phig.org> <1186121188.998.200.camel@cutter> <9d2c731f0708030355x267dc139udec94528c7ae8a23@mail.gmail.com> <46B3337D.4070707@redhat.com> <46B33B06.8000206@fedoraproject.org> <20070803160953.GA21944@nostromo.devel.redhat.com> Message-ID: <1186158343.27970.472.camel@erato.phig.org> On Fri, 2007-08-03 at 12:09 -0400, Bill Nottingham wrote: > Rahul Sundaram (sundaram at fedoraproject.org) said: > > Frontpage of Fedora already has this: > > > > "The Fedora Project is out front for you, leading the advancement of free, > > open software and content." > > Isn't the guy who leads the charge waving the flag the one that gets > shot first? BTW, that sentence definitely suffers, but ... anyway, I adjusted it when that site went live, but in my mind it was always a placeholder. -- Karsten Wade ^ Fedora Documentation Project Sr. Developer Relations Mgr. | fedoraproject.org/wiki/DocsProject quaid.108.redhat.com | gpg key: AD0E0C41 ////////////////////////////////// \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: This is a digitally signed message part URL: From jspaleta at gmail.com Fri Aug 3 16:27:34 2007 From: jspaleta at gmail.com (Jeff Spaleta) Date: Fri, 3 Aug 2007 08:27:34 -0800 Subject: thinking about the Fedora brand (WARNING: this is for you) In-Reply-To: <1186152677.998.208.camel@cutter> References: <1186020777.3521.395.camel@erato.phig.org> <1186121188.998.200.camel@cutter> <9d2c731f0708030355x267dc139udec94528c7ae8a23@mail.gmail.com> <46B3337D.4070707@redhat.com> <46B33B06.8000206@fedoraproject.org> <1186152677.998.208.camel@cutter> Message-ID: <604aa7910708030927j73e8d356y4ecd066974590e91@mail.gmail.com> On 8/3/07, seth vidal wrote: > Fedora. Because if you're not in the front the view never changes? I think I have a few sled dog images that would make a nice banner to go along with the slogan. -jef From kwade at redhat.com Fri Aug 3 16:34:07 2007 From: kwade at redhat.com (Karsten Wade) Date: Fri, 03 Aug 2007 09:34:07 -0700 Subject: thinking about the Fedora brand (WARNING: this is for you) In-Reply-To: <604aa7910708030927j73e8d356y4ecd066974590e91@mail.gmail.com> References: <1186020777.3521.395.camel@erato.phig.org> <1186121188.998.200.camel@cutter> <9d2c731f0708030355x267dc139udec94528c7ae8a23@mail.gmail.com> <46B3337D.4070707@redhat.com> <46B33B06.8000206@fedoraproject.org> <1186152677.998.208.camel@cutter> <604aa7910708030927j73e8d356y4ecd066974590e91@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <1186158847.27970.481.camel@erato.phig.org> On Fri, 2007-08-03 at 08:27 -0800, Jeff Spaleta wrote: > On 8/3/07, seth vidal wrote: > > Fedora. Because if you're not in the front the view never changes? > > I think I have a few sled dog images that would make a nice banner to > go along with > the slogan. I'm seeing a take off on a (de)motivation poster ... -- Karsten Wade ^ Fedora Documentation Project Sr. Developer Relations Mgr. | fedoraproject.org/wiki/DocsProject quaid.108.redhat.com | gpg key: AD0E0C41 ////////////////////////////////// \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: This is a digitally signed message part URL: From skvidal at fedoraproject.org Fri Aug 3 16:42:06 2007 From: skvidal at fedoraproject.org (seth vidal) Date: Fri, 03 Aug 2007 12:42:06 -0400 Subject: thinking about the Fedora brand (WARNING: this is for you) In-Reply-To: <1186158847.27970.481.camel@erato.phig.org> References: <1186020777.3521.395.camel@erato.phig.org> <1186121188.998.200.camel@cutter> <9d2c731f0708030355x267dc139udec94528c7ae8a23@mail.gmail.com> <46B3337D.4070707@redhat.com> <46B33B06.8000206@fedoraproject.org> <1186152677.998.208.camel@cutter> <604aa7910708030927j73e8d356y4ecd066974590e91@mail.gmail.com> <1186158847.27970.481.camel@erato.phig.org> Message-ID: <1186159326.998.216.camel@cutter> On Fri, 2007-08-03 at 09:34 -0700, Karsten Wade wrote: > On Fri, 2007-08-03 at 08:27 -0800, Jeff Spaleta wrote: > > On 8/3/07, seth vidal wrote: > > > Fedora. Because if you're not in the front the view never changes? > > > > I think I have a few sled dog images that would make a nice banner to > > go along with > > the slogan. > > I'm seeing a take off on a (de)motivation poster ... > with a picture of a dog's ass at about 6"? -sv From sundaram at fedoraproject.org Fri Aug 3 16:50:57 2007 From: sundaram at fedoraproject.org (Rahul Sundaram) Date: Fri, 03 Aug 2007 22:20:57 +0530 Subject: thinking about the Fedora brand (WARNING: this is for you) In-Reply-To: <20070803160953.GA21944@nostromo.devel.redhat.com> References: <1186020777.3521.395.camel@erato.phig.org> <1186121188.998.200.camel@cutter> <9d2c731f0708030355x267dc139udec94528c7ae8a23@mail.gmail.com> <46B3337D.4070707@redhat.com> <46B33B06.8000206@fedoraproject.org> <20070803160953.GA21944@nostromo.devel.redhat.com> Message-ID: <46B35CF1.9030600@fedoraproject.org> Bill Nottingham wrote: > Rahul Sundaram (sundaram at fedoraproject.org) said: >> Frontpage of Fedora already has this: >> >> "The Fedora Project is out front for you, leading the advancement of free, >> open software and content." > > Isn't the guy who leads the charge waving the flag the one that gets > shot first? It sure looks like we are getting shot all the time. Haven't you answered your MP3 question this week? Rahul From kwade at redhat.com Fri Aug 3 17:13:11 2007 From: kwade at redhat.com (Karsten Wade) Date: Fri, 03 Aug 2007 10:13:11 -0700 Subject: thinking about the Fedora brand (WARNING: this is for you) In-Reply-To: <1186159326.998.216.camel@cutter> References: <1186020777.3521.395.camel@erato.phig.org> <1186121188.998.200.camel@cutter> <9d2c731f0708030355x267dc139udec94528c7ae8a23@mail.gmail.com> <46B3337D.4070707@redhat.com> <46B33B06.8000206@fedoraproject.org> <1186152677.998.208.camel@cutter> <604aa7910708030927j73e8d356y4ecd066974590e91@mail.gmail.com> <1186158847.27970.481.camel@erato.phig.org> <1186159326.998.216.camel@cutter> Message-ID: <1186161191.27970.485.camel@erato.phig.org> On Fri, 2007-08-03 at 12:42 -0400, seth vidal wrote: > On Fri, 2007-08-03 at 09:34 -0700, Karsten Wade wrote: > > On Fri, 2007-08-03 at 08:27 -0800, Jeff Spaleta wrote: > > > On 8/3/07, seth vidal wrote: > > > > Fedora. Because if you're not in the front the view never changes? > > > > > > I think I have a few sled dog images that would make a nice banner to > > > go along with > > > the slogan. > > > > I'm seeing a take off on a (de)motivation poster ... > > > > with a picture of a dog's ass at about 6"? *ding, ding* We have a Wiener. -- Karsten Wade ^ Fedora Documentation Project Sr. Developer Relations Mgr. | fedoraproject.org/wiki/DocsProject quaid.108.redhat.com | gpg key: AD0E0C41 ////////////////////////////////// \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: This is a digitally signed message part URL: From jspaleta at gmail.com Fri Aug 3 17:20:52 2007 From: jspaleta at gmail.com (Jeff Spaleta) Date: Fri, 3 Aug 2007 09:20:52 -0800 Subject: thinking about the Fedora brand (WARNING: this is for you) In-Reply-To: <1186158847.27970.481.camel@erato.phig.org> References: <1186020777.3521.395.camel@erato.phig.org> <1186121188.998.200.camel@cutter> <9d2c731f0708030355x267dc139udec94528c7ae8a23@mail.gmail.com> <46B3337D.4070707@redhat.com> <46B33B06.8000206@fedoraproject.org> <1186152677.998.208.camel@cutter> <604aa7910708030927j73e8d356y4ecd066974590e91@mail.gmail.com> <1186158847.27970.481.camel@erato.phig.org> Message-ID: <604aa7910708031020h1b5d3418h917e5541cbceb0d0@mail.gmail.com> On 8/3/07, Karsten Wade wrote: > I'm seeing a take off on a (de)motivation poster ... Dude that saying is everyhere up here.... its a motto of sorts for the mushers. Here's someone attempt to portray the lead dog's pov: http://www.polarhusky.com/logistics/dog_yard/polar_husky_world/running_the_team.html "...it's hard to be a lead dog because you have to listen all the time. But it is also tons of fun because you get to check out everywhere we run FIRST, and you get to hunt! As you may know, if you're not the lead dog, the view never changes! Leading the team is fun, but it also requires lots of hard work, listening, and responsibility." work... listening... responsibility. balanced against fun...first. Fedora is THE lead dog, in the team of dogs, that is pulling the sled full of open source cargo and community. -jef"fudcon f11...North to Alaska!!!!!!"spaleta From Axel.Thimm at ATrpms.net Fri Aug 3 18:01:39 2007 From: Axel.Thimm at ATrpms.net (Axel Thimm) Date: Fri, 3 Aug 2007 20:01:39 +0200 Subject: thinking about the Fedora brand (WARNING: this is for you) In-Reply-To: References: <1186020777.3521.395.camel@erato.phig.org> <1186121188.998.200.camel@cutter> <9d2c731f0708030355x267dc139udec94528c7ae8a23@mail.gmail.com> <46B3337D.4070707@redhat.com> <46B33B06.8000206@fedoraproject.org> Message-ID: <20070803180139.GH9578@puariko.nirvana> On Fri, Aug 03, 2007 at 10:25:36AM -0400, Greg Dekoenigsberg wrote: > On Fri, 3 Aug 2007, Rahul Sundaram wrote: > > >>Where is the appropriate place to put this on the website? wiki/Overview > >>is completely unfocused. > > > >Frontpage of Fedora already has this: > > > >"The Fedora Project is out front for you, leading the advancement of free, > >open software and content." > > > >Maybe a short form of this should be our slogan? > > Something pithy. Bold, but true and defensible. > > Fedora. Leading by example. > > Fedora. Leaders of the Free World. Tha latter sounds like from the cold war ;) > Can we do it in five words? :) Fedora, open source motor Fedora, already there -- Axel.Thimm at ATrpms.net -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: not available URL: From msaksena at marvell.com Fri Aug 3 18:45:08 2007 From: msaksena at marvell.com (Manas Saksena) Date: Fri, 03 Aug 2007 11:45:08 -0700 Subject: Fedora Board Recap 2007-JUL-31 In-Reply-To: <20070803074835.4fecea5e@ender> References: <46B27DC2.5000501@redhat.com><2cb10c440708021810o4a51cfe5o42e707f2bd531773@mail.gmail.com><46B28381.909@marvell.com> <20070802213112.3dfcfb36@ender><46B2889C.6070000@marvell.com> <20070802214917.62993e90@ender><46B28FA8.2050705@marvell.com> <20070803074835.4fecea5e@ender> Message-ID: <46B377B4.6090901@marvell.com> Jesse Keating wrote: > On Thu, 02 Aug 2007 19:15:04 -0700 > Manas Saksena wrote: > > > There are patches that we need to apply to packages that enables them > > to build on ARM. Most of these are trivial. And, they have been > > sitting in bugzilla for a while. See the ARM tracker bug for pointers > > to these. > > > > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=245418 > > > > If we can get these patches applied, we can move onto building > > packages for ARM per the secondary arch proposal. This simplifies our > > life, as we then have to only worry about failures (after a package > > initially builds). > > A few of us were discussing this lately. We think we could pretty > reasonably get the cvs access side of the secondary arch stuff in place > relatively soon. This would allow you to have commit access to apply > these changes yourself. That would be helpful. > > There are a couple that are more difficult. They are worthy of a more > > open discussion. For e.g., GCJ does not work on ARM today. We have a > > patch that disables that and goes on with life. When gcj on arm works > > on upstream, we can enable it again, and move on with life. Or, glibc > > upstream has a glibc-ports tarball that carries support for ARM, and > > some other architectures. We have a patch that adds the port tarball > > to glibc to build for ARM and it has been refused by the maintainer. > > > > See: > > > > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=246800 > > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=246801 > > > > A slightly more friendly attitude their would be most welcome :-) > > Yes, that is a problem and we should kindly speak to these maintainers > and express to them what we're trying to accomplish in Fedora. It's > often easy for maintainers to not "notice" new initiatives in Fedora > and not be aware that we're trying for new things. Fedora is a large project -- it is important that people march in the same direction roughly. I think there is a gap between where some in the Fedora leadership want to do and the thinking of a significant number of maintainers. > Although upon > closer look it seems like you have a reasonable path for the second > one, and the first one just needs some expectations set for how long > gcj would be disabled on arm. I will live with the compromise. I say compromise since the glibc stuff will be 95% duplicate --- I dont see how that can be perceived to be good. And, as for gcj -- I havent seen any need for it for what I see as the user-base for me. So, I have no incentive to spend the time and energy to get that fixed. Hopefully, openjdk will come along and replace the need for gcj. > > 1. The VCS discussion should explicitly recognize this use-case. So, > > it should be possible for someone to clone the fedora src repo, > > and create derivatives from there, while staying synced up to the > > fedora repository. > > Yes, that is one of our forefront goals. Make it easier for derivative > development. Great. > > 2. As the compose tools evolve, hopefully they will not carry too much > > of an x86/PC class system bias. For e.g., revisor/wevisor are > > based on kickstart. I havent looked closely at it, but at first > > glance it seems to have too much of that bias. I dont know whether > > these are fixable or not. It would be useful, if using the same set > > of tools (with appropriate modifications) I can create, for e.g., > > jffs2 file system images. > > I have to ask how you think a kickstart file is bias? We have an > external parser in pykickstart. The choice of using kickstart files is > so that all things take that as an input. livecd-tools, eventually > pungi, anaconda itself, etc... If the same config syntax and parser is > used everywhere then we gain the value of code sharing and lower > complexity for people creating new configs. I have to wonder though > how this would be a bias against arm... I dunno. I havent looked at it close enough yet. I like the goal, and if we can leverage the shared code-base, then that would be wonderful. It depends on how easy it will be to extend with new commands etc. > > 3. It is useful to have Fedora packages stay close to upstream. And, > > if there is a need to put a desktop or server bias to them (by > > modifying them significantly from upstream sources) then maybe these > > should be considered in the same way -- i.e., as derivative distros > > of a base Fedora distro. > > That is one of the stated goals of Fedora itself, to stay as close to > upstream as possible. And yes, to start out with it would be nice to > hand the desktop team the infrastructure needed for them to play with > system level changes across the board while trying to create the > Desktop derivative. Eventually those changes may be able to make it > into upstream, or we can find creative ways to make them for Desktop > spins. Glad to see that we are on the same page. I dont know how much of the rest of fedora community, maintainers, and leadership is on the same page. For me, the attractions of Fedora are: -- closely synchronized to upstream -- secondary arch policy -- opening up of infrastructure, processes, etc. -- used by developers (especially in corporate settings) -- separation of build and compose tools -- a rich, well-maintained package repository -- many developers active in upstream projects -- regular 6m release schedule The biggest problems that I see and get complaints from others are -- server bias to serve RH's core business -- desktop weakness compared to ubuntu The above are both real and perceived. And, I think directly related to Fedora's brand (cf the fedora brand discussion). Regards, Manas From blizzard at redhat.com Fri Aug 3 21:37:34 2007 From: blizzard at redhat.com (Christopher Blizzard) Date: Fri, 03 Aug 2007 17:37:34 -0400 Subject: thinking about the Fedora brand (WARNING: this is for you) In-Reply-To: <1186121188.998.200.camel@cutter> References: <1186020777.3521.395.camel@erato.phig.org> <1186121188.998.200.camel@cutter> Message-ID: <1186177054.12125.74.camel@localhost.localdomain> On Fri, 2007-08-03 at 02:06 -0400, seth vidal wrote: > > I watched the slideshow. > Seems to be our brand is being defined for us by others - which is a > way > of saying we're not saying enough about what fedora is. Sort of. Having not yet looked at the presentation, a couple of things that I've learned from our (wonderful) branding folks inside of Red Hat about brands in general: 1. "A brand is a sponge." They absorb all kinds of things, good and bad. And you don't necessarily get to choose what it is. 2. Your perception of what a brand is and the actual perception of people outside of an organization can be completely different. Very often if you want to figure out what people think about a brand you have to find other people and ask them. And be ready to hear something you didn't expect. --Chris From jspaleta at gmail.com Fri Aug 3 21:56:29 2007 From: jspaleta at gmail.com (Jeff Spaleta) Date: Fri, 3 Aug 2007 13:56:29 -0800 Subject: Fedora Board Recap 2007-JUL-31 In-Reply-To: <46B28381.909@marvell.com> References: <46B27DC2.5000501@redhat.com> <2cb10c440708021810o4a51cfe5o42e707f2bd531773@mail.gmail.com> <46B28381.909@marvell.com> Message-ID: <604aa7910708031456s48f212feh245fdb5bbd188fce@mail.gmail.com> On 8/2/07, Manas Saksena wrote: > I see the value of creating custom Live CDs. And, maybe people are > creating them, just not advertising them. Especially, when distributing > and advertising runs afoul of trademark issues. First step is to make it easy to avoid trademark issues, and it looks like we should be able to do that with generic logos in a package that conflicts with fedora-logos. Please,everyone be on the look out for packages in fedora which include the fedora trademarks. Only the fedora-logos package should include the protected trademarked material. If you run across a package that includes them we need to file a bug against the package component as well as fedora-logos so we can get this fixed up. If we can keep all the other packages clear of fedora marks we make it easier for derived custom spins to re-brand as needed. I'm still interested in taking it further and trying to find a way to give everyone who is working with our tools and our content to raise their hand and say they stand among a group of peer projects as part of a larger effort. We can't have these project advertise fedora as a mark, but I'll be damned if we can't find a way to have Fedora and all these projects advertise..community. -jef"it's clobbering time"spaleta From sundaram at fedoraproject.org Fri Aug 3 23:09:32 2007 From: sundaram at fedoraproject.org (Rahul Sundaram) Date: Sat, 04 Aug 2007 04:39:32 +0530 Subject: Fedora Board Recap 2007-JUL-31 In-Reply-To: <604aa7910708031456s48f212feh245fdb5bbd188fce@mail.gmail.com> References: <46B27DC2.5000501@redhat.com> <2cb10c440708021810o4a51cfe5o42e707f2bd531773@mail.gmail.com> <46B28381.909@marvell.com> <604aa7910708031456s48f212feh245fdb5bbd188fce@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <46B3B5AC.4080405@fedoraproject.org> Jeff Spaleta wrote: > I'm still interested in taking it further and trying to find a way to > give everyone who is working with our tools and our content to raise > their hand and say they stand among a group of peer projects as part > of a larger effort. We can't have these project advertise fedora as a > mark, but I'll be damned if we can't find a way to have Fedora and all > these projects advertise..community. Right. With generic logos package we can solve one of the requirements for derivatives which is to distinguish themselves as a different brand and effort from Fedora so that they can add packages outside the distribution for whatever reasons and redistribute it to other folks. One of the other mutually beneficial requirements is to help a derivative declare themselves as based on Fedora. Not Fedora. Just based on it. This would come under fair use regardless of the rights and restrictions on the trademark guidelines but we can benefit from making it easier for derivatives to do this. Maybe another logos package and exposing that as a easy to use functionality in live cd tools, pungi, revisor, wevisor etc to replace fedora-logos with either generic logos or derivative logos package or custom feed the images dynamically without even building a rpm package. Rahul From kwade at redhat.com Fri Aug 3 23:17:55 2007 From: kwade at redhat.com (Karsten Wade) Date: Fri, 03 Aug 2007 16:17:55 -0700 Subject: thinking about the Fedora brand (WARNING: this is for you) In-Reply-To: <1186177054.12125.74.camel@localhost.localdomain> References: <1186020777.3521.395.camel@erato.phig.org> <1186121188.998.200.camel@cutter> <1186177054.12125.74.camel@localhost.localdomain> Message-ID: <1186183075.27970.524.camel@erato.phig.org> On Fri, 2007-08-03 at 17:37 -0400, Christopher Blizzard wrote: > On Fri, 2007-08-03 at 02:06 -0400, seth vidal wrote: > > > > I watched the slideshow. > > Seems to be our brand is being defined for us by others - which is a > > way > > of saying we're not saying enough about what fedora is. > > Sort of. Having not yet looked at the presentation, a couple of things > that I've learned from our (wonderful) branding folks inside of Red Hat > about brands in general: BTW, that's where I bounced this from -- an internal circulation amongst the BrandComm folks. And I thoroughly concur with the "wonderful" tag; I hope you all get a chance to hang with these cats. - Karsten, "Down with BCD, yeah you know me" -- Karsten Wade ^ Fedora Documentation Project Sr. Developer Relations Mgr. | fedoraproject.org/wiki/DocsProject quaid.108.redhat.com | gpg key: AD0E0C41 ////////////////////////////////// \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: This is a digitally signed message part URL: From jspaleta at gmail.com Fri Aug 3 23:45:05 2007 From: jspaleta at gmail.com (Jeff Spaleta) Date: Fri, 3 Aug 2007 15:45:05 -0800 Subject: Fedora Board Recap 2007-JUL-31 In-Reply-To: <46B3B5AC.4080405@fedoraproject.org> References: <46B27DC2.5000501@redhat.com> <2cb10c440708021810o4a51cfe5o42e707f2bd531773@mail.gmail.com> <46B28381.909@marvell.com> <604aa7910708031456s48f212feh245fdb5bbd188fce@mail.gmail.com> <46B3B5AC.4080405@fedoraproject.org> Message-ID: <604aa7910708031645v4f858adfx5bf0e35e341a08fa@mail.gmail.com> On 8/3/07, Rahul Sundaram wrote: > Maybe another logos package and exposing that as a easy to use > functionality in live cd tools, pungi, revisor, wevisor etc to replace > fedora-logos with either generic logos or derivative logos package or > custom feed the images dynamically without even building a rpm package. http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Releases/FeatureGenericLogos From kanarip at kanarip.com Sat Aug 4 11:40:22 2007 From: kanarip at kanarip.com (Jeroen van Meeuwen) Date: Sat, 04 Aug 2007 13:40:22 +0200 Subject: thinking about the Fedora brand (WARNING: this is for you) In-Reply-To: <1186121188.998.200.camel@cutter> References: <1186020777.3521.395.camel@erato.phig.org> <1186121188.998.200.camel@cutter> Message-ID: <46B465A6.5040701@kanarip.com> seth vidal wrote: > I watched the slideshow. > Seems to be our brand is being defined for us by others - which is a way > of saying we're not saying enough about what fedora is. > I interpreted it more literally: It's not us defining our brand, it's them; no matter how we advertise it the brand will always be defined by the audience, not us. Our product and principles builds our brand; If the audience is thinking we adopt buggy brand new software and technology, the gut feeling will be that Fedora is buggy -or at least that's what I assume leaves the biggest impression. Some people though think it's cool as it's way more of an engineering distribution if something fails every now and then, rather then *just work*. Though if the audience sees we adopt brand new software and technology without exposing them to whatever child diseases brand new software and technology usually has, they may slowly but surely start thinking we are innovative instead of buggy. As the presentation also suggests, it's anyone's gut feeling that makes up the brand, not us. We can't tell anyone what kind of gut feeling they should have when I sneak up behind them and whisper "Fedora" in their ear. It's them. How do we change that? Kind regards, Jeroen van Meeuwen -kanarip From ville.skytta at iki.fi Mon Aug 6 21:19:12 2007 From: ville.skytta at iki.fi (Ville =?iso-8859-1?q?Skytt=E4?=) Date: Tue, 7 Aug 2007 00:19:12 +0300 Subject: Fwd: Re: [Fedora-packaging] Licensing guidelines suggestions Message-ID: <200708070019.13063.ville.skytta@iki.fi> Hello fab-list, Below is some discussion about Fedora licensing that took place on fedora-packaging to day, perhaps the board could put it on the meeting agenda? ---------- Forwarded Message ---------- Subject: Re: [Fedora-packaging] Licensing guidelines suggestions Date: Monday 06 August 2007 From: "Tom \"spot\" Callaway" To: Discussion of RPM packaging standards and practices for Fedora On Mon, 2007-08-06 at 23:05 +0300, Ville Skytt? wrote: > Hello, > > Here's a few notes/questions that IMO need to be addressed in the new > licensing guidelines in Wiki. IANAL, etc, but anyway, something for near > future FPC meetings (which I still probably won't be able to attend to for a > couple of weeks): > > 1) The licensing pages strongly imply that OSI-approved licenses are ok. > However for example the original Artistic license is OSI-approved but listed > in Wiki page as "bad". Something needs real fixing - "ask upstream to move > to a "good" Artistic license" is IMO just a band aid. > http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Licensing > http://www.opensource.org/licenses/artistic-license.php I think we're going to need the Fedora Board to decide this. Its a little outside of our jurisdiction, unfortunately. From notting at redhat.com Mon Aug 6 22:59:32 2007 From: notting at redhat.com (Bill Nottingham) Date: Mon, 6 Aug 2007 18:59:32 -0400 Subject: Fwd: Re: [Fedora-packaging] Licensing guidelines suggestions In-Reply-To: <200708070019.13063.ville.skytta@iki.fi> References: <200708070019.13063.ville.skytta@iki.fi> Message-ID: <20070806225932.GI4275@nostromo.devel.redhat.com> > Below is some discussion about Fedora licensing that took place on > fedora-packaging to day, perhaps the board could put it on the meeting > agenda? What was the original reason why it was deemed bad? Bill From tcallawa at redhat.com Tue Aug 7 13:54:42 2007 From: tcallawa at redhat.com (Tom "spot" Callaway) Date: Tue, 07 Aug 2007 09:54:42 -0400 Subject: Fwd: Re: [Fedora-packaging] Licensing guidelines suggestions In-Reply-To: <20070806225932.GI4275@nostromo.devel.redhat.com> References: <200708070019.13063.ville.skytta@iki.fi> <20070806225932.GI4275@nostromo.devel.redhat.com> Message-ID: <1186494882.3368.16.camel@dhcp67.install.boston.redhat.com> On Mon, 2007-08-06 at 18:59 -0400, Bill Nottingham wrote: > > Below is some discussion about Fedora licensing that took place on > > fedora-packaging to day, perhaps the board could put it on the meeting > > agenda? > > What was the original reason why it was deemed bad? The original Artistic license is far too vague, the intent is not clear. Upstream perl agreed, redid the license and made a 2.0 version, which is free & GPL compat. Unfortunately, nothing will use Artistic 2.0 until perl6. ~spot From sundaram at fedoraproject.org Tue Aug 7 14:10:18 2007 From: sundaram at fedoraproject.org (Rahul Sundaram) Date: Tue, 07 Aug 2007 19:40:18 +0530 Subject: Fwd: Re: [Fedora-packaging] Licensing guidelines suggestions In-Reply-To: <1186494882.3368.16.camel@dhcp67.install.boston.redhat.com> References: <200708070019.13063.ville.skytta@iki.fi> <20070806225932.GI4275@nostromo.devel.redhat.com> <1186494882.3368.16.camel@dhcp67.install.boston.redhat.com> Message-ID: <46B87D4A.3070903@fedoraproject.org> Tom "spot" Callaway wrote: > On Mon, 2007-08-06 at 18:59 -0400, Bill Nottingham wrote: >>> Below is some discussion about Fedora licensing that took place on >>> fedora-packaging to day, perhaps the board could put it on the meeting >>> agenda? >> What was the original reason why it was deemed bad? > > The original Artistic license is far too vague, the intent is not clear. > Upstream perl agreed, redid the license and made a 2.0 version, which is > free & GPL compat. > > Unfortunately, nothing will use Artistic 2.0 until perl6. Since you aren't relying solely on OSI requirement why not drop it and point to the licensing wiki page as the canonical list in http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/LicensingGuidelines? Rahul From tcallawa at redhat.com Tue Aug 7 14:11:00 2007 From: tcallawa at redhat.com (Tom "spot" Callaway) Date: Tue, 07 Aug 2007 10:11:00 -0400 Subject: Fwd: Re: [Fedora-packaging] Licensing guidelines suggestions In-Reply-To: <46B87D4A.3070903@fedoraproject.org> References: <200708070019.13063.ville.skytta@iki.fi> <20070806225932.GI4275@nostromo.devel.redhat.com> <1186494882.3368.16.camel@dhcp67.install.boston.redhat.com> <46B87D4A.3070903@fedoraproject.org> Message-ID: <1186495860.3368.18.camel@dhcp67.install.boston.redhat.com> On Tue, 2007-08-07 at 19:40 +0530, Rahul Sundaram wrote: > Tom "spot" Callaway wrote: > > On Mon, 2007-08-06 at 18:59 -0400, Bill Nottingham wrote: > >>> Below is some discussion about Fedora licensing that took place on > >>> fedora-packaging to day, perhaps the board could put it on the meeting > >>> agenda? > >> What was the original reason why it was deemed bad? > > > > The original Artistic license is far too vague, the intent is not clear. > > Upstream perl agreed, redid the license and made a 2.0 version, which is > > free & GPL compat. > > > > Unfortunately, nothing will use Artistic 2.0 until perl6. > > Since you aren't relying solely on OSI requirement why not drop it and > point to the licensing wiki page as the canonical list in > http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/LicensingGuidelines? That's not the question that needs answering. The question is: There are licenses which are on the OSI approved list but which are considered non-free by the FSF. Are these licenses OK for Fedora or not? ~spot From tcallawa at redhat.com Tue Aug 7 14:14:12 2007 From: tcallawa at redhat.com (Tom "spot" Callaway) Date: Tue, 07 Aug 2007 10:14:12 -0400 Subject: Fwd: Re: [Fedora-packaging] Licensing guidelines suggestions In-Reply-To: <1186495860.3368.18.camel@dhcp67.install.boston.redhat.com> References: <200708070019.13063.ville.skytta@iki.fi> <20070806225932.GI4275@nostromo.devel.redhat.com> <1186494882.3368.16.camel@dhcp67.install.boston.redhat.com> <46B87D4A.3070903@fedoraproject.org> <1186495860.3368.18.camel@dhcp67.install.boston.redhat.com> Message-ID: <1186496052.3368.21.camel@dhcp67.install.boston.redhat.com> On Tue, 2007-08-07 at 10:11 -0400, Tom "spot" Callaway wrote: > That's not the question that needs answering. > > The question is: > > There are licenses which are on the OSI approved list but which are > considered non-free by the FSF. Are these licenses OK for Fedora or not? And to answer my own question, I think the answer is no. Why? 1. OSI doesn't list licenses which don't meet their criteria, the FSF does. 2. The FSF has been extremely helpful in working with us on licensing matters. I'm inclined to give them the benefit of the doubt on licensing conflicts. ~spot From sundaram at fedoraproject.org Tue Aug 7 14:27:34 2007 From: sundaram at fedoraproject.org (Rahul Sundaram) Date: Tue, 07 Aug 2007 19:57:34 +0530 Subject: Fwd: Re: [Fedora-packaging] Licensing guidelines suggestions In-Reply-To: <1186496052.3368.21.camel@dhcp67.install.boston.redhat.com> References: <200708070019.13063.ville.skytta@iki.fi> <20070806225932.GI4275@nostromo.devel.redhat.com> <1186494882.3368.16.camel@dhcp67.install.boston.redhat.com> <46B87D4A.3070903@fedoraproject.org> <1186495860.3368.18.camel@dhcp67.install.boston.redhat.com> <1186496052.3368.21.camel@dhcp67.install.boston.redhat.com> Message-ID: <46B88156.5000907@fedoraproject.org> Tom "spot" Callaway wrote: > And to answer my own question, I think the answer is no. > > Why? > 1. OSI doesn't list licenses which don't meet their criteria, the FSF > does. On the other hand they haven't yet listed all the known Free software licenses like you did but they have previously been open to that. You might want to followup on that. > 2. The FSF has been extremely helpful in working with us on licensing > matters. I'm inclined to give them the benefit of the doubt on licensing > conflicts. Agreed but then relying on FSF would mean that you are effectively dropping the OSI requirement which is what I suggested earlier. Relying on our own list is more safe if FSF acts up or FSF agrees on a license that Red Hat Legal doesn't want to deal with ever. Rahul From tcallawa at redhat.com Tue Aug 7 14:36:15 2007 From: tcallawa at redhat.com (Tom "spot" Callaway) Date: Tue, 07 Aug 2007 10:36:15 -0400 Subject: Fwd: Re: [Fedora-packaging] Licensing guidelines suggestions In-Reply-To: <46B88156.5000907@fedoraproject.org> References: <200708070019.13063.ville.skytta@iki.fi> <20070806225932.GI4275@nostromo.devel.redhat.com> <1186494882.3368.16.camel@dhcp67.install.boston.redhat.com> <46B87D4A.3070903@fedoraproject.org> <1186495860.3368.18.camel@dhcp67.install.boston.redhat.com> <1186496052.3368.21.camel@dhcp67.install.boston.redhat.com> <46B88156.5000907@fedoraproject.org> Message-ID: <1186497375.3368.34.camel@dhcp67.install.boston.redhat.com> On Tue, 2007-08-07 at 19:57 +0530, Rahul Sundaram wrote: > Tom "spot" Callaway wrote: > > > And to answer my own question, I think the answer is no. > > > > Why? > > 1. OSI doesn't list licenses which don't meet their criteria, the FSF > > does. > > On the other hand they haven't yet listed all the known Free software > licenses like you did but they have previously been open to that. You > might want to followup on that. > > > 2. The FSF has been extremely helpful in working with us on licensing > > matters. I'm inclined to give them the benefit of the doubt on licensing > > conflicts. > > Agreed but then relying on FSF would mean that you are effectively > dropping the OSI requirement which is what I suggested earlier. Relying > on our own list is more safe if FSF acts up or FSF agrees on a license > that Red Hat Legal doesn't want to deal with ever. That makes more sense. I think we might want to change the wording to something like: The goal of The Fedora Project is to work with the Linux community to build a complete, general purpose operating system exclusively from open source software. In accordance with that, all packages included in Fedora must be covered under an approved license. The Fedora approved license list is generated from the [[link OSI]] and [[link FSF]] lists, but since those lists conflict with each other, only licenses explicitly listed here are approved for use in Fedora. From sundaram at fedoraproject.org Tue Aug 7 15:18:51 2007 From: sundaram at fedoraproject.org (Rahul Sundaram) Date: Tue, 07 Aug 2007 20:48:51 +0530 Subject: Fwd: Re: [Fedora-packaging] Licensing guidelines suggestions In-Reply-To: <1186497375.3368.34.camel@dhcp67.install.boston.redhat.com> References: <200708070019.13063.ville.skytta@iki.fi> <20070806225932.GI4275@nostromo.devel.redhat.com> <1186494882.3368.16.camel@dhcp67.install.boston.redhat.com> <46B87D4A.3070903@fedoraproject.org> <1186495860.3368.18.camel@dhcp67.install.boston.redhat.com> <1186496052.3368.21.camel@dhcp67.install.boston.redhat.com> <46B88156.5000907@fedoraproject.org> <1186497375.3368.34.camel@dhcp67.install.boston.redhat.com> Message-ID: <46B88D5B.5010705@fedoraproject.org> Tom "spot" Callaway wrote: > The goal of The Fedora Project is to work with the Linux community to > build a complete, general purpose operating system exclusively from open > source software. In accordance with that, all packages included in > Fedora must be covered under an approved license. The Fedora approved > license list is generated from the [[link OSI]] and [[link FSF]] lists, > but since those lists conflict with each other, only licenses explicitly > listed here are approved for use in Fedora. My suggestion is similar with some minor changes: The goal of the Fedora Project is to to create a complete, general purpose operating system based on Linux exclusively from Free and open source software. All software in Fedora must be under licenses in the Fedora licensing list [Link]. This list is based on the licenses approved by FSF [Link], OSI [Link] and consulting Red Hat Legal. Rahul From Axel.Thimm at ATrpms.net Tue Aug 7 19:21:40 2007 From: Axel.Thimm at ATrpms.net (Axel Thimm) Date: Tue, 7 Aug 2007 21:21:40 +0200 Subject: Licensing guidelines suggestions In-Reply-To: <1186497375.3368.34.camel@dhcp67.install.boston.redhat.com> References: <200708070019.13063.ville.skytta@iki.fi> <20070806225932.GI4275@nostromo.devel.redhat.com> <1186494882.3368.16.camel@dhcp67.install.boston.redhat.com> <46B87D4A.3070903@fedoraproject.org> <1186495860.3368.18.camel@dhcp67.install.boston.redhat.com> <1186496052.3368.21.camel@dhcp67.install.boston.redhat.com> <46B88156.5000907@fedoraproject.org> <1186497375.3368.34.camel@dhcp67.install.boston.redhat.com> Message-ID: <20070807192140.GE23122@puariko.nirvana> On Tue, Aug 07, 2007 at 10:36:15AM -0400, Tom spot Callaway wrote: > The goal of The Fedora Project is to work with the Linux community to > build a complete, general purpose operating system exclusively from open > source software. In accordance with that, all packages included in > Fedora must be covered under an approved license. The Fedora approved > license list is generated from the [[link OSI]] and [[link FSF]] lists, > but since those lists conflict with each other, only licenses explicitly > listed here are approved for use in Fedora. BTW who decides on adding new licenses to this list, the board? I'm asking because sometimes, especially in the natural sciences field, authors have been creative in this area, and while most licenses are indeed free, they need to be thrown at someone to approve them. -- Axel.Thimm at ATrpms.net -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: not available URL: From tcallawa at redhat.com Tue Aug 7 20:00:32 2007 From: tcallawa at redhat.com (Tom "spot" Callaway) Date: Tue, 07 Aug 2007 16:00:32 -0400 Subject: Licensing guidelines suggestions In-Reply-To: <20070807192140.GE23122@puariko.nirvana> References: <200708070019.13063.ville.skytta@iki.fi> <20070806225932.GI4275@nostromo.devel.redhat.com> <1186494882.3368.16.camel@dhcp67.install.boston.redhat.com> <46B87D4A.3070903@fedoraproject.org> <1186495860.3368.18.camel@dhcp67.install.boston.redhat.com> <1186496052.3368.21.camel@dhcp67.install.boston.redhat.com> <46B88156.5000907@fedoraproject.org> <1186497375.3368.34.camel@dhcp67.install.boston.redhat.com> <20070807192140.GE23122@puariko.nirvana> Message-ID: <1186516832.3368.109.camel@dhcp67.install.boston.redhat.com> On Tue, 2007-08-07 at 21:21 +0200, Axel Thimm wrote: > On Tue, Aug 07, 2007 at 10:36:15AM -0400, Tom spot Callaway wrote: > > The goal of The Fedora Project is to work with the Linux community to > > build a complete, general purpose operating system exclusively from open > > source software. In accordance with that, all packages included in > > Fedora must be covered under an approved license. The Fedora approved > > license list is generated from the [[link OSI]] and [[link FSF]] lists, > > but since those lists conflict with each other, only licenses explicitly > > listed here are approved for use in Fedora. > > BTW who decides on adding new licenses to this list, the board? > > I'm asking because sometimes, especially in the natural sciences > field, authors have been creative in this area, and while most > licenses are indeed free, they need to be thrown at someone to approve > them. I do, right now. If its not listed on either OSI or FSF, I usually send it to the FSF for review, and they respond within a day or two (usually). ~spot From tcallawa at redhat.com Tue Aug 7 21:51:12 2007 From: tcallawa at redhat.com (Tom "spot" Callaway) Date: Tue, 07 Aug 2007 17:51:12 -0400 Subject: Fwd: Re: [Fedora-packaging] Licensing guidelines suggestions In-Reply-To: <46B88D5B.5010705@fedoraproject.org> References: <200708070019.13063.ville.skytta@iki.fi> <20070806225932.GI4275@nostromo.devel.redhat.com> <1186494882.3368.16.camel@dhcp67.install.boston.redhat.com> <46B87D4A.3070903@fedoraproject.org> <1186495860.3368.18.camel@dhcp67.install.boston.redhat.com> <1186496052.3368.21.camel@dhcp67.install.boston.redhat.com> <46B88156.5000907@fedoraproject.org> <1186497375.3368.34.camel@dhcp67.install.boston.redhat.com> <46B88D5B.5010705@fedoraproject.org> Message-ID: <1186523472.3368.136.camel@dhcp67.install.boston.redhat.com> On Tue, 2007-08-07 at 20:48 +0530, Rahul Sundaram wrote: > Tom "spot" Callaway wrote: > > > The goal of The Fedora Project is to work with the Linux community to > > build a complete, general purpose operating system exclusively from open > > source software. In accordance with that, all packages included in > > Fedora must be covered under an approved license. The Fedora approved > > license list is generated from the [[link OSI]] and [[link FSF]] lists, > > but since those lists conflict with each other, only licenses explicitly > > listed here are approved for use in Fedora. > > My suggestion is similar with some minor changes: > > The goal of the Fedora Project is to to create a complete, general > purpose operating system based on Linux exclusively from Free and open > source software. > > All software in Fedora must be under licenses in the Fedora licensing > list [Link]. This list is based on the licenses approved by FSF [Link], > OSI [Link] and consulting Red Hat Legal. This wording is ok with me, but I'd like the board to approve it. ~spot From kanarip at kanarip.com Tue Aug 7 22:44:04 2007 From: kanarip at kanarip.com (Jeroen van Meeuwen) Date: Wed, 08 Aug 2007 00:44:04 +0200 Subject: Fwd: Re: [Fedora-packaging] Licensing guidelines suggestions In-Reply-To: <1186495860.3368.18.camel@dhcp67.install.boston.redhat.com> References: <200708070019.13063.ville.skytta@iki.fi> <20070806225932.GI4275@nostromo.devel.redhat.com> <1186494882.3368.16.camel@dhcp67.install.boston.redhat.com> <46B87D4A.3070903@fedoraproject.org> <1186495860.3368.18.camel@dhcp67.install.boston.redhat.com> Message-ID: <46B8F5B4.4060705@kanarip.com> Tom "spot" Callaway wrote: > On Tue, 2007-08-07 at 19:40 +0530, Rahul Sundaram wrote: >> Tom "spot" Callaway wrote: >>> On Mon, 2007-08-06 at 18:59 -0400, Bill Nottingham wrote: >>>>> Below is some discussion about Fedora licensing that took place on >>>>> fedora-packaging to day, perhaps the board could put it on the meeting >>>>> agenda? >>>> What was the original reason why it was deemed bad? >>> The original Artistic license is far too vague, the intent is not clear. >>> Upstream perl agreed, redid the license and made a 2.0 version, which is >>> free & GPL compat. >>> >>> Unfortunately, nothing will use Artistic 2.0 until perl6. >> Since you aren't relying solely on OSI requirement why not drop it and >> point to the licensing wiki page as the canonical list in >> http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/LicensingGuidelines? > > That's not the question that needs answering. > > The question is: > > There are licenses which are on the OSI approved list but which are > considered non-free by the FSF. Are these licenses OK for Fedora or not? > > ~spot > Open is soooo 1900's. Freedom. For All. Jeroen van Meeuwen -kanarip From sundaram at fedoraproject.org Tue Aug 7 23:15:13 2007 From: sundaram at fedoraproject.org (Rahul Sundaram) Date: Wed, 08 Aug 2007 04:45:13 +0530 Subject: Fwd: Re: [Fedora-packaging] Licensing guidelines suggestions In-Reply-To: <46B8F5B4.4060705@kanarip.com> References: <200708070019.13063.ville.skytta@iki.fi> <20070806225932.GI4275@nostromo.devel.redhat.com> <1186494882.3368.16.camel@dhcp67.install.boston.redhat.com> <46B87D4A.3070903@fedoraproject.org> <1186495860.3368.18.camel@dhcp67.install.boston.redhat.com> <46B8F5B4.4060705@kanarip.com> Message-ID: <46B8FD01.7080608@fedoraproject.org> Jeroen van Meeuwen wrote: > > Open is soooo 1900's. Freedom. For All. > > Jeroen van Meeuwen > -kanarip You can't make licensing decisions based on just the words which themselves can be interpreted in many different ways. Rahul From loupgaroublond at gmail.com Fri Aug 10 01:50:17 2007 From: loupgaroublond at gmail.com (Yaakov Nemoy) Date: Thu, 9 Aug 2007 21:50:17 -0400 Subject: Smolt + GeoIP Message-ID: <7f692fec0708091850jc9dad83k21336d8eab8df8b7@mail.gmail.com> Hi guys, One guy brought up an interesting idea in #smolt: (03.34.00) ( Romster) be cool for smolt to have a map like gnome does http://live.gnome.org/GnomeWorldWide I'm thinking a simple way to do this is to save the GeoIP for each IP that sends in information to the server iff (that's if and only if) the client passes a bit saying 'i allow'. Another way is when the user goes to the smolt page, after submitting, they have the option of filling in this information. I'm not crazy to do this, but it does sound interesting nonetheless. Does this seem like something that we could even consider reasonable? Or could this be a nightmare and a half? Cheers, Yaakov From skvidal at fedoraproject.org Fri Aug 10 02:58:57 2007 From: skvidal at fedoraproject.org (seth vidal) Date: Thu, 09 Aug 2007 22:58:57 -0400 Subject: Smolt + GeoIP In-Reply-To: <7f692fec0708091850jc9dad83k21336d8eab8df8b7@mail.gmail.com> References: <7f692fec0708091850jc9dad83k21336d8eab8df8b7@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <1186714737.8119.40.camel@cutter> On Thu, 2007-08-09 at 21:50 -0400, Yaakov Nemoy wrote: > Hi guys, > > One guy brought up an interesting idea in #smolt: > (03.34.00) ( Romster) be cool for smolt to have a map like gnome does > http://live.gnome.org/GnomeWorldWide > > I'm thinking a simple way to do this is to save the GeoIP for each IP > that sends in information to the server iff (that's if and only if) > the client passes a bit saying 'i allow'. > > Another way is when the user goes to the smolt page, after submitting, > they have the option of filling in this information. > > I'm not crazy to do this, but it does sound interesting nonetheless. > Does this seem like something that we could even consider reasonable? > Or could this be a nightmare and a half? We don't really need to do it w/smolt. We can simply analyze the mirrormanger logs to see where people are, can't we? -sv From loupgaroublond at gmail.com Fri Aug 10 03:36:57 2007 From: loupgaroublond at gmail.com (Yaakov Nemoy) Date: Thu, 9 Aug 2007 23:36:57 -0400 Subject: Smolt + GeoIP In-Reply-To: <1186714737.8119.40.camel@cutter> References: <7f692fec0708091850jc9dad83k21336d8eab8df8b7@mail.gmail.com> <1186714737.8119.40.camel@cutter> Message-ID: <7f692fec0708092036r6c49a7f4sf7148e5465474456@mail.gmail.com> On 8/9/07, seth vidal wrote: > On Thu, 2007-08-09 at 21:50 -0400, Yaakov Nemoy wrote: > > Hi guys, > > > > One guy brought up an interesting idea in #smolt: > > (03.34.00) ( Romster) be cool for smolt to have a map like gnome does > > http://live.gnome.org/GnomeWorldWide > > > > I'm thinking a simple way to do this is to save the GeoIP for each IP > > that sends in information to the server iff (that's if and only if) > > the client passes a bit saying 'i allow'. > > > > Another way is when the user goes to the smolt page, after submitting, > > they have the option of filling in this information. > > > > I'm not crazy to do this, but it does sound interesting nonetheless. > > Does this seem like something that we could even consider reasonable? > > Or could this be a nightmare and a half? > > We don't really need to do it w/smolt. We can simply analyze the > mirrormanger logs to see where people are, can't we? Smolt is for more than just Fedora though. I'm thinking something more like MyFedoraSpace or FedoraBook, where a user has his FAS account, and can show off what he does/uses/etc.... All available to all Linux users. The funny part about smolt is that we can collect data now, and make it useful eventually without requiring any changes from the client immediately. -Yaakov From bugs.michael at gmx.net Sun Aug 12 08:21:34 2007 From: bugs.michael at gmx.net (Michael Schwendt) Date: Sun, 12 Aug 2007 10:21:34 +0200 Subject: FESCo/FPB vote counting Message-ID: <20070812102134.3330256b.bugs.michael@gmx.net> What I am in search of is the total number of votes per candidate of the recent FESCo and FPB elections. That vote count cannot be found anywhere. The Wiki explains: Approval Voting. In approval voting you have two basic choices: voting for a candidate means you approve of their getting the position. Not voting for them means you don't approve of them. This means that candidates with less votes are less approved by the community of voters. We have had vote counting for the first FESCo election. Where are the numbers for the most recent elections? From bpepple at fedoraproject.org Sun Aug 12 12:57:50 2007 From: bpepple at fedoraproject.org (Brian Pepple) Date: Sun, 12 Aug 2007 08:57:50 -0400 Subject: FESCo/FPB vote counting In-Reply-To: <20070812102134.3330256b.bugs.michael@gmx.net> References: <20070812102134.3330256b.bugs.michael@gmx.net> Message-ID: <1186923470.2742.2.camel@kennedy> On Sun, 2007-08-12 at 10:21 +0200, Michael Schwendt wrote: > Where are the numbers for the most recent elections? > Here's the numbers for the last election. 107 Voters vote_count | id | human_name | email ------------+--------+--------------------+------------------- 89 | 100045 | Bill Nottingham | notting at redhat.com 85 | 100351 | Jesse Keating | jkeating at redhat.com 82 | 100036 | Jeremy Katz | katzj at redhat.com 81 | 100061 | Tom Callaway | tcallawa at redhat.com 69 | 100158 | Jason Tibbitts | tibbs at math.uh.edu 69 | 100012 | Brian Pepple | bdpepple at ameritech.net 67 | 100103 | Dennis Gilmore | dennis at ausil.us 65 | 100073 | Warren Togami | wtogami at redhat.com 59 | 100115 | Joshua W. Boyer | jwboyer at jdub.homelinux.org 53 | 100037 | Kevin Fenzi | kevin at tummy.com 51 | 100114 | Christian Iseli | Christian.Iseli at licr.org 51 | 100015 | Christopher Aillon | caillon at redhat.com 43 | 100020 | David Woodhouse | dwmw2 at redhat.com 40 | 101110 | John Poelstra | poelstra at redhat.com 35 | 100527 | James Bowes | jbowes at redhat.com Later, /B -- Brian Pepple http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/BrianPepple gpg --keyserver pgp.mit.edu --recv-keys 810CC15E BD5E 6F9E 8688 E668 8F5B CBDE 326A E936 810C C15E -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: This is a digitally signed message part URL: From Axel.Thimm at ATrpms.net Sun Aug 12 20:30:05 2007 From: Axel.Thimm at ATrpms.net (Axel Thimm) Date: Sun, 12 Aug 2007 22:30:05 +0200 Subject: FESCo/FPB vote counting In-Reply-To: <1186923470.2742.2.camel@kennedy> References: <20070812102134.3330256b.bugs.michael@gmx.net> <1186923470.2742.2.camel@kennedy> Message-ID: <20070812203005.GA27473@puariko.nirvana> On Sun, Aug 12, 2007 at 08:57:50AM -0400, Brian Pepple wrote: > On Sun, 2007-08-12 at 10:21 +0200, Michael Schwendt wrote: > > Where are the numbers for the most recent elections? > Here's the numbers for the last election. > > 107 Voters That sounds very little. Aren't we more like at least four times as many packagers alone? And weren't there even non-packagers admitted to vote? QA/doc/managment (I hope Max was allowed to vote :) etc? I don't know how many accounts were entitled to vote in total, but we probably only had 20-25% of people caring to vote, which looks bad [1]. How can we improve this mark? [1] Some people will use the argument "everyone was happy, so no one went voting", but that's not a valid argument. If people are happy the least they could do is click on a web voting application to confirm their happyiness (which BTW is really a painless effort, credits to the authors of it, I think this was mainly Toshio). -- Axel.Thimm at ATrpms.net -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: not available URL: From mmcgrath at redhat.com Sun Aug 12 21:59:37 2007 From: mmcgrath at redhat.com (Mike McGrath) Date: Sun, 12 Aug 2007 16:59:37 -0500 Subject: FESCo/FPB vote counting In-Reply-To: <20070812203005.GA27473@puariko.nirvana> References: <20070812102134.3330256b.bugs.michael@gmx.net> <1186923470.2742.2.camel@kennedy> <20070812203005.GA27473@puariko.nirvana> Message-ID: <46BF82C9.2030103@redhat.com> Axel Thimm wrote: > On Sun, Aug 12, 2007 at 08:57:50AM -0400, Brian Pepple wrote: > >> On Sun, 2007-08-12 at 10:21 +0200, Michael Schwendt wrote: >> >>> Where are the numbers for the most recent elections? >>> >> Here's the numbers for the last election. >> >> 107 Voters >> > > That sounds very little. Aren't we more like at least four times as > many packagers alone? And weren't there even non-packagers admitted to > vote? QA/doc/managment (I hope Max was allowed to vote :) etc? > > I don't know how many accounts were entitled to vote in total, but we > probably only had 20-25% of people caring to vote, which looks > bad [1]. How can we improve this mark? > > [1] Some people will use the argument "everyone was happy, so no one > went voting", but that's not a valid argument. If people are happy > the least they could do is click on a web voting application to > confirm their happyiness (which BTW is really a painless effort, > credits to the authors of it, I think this was mainly Toshio). > Its a sad thing to say but... "Most people were american, so no one went voting" I could be wrong, but I bet apathy played a roll in low voter turnout. Or a lack of knowledge about the candidates. -Mike From jwboyer at jdub.homelinux.org Sun Aug 12 22:25:59 2007 From: jwboyer at jdub.homelinux.org (Josh Boyer) Date: Sun, 12 Aug 2007 17:25:59 -0500 Subject: FESCo/FPB vote counting In-Reply-To: <46BF82C9.2030103@redhat.com> References: <20070812102134.3330256b.bugs.michael@gmx.net> <1186923470.2742.2.camel@kennedy> <20070812203005.GA27473@puariko.nirvana> <46BF82C9.2030103@redhat.com> Message-ID: <20070812172559.0c34c9aa@vader.jdub.homelinux.org> On Sun, 12 Aug 2007 16:59:37 -0500 Mike McGrath wrote: > Axel Thimm wrote: > > On Sun, Aug 12, 2007 at 08:57:50AM -0400, Brian Pepple wrote: > > > >> On Sun, 2007-08-12 at 10:21 +0200, Michael Schwendt wrote: > >> > >>> Where are the numbers for the most recent elections? > >>> > >> Here's the numbers for the last election. > >> > >> 107 Voters > >> > > > > That sounds very little. Aren't we more like at least four times as > > many packagers alone? And weren't there even non-packagers admitted > > to vote? QA/doc/managment (I hope Max was allowed to vote :) etc? Yes. I believe that we had roughly 10% voter turnout. > Its a sad thing to say but... > > "Most people were american, so no one went voting" Heh, perhaps. > I could be wrong, but I bet apathy played a roll in low voter > turnout. Or a lack of knowledge about the candidates. I think it's likely the latter. But apathy probably played a part as well. josh From fedora at leemhuis.info Mon Aug 13 05:04:53 2007 From: fedora at leemhuis.info (Thorsten Leemhuis) Date: Mon, 13 Aug 2007 07:04:53 +0200 Subject: FESCo/FPB vote counting In-Reply-To: <20070812172559.0c34c9aa@vader.jdub.homelinux.org> References: <20070812102134.3330256b.bugs.michael@gmx.net> <1186923470.2742.2.camel@kennedy> <20070812203005.GA27473@puariko.nirvana> <46BF82C9.2030103@redhat.com> <20070812172559.0c34c9aa@vader.jdub.homelinux.org> Message-ID: <46BFE675.5040007@leemhuis.info> On 13.08.2007 00:25, Josh Boyer wrote: > On Sun, 12 Aug 2007 16:59:37 -0500 > Mike McGrath wrote: >> Axel Thimm wrote: >>> On Sun, Aug 12, 2007 at 08:57:50AM -0400, Brian Pepple wrote: >>> >>>> On Sun, 2007-08-12 at 10:21 +0200, Michael Schwendt wrote: >>>> >>>>> Where are the numbers for the most recent elections? >>>>> >>>> Here's the numbers for the last election. >>>> >>>> 107 Voters >>>> >>> That sounds very little. Aren't we more like at least four times as >>> many packagers alone? And weren't there even non-packagers admitted >>> to vote? QA/doc/managment (I hope Max was allowed to vote :) etc? > > Yes. I believe that we had roughly 10% voter turnout. > >> Its a sad thing to say but... >> >> "Most people were american, so no one went voting" > > Heh, perhaps. > >> I could be wrong, but I bet apathy played a roll in low voter >> turnout. Or a lack of knowledge about the candidates. > > I think it's likely the latter. But apathy probably played a part as > well. I was one of those that got the election idea for FESCo realized, but these days I'm wondering if it's the right way (the low voting count is just one of the reasons for this thought). Maybe it's time for something else that matches the "those that do the work can make the decisions" criteria better. Then maybe more people would simply do something to make Fedora better and not rely on FESCo members to do the work (same for other groups maybe). In other words: more a coordinated wiki-style approach where a group like FESCo (or the Board) only mediates and helps pushing stuff forward. Sure, FESCo (or the Board) would still be needed in case people can't agree one something (which for sure will happen), but maybe that committee could be constituted not my election and more by "those that did the work in the past {months,year}". Just my 2 cent (in a effort to get rid of some of the bureaucracy which evolved over the past years (yes, I know that I played a big role in that)). CU knurd From mspevack at redhat.com Mon Aug 13 17:38:33 2007 From: mspevack at redhat.com (Max Spevack) Date: Mon, 13 Aug 2007 13:38:33 -0400 (EDT) Subject: Fedora Board Q&A at VFUDCon on Tuesday Message-ID: We're doing a Q&A with the Fedora Board members tomorrow as part of the Virtual FUDCon. We'll be holding this session tomorrow (Tuesday August 14th) in #fudcon on Freenode. We will begin at 5:00 PM eastern time and go for about an hour. We'll take whatever questions are posed to us, about any topic related to Fedora -- technical, non-technical, decision-making, etc. Questions will be answered by whoever are the most appropriate Board members for each, depending on subject matter. Depending on how much we get through, and how many questions are left over that we don't get to, I will possibly do a second Q&A session with just myself later in the week to make sure that everyone who has something to say gets a chance. -- Max Spevack + http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/MaxSpevack + gpg key -- http://spevack.org/max.asc + fingerprint -- CD52 5E72 369B B00D 9E9A 773E 2FDB CB46 5A17 CF21 From gdk at redhat.com Mon Aug 13 17:40:13 2007 From: gdk at redhat.com (Greg Dekoenigsberg) Date: Mon, 13 Aug 2007 13:40:13 -0400 (EDT) Subject: FESCo/FPB vote counting In-Reply-To: <46BF82C9.2030103@redhat.com> References: <20070812102134.3330256b.bugs.michael@gmx.net> <1186923470.2742.2.camel@kennedy> <20070812203005.GA27473@puariko.nirvana> <46BF82C9.2030103@redhat.com> Message-ID: On Sun, 12 Aug 2007, Mike McGrath wrote: >> That sounds very little. Aren't we more like at least four times as >> many packagers alone? And weren't there even non-packagers admitted to >> vote? QA/doc/managment (I hope Max was allowed to vote :) etc? >> >> I don't know how many accounts were entitled to vote in total, but we >> probably only had 20-25% of people caring to vote, which looks >> bad [1]. How can we improve this mark? >> >> [1] Some people will use the argument "everyone was happy, so no one >> went voting", but that's not a valid argument. If people are happy >> the least they could do is click on a web voting application to >> confirm their happyiness (which BTW is really a painless effort, >> credits to the authors of it, I think this was mainly Toshio). >> > Its a sad thing to say but... > > "Most people were american, so no one went voting" > > I could be wrong, but I bet apathy played a roll in low voter turnout. Or a > lack of knowledge about the candidates. Don't blame me, I voted for Jef. Seriously -- if we think that it's important to get more people to vote, we need to make a concerted effort. As in, a nag script. "We see you haven't voted yet! Voting for the membership of (Fedora board / Fedora subproject foo) is one of your most sacred rights as a citizen of the Fedora nation! It'll take two minutes, srsly. Click here!" --g -- Greg DeKoenigsberg Community Development Manager Red Hat, Inc. :: 1-919-754-4255 "To whomsoever much hath been given... ...from him much shall be asked" From jwboyer at jdub.homelinux.org Mon Aug 13 18:14:44 2007 From: jwboyer at jdub.homelinux.org (Josh Boyer) Date: Mon, 13 Aug 2007 13:14:44 -0500 Subject: FESCo/FPB vote counting In-Reply-To: References: <20070812102134.3330256b.bugs.michael@gmx.net> <1186923470.2742.2.camel@kennedy> <20070812203005.GA27473@puariko.nirvana> <46BF82C9.2030103@redhat.com> Message-ID: <20070813131444.4e6c8340@weaponx.rchland.ibm.com> On Mon, 13 Aug 2007 13:40:13 -0400 (EDT) Greg Dekoenigsberg wrote: > On Sun, 12 Aug 2007, Mike McGrath wrote: > > >> That sounds very little. Aren't we more like at least four times as > >> many packagers alone? And weren't there even non-packagers admitted to > >> vote? QA/doc/managment (I hope Max was allowed to vote :) etc? > >> > >> I don't know how many accounts were entitled to vote in total, but we > >> probably only had 20-25% of people caring to vote, which looks > >> bad [1]. How can we improve this mark? > >> > >> [1] Some people will use the argument "everyone was happy, so no one > >> went voting", but that's not a valid argument. If people are happy > >> the least they could do is click on a web voting application to > >> confirm their happyiness (which BTW is really a painless effort, > >> credits to the authors of it, I think this was mainly Toshio). > >> > > Its a sad thing to say but... > > > > "Most people were american, so no one went voting" > > > > I could be wrong, but I bet apathy played a roll in low voter turnout. Or a > > lack of knowledge about the candidates. > > Don't blame me, I voted for Jef. > > Seriously -- if we think that it's important to get more people to vote, > we need to make a concerted effort. As in, a nag script. "We see you > haven't voted yet! Voting for the membership of (Fedora board / Fedora > subproject foo) is one of your most sacred rights as a citizen of the > Fedora nation! It'll take two minutes, srsly. Click here!" I'm sure Toshio would gladly take patches to the voting app. It'll take two minutes, srsly. josh From gdk at redhat.com Mon Aug 13 18:06:07 2007 From: gdk at redhat.com (Greg Dekoenigsberg) Date: Mon, 13 Aug 2007 14:06:07 -0400 (EDT) Subject: FESCo/FPB vote counting In-Reply-To: <20070813131444.4e6c8340@weaponx.rchland.ibm.com> References: <20070812102134.3330256b.bugs.michael@gmx.net> <1186923470.2742.2.camel@kennedy> <20070812203005.GA27473@puariko.nirvana> <46BF82C9.2030103@redhat.com> <20070813131444.4e6c8340@weaponx.rchland.ibm.com> Message-ID: On Mon, 13 Aug 2007, Josh Boyer wrote: >> Seriously -- if we think that it's important to get more people to vote, >> we need to make a concerted effort. As in, a nag script. "We see you >> haven't voted yet! Voting for the membership of (Fedora board / Fedora >> subproject foo) is one of your most sacred rights as a citizen of the >> Fedora nation! It'll take two minutes, srsly. Click here!" > > I'm sure Toshio would gladly take patches to the voting app. It'll > take two minutes, srsly. Personally? I don't think it's that big a deal that more people didn't vote. So I'm not going to be submitting any patches for this particular issue. :) --g -- Greg DeKoenigsberg Community Development Manager Red Hat, Inc. :: 1-919-754-4255 "To whomsoever much hath been given... ...from him much shall be asked" From caillon at redhat.com Mon Aug 13 18:23:03 2007 From: caillon at redhat.com (Christopher Aillon) Date: Mon, 13 Aug 2007 14:23:03 -0400 Subject: FESCo/FPB vote counting In-Reply-To: <20070812203005.GA27473@puariko.nirvana> References: <20070812102134.3330256b.bugs.michael@gmx.net> <1186923470.2742.2.camel@kennedy> <20070812203005.GA27473@puariko.nirvana> Message-ID: <46C0A187.8080604@redhat.com> Axel Thimm wrote: > On Sun, Aug 12, 2007 at 08:57:50AM -0400, Brian Pepple wrote: >> On Sun, 2007-08-12 at 10:21 +0200, Michael Schwendt wrote: >> > Where are the numbers for the most recent elections? >> Here's the numbers for the last election. >> >> 107 Voters > > That sounds very little. Aren't we more like at least four times as > many packagers alone? And weren't there even non-packagers admitted to > vote? QA/doc/managment (I hope Max was allowed to vote :) etc? > > I don't know how many accounts were entitled to vote in total, but we > probably only had 20-25% of people caring to vote, which looks > bad [1]. How can we improve this mark? Well, I for one didn't even realize the election took place until I found out that I won a seat -- by way of my getting subscribed to the list. Maybe I missed these FESCo voting announcements but I saw at least 3 or 4 announcements for the board election. It would be interesting to see if the board election had better turnout. If so, I'd say we ought to simply make sure people know there's an election going on. And advertise election dates EARLY. From jwboyer at jdub.homelinux.org Mon Aug 13 18:33:48 2007 From: jwboyer at jdub.homelinux.org (Josh Boyer) Date: Mon, 13 Aug 2007 13:33:48 -0500 Subject: FESCo/FPB vote counting In-Reply-To: References: <20070812102134.3330256b.bugs.michael@gmx.net> <1186923470.2742.2.camel@kennedy> <20070812203005.GA27473@puariko.nirvana> <46BF82C9.2030103@redhat.com> <20070813131444.4e6c8340@weaponx.rchland.ibm.com> Message-ID: <20070813133348.37f8e563@weaponx.rchland.ibm.com> On Mon, 13 Aug 2007 14:06:07 -0400 (EDT) Greg Dekoenigsberg wrote: > On Mon, 13 Aug 2007, Josh Boyer wrote: > > >> Seriously -- if we think that it's important to get more people to vote, > >> we need to make a concerted effort. As in, a nag script. "We see you > >> haven't voted yet! Voting for the membership of (Fedora board / Fedora > >> subproject foo) is one of your most sacred rights as a citizen of the > >> Fedora nation! It'll take two minutes, srsly. Click here!" > > > > I'm sure Toshio would gladly take patches to the voting app. It'll > > take two minutes, srsly. > > Personally? I don't think it's that big a deal that more people didn't > vote. So I'm not going to be submitting any patches for this particular > issue. :) Me either. Guess those people that didn't vote because they didn't see the emails will have to do it... josh From bpepple at fedoraproject.org Mon Aug 13 19:45:17 2007 From: bpepple at fedoraproject.org (Brian Pepple) Date: Mon, 13 Aug 2007 15:45:17 -0400 Subject: FESCo/FPB vote counting In-Reply-To: <46C0A187.8080604@redhat.com> References: <20070812102134.3330256b.bugs.michael@gmx.net> <1186923470.2742.2.camel@kennedy> <20070812203005.GA27473@puariko.nirvana> <46C0A187.8080604@redhat.com> Message-ID: <1187034317.2850.2.camel@kennedy> On Mon, 2007-08-13 at 14:23 -0400, Christopher Aillon wrote: > > Well, I for one didn't even realize the election took place until I > found out that I won a seat -- by way of my getting subscribed to the > list. Maybe I missed these FESCo voting announcements but I saw at > least 3 or 4 announcements for the board election. It would be > interesting to see if the board election had better turnout. If so, I'd > say we ought to simply make sure people know there's an election going > on. And advertise election dates EARLY. If I remember correctly, the FAB election had even less people actually vote. /B -- Brian Pepple http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/BrianPepple gpg --keyserver pgp.mit.edu --recv-keys 810CC15E BD5E 6F9E 8688 E668 8F5B CBDE 326A E936 810C C15E -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: This is a digitally signed message part URL: From Axel.Thimm at ATrpms.net Mon Aug 13 19:53:41 2007 From: Axel.Thimm at ATrpms.net (Axel Thimm) Date: Mon, 13 Aug 2007 21:53:41 +0200 Subject: FESCo/FPB vote counting In-Reply-To: <46C0A187.8080604@redhat.com> References: <20070812102134.3330256b.bugs.michael@gmx.net> <1186923470.2742.2.camel@kennedy> <20070812203005.GA27473@puariko.nirvana> <46C0A187.8080604@redhat.com> Message-ID: <20070813195341.GA20424@puariko.nirvana> On Mon, Aug 13, 2007 at 02:23:03PM -0400, Christopher Aillon wrote: > >>Here's the numbers for the last election. > >> > >>107 Voters > > > >That sounds very little. [...] > Well, I for one didn't even realize the election took place until I > found out that I won a seat I think we should set you up for president. And tell you later that you won ;) But more seriously: If not even the passive voters realized there was an election happening, then we can't expect much from the active voting body either, there was obviously a lack of communication. Don't take me wrong: I'm not in any way dissatisfied with the outcome (I think no one is), I just think that the legitimacy should be stronger. -- Axel.Thimm at ATrpms.net -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: not available URL: From mspevack at redhat.com Tue Aug 14 14:46:04 2007 From: mspevack at redhat.com (Max Spevack) Date: Tue, 14 Aug 2007 10:46:04 -0400 (EDT) Subject: FESCo/FPB vote counting In-Reply-To: <1187034317.2850.2.camel@kennedy> References: <20070812102134.3330256b.bugs.michael@gmx.net> <1186923470.2742.2.camel@kennedy> <20070812203005.GA27473@puariko.nirvana> <46C0A187.8080604@redhat.com> <1187034317.2850.2.camel@kennedy> Message-ID: On Mon, 13 Aug 2007, Brian Pepple wrote: > If I remember correctly, the FAB election had even less people > actually vote. The recent Fedora Board election actually had more votes cast than the FESCO election -- 190 total votes. The top 3 vote getters received 114, 102, and 98 votes and were elected to seats. The bottom 3 vote getters received 95, 93, and 85 votes. As you can see, it was exceptionally close. I would be happy with a larger turnout, but at the same time I think the choices that were made in the recent elections were good ones. The Crowd is Wise. --Max From jwboyer at jdub.homelinux.org Tue Aug 14 15:13:32 2007 From: jwboyer at jdub.homelinux.org (Josh Boyer) Date: Tue, 14 Aug 2007 10:13:32 -0500 Subject: FESCo/FPB vote counting In-Reply-To: References: <20070812102134.3330256b.bugs.michael@gmx.net> <1186923470.2742.2.camel@kennedy> <20070812203005.GA27473@puariko.nirvana> <46C0A187.8080604@redhat.com> <1187034317.2850.2.camel@kennedy> Message-ID: <20070814101332.306dfd80@vader.jdub.homelinux.org> On Tue, 14 Aug 2007 10:46:04 -0400 (EDT) Max Spevack wrote: > On Mon, 13 Aug 2007, Brian Pepple wrote: > > > If I remember correctly, the FAB election had even less people > > actually vote. > > The recent Fedora Board election actually had more votes cast than > the FESCO election -- 190 total votes. The number of eligible voters in that election was larger though I believe. So the FESCo election had higher voter turnout. (IIRC, it was about 10% for FESCo, 6% for FB). josh From mmcgrath at redhat.com Tue Aug 14 23:41:23 2007 From: mmcgrath at redhat.com (Mike McGrath) Date: Tue, 14 Aug 2007 18:41:23 -0500 Subject: Corporate Sponsorship RFC Message-ID: <46C23DA3.8000701@redhat.com> I'd like to find some additional sponsors for some of the projects we are working on in Infrastructure and I feel Fedora is at the point where a sponsorship framework is warranted. This policy would be used by the Infrastructure team to negotiate with potential sponsors. I want to offer a couple of options to be worked out between Fedora and the Sponsor and each offering should be simple and straight forward. Below is a list of some options I'd like to formalize on the wiki. Please comment or provide additional ideas. 1) A sponsorship page. Those who offer bandwidth, hosting or machines get to place an icon on a page on the wiki. 2) Localized sponsorship. Right now at the bottom of the wiki you'll notice a "powered by dell" logo. We could fairly easily devise a way to add icons to various parts of our website. For example, if a user happens to hit the website in a japanese colo, they would see a "services provided by" next to the dell logo. There's a few ways to get fancy with this but still make it compelling to contribute resources for potential sponsors. This is very analogous to the way our mirrors work now: http://fedora.mirror.facebook.com/linux/releases/7/Everything/i386/os/ (for example) 3) White paper. This one is my favorite. Lets say we'd like to roll out some global build infrastructure. We could offer to put the powered by on the build website but then also have one of the project managers write a white paper, in great detail "This is how Bit Company A helped us build a complete global build system". It basically gives a complete technology overview on how cool Fedora is and how easy it was to do it on "This server from this company." You get the idea. Obviously this would be for larger projects. Additionally I'm working on what we can take, who to contact and how to manage all of that. Comments? -Mike From jspaleta at gmail.com Wed Aug 15 00:27:59 2007 From: jspaleta at gmail.com (Jeff Spaleta) Date: Tue, 14 Aug 2007 16:27:59 -0800 Subject: Corporate Sponsorship RFC In-Reply-To: <46C23DA3.8000701@redhat.com> References: <46C23DA3.8000701@redhat.com> Message-ID: <604aa7910708141727u4272e36ct2fe779c337f78211@mail.gmail.com> On 8/14/07, Mike McGrath wrote: > 1) A sponsorship page. Those who offer bandwidth, hosting or machines > get to place an icon on a page on the wiki. Would such a page rank a default bookmark? Can you have a sponsorship banner on a frontpage that rotates through sponsors and then links into the full sponsor page? I think you might also consider sponsorship tagging into other contributor/public facing interfaces like bodhi and koji web interfaces as appropriate. > > 3) White paper. This one is my favorite. +1 Additionally, have you thought about defining sponsorship levels of any sort? -jef From kanarip at kanarip.com Wed Aug 15 13:31:29 2007 From: kanarip at kanarip.com (Jeroen van Meeuwen) Date: Wed, 15 Aug 2007 15:31:29 +0200 Subject: Rebranding / Remixing / Respinning Fedora Message-ID: <46C30031.8040003@kanarip.com> Hi All, Regarding the legal issues of Rebranding, Remixing and Respinning Fedora, I want to ask some questions regarding to providing the sources. First of all there is the "genuine Fedora" branch of custom distributions; all parts included come from Fedora (Remix), and/or it contains updates (Respin), and it does not need any rebranding whatsoever. In fact, we may feel like hosting, mirroring or linking to these distributions at some point. For these distributions, GPLv2 requires that you distribute or make available the sources of whatever you distribute alongside the binaries, or include instructions to obtain the sources, or (3c), provide the instructions you have gotten yourself. For some of us, this isn't a problem. However, if a Respin (definitely including updates) or Remix (possibly including updates) needs to also distribute or make available the sources, they could have pointed to the Fedora mirrors if only the updates (and their source RPMs) wouldn't expire from these mirrors. Having a Respin include update foo-1.0.1, which is being replaced by update foo-1.0.2 a day later, which expires the source RPM for foo-1.0.1 as well, prevents the ones distributing the Respin or Remix from GPL-compliance as the sources for foo-1.0.1 are no longer publicly available. The Respin or Remix ends up to be non-distributable unless someone finds the resources to also host the source. Is there some kind of archive of all updates ever released? Is that koji? Can Respinners and Remixes just point people to koji? As (afaik) the Fedora Project releases under 3a and 3b of GPLv2, can we not make it so people that do Respins/Remixes can use 3c? E.g., include the complete instructions for retrieving the sources for anything the Fedora Project releases, whether it be actual releases or updates, in the Fedora Release Notes? It'd maybe save a lot of people a lot of trouble, and thus enable a lot more people to start remixing Fedora and distribute the results. That's todays question. Kind regards, Jeroen van Meeuwen -kanarip From kanarip at kanarip.com Wed Aug 15 14:56:02 2007 From: kanarip at kanarip.com (Jeroen van Meeuwen) Date: Wed, 15 Aug 2007 16:56:02 +0200 Subject: Rebranding / Remixing / Respinning Fedora In-Reply-To: <46C30031.8040003@kanarip.com> References: <46C30031.8040003@kanarip.com> Message-ID: <46C31402.9060306@kanarip.com> As clarified by Jesse on IRC: The Fedora Project distributes under 3a, and 3a alone. This means there is practically no way for any Remixer or Respinner to distribute their product under anything other then 3a as well. For the Fedora Project to start distributing under 3b so that Remixers and Respinners can use 3c is too big of an investment to make right now -without knowing whom exactly benefit from it, it's gonna cost like millions and millions of bits of storage, really dazzling. Kind regards, Jeroen van Meeuwen -kanarip Jeroen van Meeuwen wrote: > Hi All, > > Regarding the legal issues of Rebranding, Remixing and Respinning > Fedora, I want to ask some questions regarding to providing the sources. > > First of all there is the "genuine Fedora" branch of custom > distributions; all parts included come from Fedora (Remix), and/or it > contains updates (Respin), and it does not need any rebranding > whatsoever. In fact, we may feel like hosting, mirroring or linking to > these distributions at some point. > > For these distributions, GPLv2 requires that you distribute or make > available the sources of whatever you distribute alongside the binaries, > or include instructions to obtain the sources, or (3c), provide the > instructions you have gotten yourself. For some of us, this isn't a problem. > > However, if a Respin (definitely including updates) or Remix (possibly > including updates) needs to also distribute or make available the > sources, they could have pointed to the Fedora mirrors if only the > updates (and their source RPMs) wouldn't expire from these mirrors. > > Having a Respin include update foo-1.0.1, which is being replaced by > update foo-1.0.2 a day later, which expires the source RPM for foo-1.0.1 > as well, prevents the ones distributing the Respin or Remix from > GPL-compliance as the sources for foo-1.0.1 are no longer publicly > available. The Respin or Remix ends up to be non-distributable unless > someone finds the resources to also host the source. > > Is there some kind of archive of all updates ever released? Is that > koji? Can Respinners and Remixes just point people to koji? As (afaik) > the Fedora Project releases under 3a and 3b of GPLv2, can we not make it > so people that do Respins/Remixes can use 3c? E.g., include the complete > instructions for retrieving the sources for anything the Fedora Project > releases, whether it be actual releases or updates, in the Fedora > Release Notes? It'd maybe save a lot of people a lot of trouble, and > thus enable a lot more people to start remixing Fedora and distribute > the results. > > That's todays question. > > Kind regards, > > Jeroen van Meeuwen > -kanarip > > _______________________________________________ > fedora-advisory-board mailing list > fedora-advisory-board at redhat.com > http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-advisory-board From kwade at redhat.com Wed Aug 15 17:56:49 2007 From: kwade at redhat.com (Karsten Wade) Date: Wed, 15 Aug 2007 10:56:49 -0700 Subject: Rebranding / Remixing / Respinning Fedora In-Reply-To: <46C31402.9060306@kanarip.com> References: <46C30031.8040003@kanarip.com> <46C31402.9060306@kanarip.com> Message-ID: <1187200609.6168.49.camel@erato.phig.org> On Wed, 2007-08-15 at 16:56 +0200, Jeroen van Meeuwen wrote: > As clarified by Jesse on IRC: > > The Fedora Project distributes under 3a, and 3a alone. > > This means there is practically no way for any Remixer or Respinner to > distribute their product under anything other then 3a as well. We need to make sure the Live Spin Guide explicitly explains how to handle this. http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Docs/Drafts/Spins BTW, we really need some contributors to help get together a single Fedora Live Spin Guide. The few of us active in Docs have tried but are too busy. - Karsten -- Karsten Wade ^ Fedora Documentation Project Sr. Developer Relations Mgr. | fedoraproject.org/wiki/DocsProject quaid.fedorapeople.org | gpg key: AD0E0C41 ////////////////////////////////// \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: This is a digitally signed message part URL: From kanarip at kanarip.com Thu Aug 16 09:58:51 2007 From: kanarip at kanarip.com (Jeroen van Meeuwen) Date: Thu, 16 Aug 2007 11:58:51 +0200 Subject: Rebranding / Remixing / Respinning Fedora In-Reply-To: <1187200609.6168.49.camel@erato.phig.org> References: <46C30031.8040003@kanarip.com> <46C31402.9060306@kanarip.com> <1187200609.6168.49.camel@erato.phig.org> Message-ID: <46C41FDB.4080902@kanarip.com> Karsten Wade wrote: > On Wed, 2007-08-15 at 16:56 +0200, Jeroen van Meeuwen wrote: >> As clarified by Jesse on IRC: >> >> The Fedora Project distributes under 3a, and 3a alone. >> >> This means there is practically no way for any Remixer or Respinner to >> distribute their product under anything other then 3a as well. > > We need to make sure the Live Spin Guide explicitly explains how to > handle this. > > http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Docs/Drafts/Spins > > BTW, we really need some contributors to help get together a single > Fedora Live Spin Guide. The few of us active in Docs have tried but are > too busy. > > - Karsten > I'm writing some things up on the wiki as well as our homepage: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/JeroenVanMeeuwen/Revisor http://revisor.fedoraunity.org/documentation/ Kind regards, Jeroen van Meeuwen -kanarip From matt at domsch.com Fri Aug 17 03:04:12 2007 From: matt at domsch.com (Matt Domsch) Date: Thu, 16 Aug 2007 22:04:12 -0500 Subject: Corporate Sponsorship RFC In-Reply-To: <46C23DA3.8000701@redhat.com> References: <46C23DA3.8000701@redhat.com> Message-ID: <20070817030412.GB7010@domsch.com> On Tue, Aug 14, 2007 at 06:41:23PM -0500, Mike McGrath wrote: > I'd like to find some additional sponsors for some of the projects we > are working on in Infrastructure and I feel Fedora is at the point where > a sponsorship framework is warranted. This policy would be used by the > Infrastructure team to negotiate with potential sponsors. I want to > offer a couple of options to be worked out between Fedora and the > Sponsor and each offering should be simple and straight forward. Below > is a list of some options I'd like to formalize on the wiki. Please > comment or provide additional ideas. I'm all for additional sponsorship. I think there are lots of needs which can be met through developing new sponsors, and enhancing existing ones. > 1) A sponsorship page. Those who offer bandwidth, hosting or machines > get to place an icon on a page on the wiki. Indeed, easy. > 2) Localized sponsorship. Right now at the bottom of the wiki you'll > notice a "powered by dell" logo. We could fairly easily devise a way to > add icons to various parts of our website. For example, if a user > happens to hit the website in a japanese colo, they would see a > "services provided by" next to the dell logo. There's a few ways to get > fancy with this but still make it compelling to contribute resources for > potential sponsors. This is very analogous to the way our mirrors work > now: > http://fedora.mirror.facebook.com/linux/releases/7/Everything/i386/os/ > (for example) One of the things I intentionally did with MirrorManager and the publiclist web pages is to let each Site (company, organization) have their own URL listed on the pages, in addition to the URL of the mirror server. That way, those volunteers and their organizations get credit all the time for what they contribute, in a clear fashion. Some of the things we're needing (storage, off-site backups (so more storage), DIDs for the asterisk setup, colo space) don't directly lend themselves to such blatent recognition though. Web tool front ends can, certainly. > 3) White paper. This one is my favorite. Yeah, this is great. Fundamentally, it's how many magazines pay for themselves too. A company "sponsors" an article to be written that includes their product mention, and that sponsorship also pays for another pure-technical article with no direct mention. Sponsorship usually comes from a company's advertising budget, so they're looking for eyeballs. Where can we present impressions? - anaconda screens while installing packages - firstboot - web browser default page - our web sites - a text file on the root of the CD/DVD "SPONSORS" "This Fedora release brought to you by..." - Download redirectors (ala sourceforge) ... - "Fedora Recommends ..." taglines? It has the added benefit of not appearing like an advertisement. :-) I like Mike's thought of being context-sensitive. So users from Japan might see recognition for sponsors from that geography, if they're geographically constrained as such. The big companies we might hit up are global in nature though, so need to allow for global recognition too. that's enough rambling for one night... -Matt From rc040203 at freenet.de Fri Aug 24 08:27:34 2007 From: rc040203 at freenet.de (Ralf Corsepius) Date: Fri, 24 Aug 2007 10:27:34 +0200 Subject: [Bug 226377] Merge Review: rpm In-Reply-To: <200708240816.l7O8GhMC001124@bugzilla.redhat.com> References: <200708240816.l7O8GhMC001124@bugzilla.redhat.com> Message-ID: <1187944054.31667.478.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> On Fri, 2007-08-24 at 04:16 -0400, bugzilla at redhat.com wrote: > Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional > comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. > > Summary: Merge Review: rpm > > > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=226377 > > > > > > ------- Additional Comments From redhat at linuxnetz.de 2007-08-24 04:16 EST ------- > Panu, I already did this job more or less - but for rpm5. It is less pain and > seems to work well. If next week matches, my rpm5 package should reach review > and then you can copy over bits from there to get the rpm.spec file friendly to > rpmlint (of course, there will be some warnings and errors further on, because > rpm is a special package). IMO, we will not be able to avoid to have a management decision on how to proceed with JBJ's rpm5. AFAICT, Fedora leadership clearly has set up a clear decision not to switch to rpm5 but to continue with rpm.org. => IMO, there should not be any room for rpm5, may-be except as an optional add-on package. Ralf From Axel.Thimm at ATrpms.net Fri Aug 24 09:17:36 2007 From: Axel.Thimm at ATrpms.net (Axel Thimm) Date: Fri, 24 Aug 2007 11:17:36 +0200 Subject: [Bug 226377] Merge Review: rpm In-Reply-To: <1187944054.31667.478.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> References: <200708240816.l7O8GhMC001124@bugzilla.redhat.com> <1187944054.31667.478.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> Message-ID: <20070824091736.GB5930@puariko.nirvana> On Fri, Aug 24, 2007 at 10:27:34AM +0200, Ralf Corsepius wrote: > On Fri, 2007-08-24 at 04:16 -0400, bugzilla at redhat.com wrote: > > Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional > > comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. > > > > Summary: Merge Review: rpm > > > > > > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=226377 > > > > > > > > > > > > ------- Additional Comments From redhat at linuxnetz.de 2007-08-24 04:16 EST ------- > > Panu, I already did this job more or less - but for rpm5. It is less pain and > > seems to work well. If next week matches, my rpm5 package should reach review > > and then you can copy over bits from there to get the rpm.spec file friendly to > > rpmlint (of course, there will be some warnings and errors further on, because > > rpm is a special package). > > IMO, we will not be able to avoid to have a management decision on how > to proceed with JBJ's rpm5. > > AFAICT, Fedora leadership clearly has set up a clear decision not to > switch to rpm5 but to continue with rpm.org. > > => IMO, there should not be any room for rpm5, may-be except as an > optional add-on package. I think this decision has already been made when Jeff had announced rpm as unmaintained and the ball was picked up by what is now under rpm.org. I think rpm5 in Fedora is dangerous. At the very least it reverses the ordering of letters and digits and thus breaks a ton of packaging techniques. Any *-1.fc8 -> *.1.1.fc8 upgrade path is busted for example. An rpm5 package in Fedora would have to bend the paths as to leave /var/lib/rpm alone (perhaps rpm5 already uses /var/lib/rpm5, I don't know). -- Axel.Thimm at ATrpms.net -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: not available URL: From rc040203 at freenet.de Fri Aug 24 10:45:49 2007 From: rc040203 at freenet.de (Ralf Corsepius) Date: Fri, 24 Aug 2007 12:45:49 +0200 Subject: [Bug 226377] Merge Review: rpm In-Reply-To: <20070824091736.GB5930@puariko.nirvana> References: <200708240816.l7O8GhMC001124@bugzilla.redhat.com> <1187944054.31667.478.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> <20070824091736.GB5930@puariko.nirvana> Message-ID: <1187952349.31667.508.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> On Fri, 2007-08-24 at 11:17 +0200, Axel Thimm wrote: > On Fri, Aug 24, 2007 at 10:27:34AM +0200, Ralf Corsepius wrote: > > On Fri, 2007-08-24 at 04:16 -0400, bugzilla at redhat.com wrote: > > > Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional > > > comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. > > > > > > Summary: Merge Review: rpm > > > > > > > > > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=226377 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ------- Additional Comments From redhat at linuxnetz.de 2007-08-24 04:16 EST ------- > > > Panu, I already did this job more or less - but for rpm5. It is less pain and > > > seems to work well. If next week matches, my rpm5 package should reach review > > > and then you can copy over bits from there to get the rpm.spec file friendly to > > > rpmlint (of course, there will be some warnings and errors further on, because > > > rpm is a special package). > > > > IMO, we will not be able to avoid to have a management decision on how > > to proceed with JBJ's rpm5. > > > > AFAICT, Fedora leadership clearly has set up a clear decision not to > > switch to rpm5 but to continue with rpm.org. > > > > => IMO, there should not be any room for rpm5, may-be except as an > > optional add-on package. > > I think this decision has already been made when Jeff had announced > rpm as unmaintained and the ball was picked up by what is now under > rpm.org. This corresponds to my memory. > I think rpm5 in Fedora is dangerous. Exactly. In first place, using rpm5 in Fedora is dangerous to users. In second place, seeing rpm5 in Fedora (which could be read as Fedora supporting rpm5) is threatening the rpm.org project. In third place, setting up rpm5 not to conflict with "Fedora's" nominal rpm is a true technical challenge. Ralf From rc040203 at freenet.de Fri Aug 24 11:08:17 2007 From: rc040203 at freenet.de (Ralf Corsepius) Date: Fri, 24 Aug 2007 13:08:17 +0200 Subject: [Bug 226377] Merge Review: rpm In-Reply-To: References: <200708240816.l7O8GhMC001124@bugzilla.redhat.com> <1187944054.31667.478.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> <20070824091736.GB5930@puariko.nirvana> <20070824093859.GA7232@hurricane.linuxnetz.de> Message-ID: <1187953697.31667.528.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> On Fri, 2007-08-24 at 13:53 +0300, Panu Matilainen wrote: > On Fri, 24 Aug 2007, Robert Scheck wrote: > There are some rather grave technical issues involved with alternative rpm > implementation in Fedora main repository. The issue I am primarily aiming at HERE, is not the technical side, it's the political side. Does Fedora want rpm5 and to tie developer capacities to rpm5 or not? Ralf From Axel.Thimm at ATrpms.net Fri Aug 24 11:31:04 2007 From: Axel.Thimm at ATrpms.net (Axel Thimm) Date: Fri, 24 Aug 2007 13:31:04 +0200 Subject: [Bug 226377] Merge Review: rpm In-Reply-To: <20070824093859.GA7232@hurricane.linuxnetz.de> References: <200708240816.l7O8GhMC001124@bugzilla.redhat.com> <1187944054.31667.478.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> <20070824091736.GB5930@puariko.nirvana> <20070824093859.GA7232@hurricane.linuxnetz.de> Message-ID: <20070824113104.GA11762@puariko.nirvana> On Fri, Aug 24, 2007 at 11:38:59AM +0200, Robert Scheck wrote: > IMAO this is nothing that has to be discussed at advisory board. Or are we > going to discuss glibc vs. uclibc or similar things there, too? Thanks. If the board had decided in the past to chose using only glibc because the developer of uclibc has become actively non-cooperative, then we sure would do so. The rpm5 political issue has been too often an issue of the board in the past, and we should try to keep it there, in the past. There is no benefit in Fedora carrying an alternative package to a critical base system component with an anti-upstream. At the very least we derail the efforts of the in-house rpm development. That's all a political discussion. The technical divergencies follow from the non-cooperation policy. FWIW some of the decisions that made rpm5 incompatible to Fedora/RHEL were made known to rpm5's developer beforehand and he didn't care about it. In fact if you just try to conatct the devloper and say that this and this is an issue in Fedora and whether he could make that a compile time switch you will probably get very nasty vocal attributes in return. -- Axel.Thimm at ATrpms.net -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: not available URL: From Axel.Thimm at ATrpms.net Fri Aug 24 11:37:54 2007 From: Axel.Thimm at ATrpms.net (Axel Thimm) Date: Fri, 24 Aug 2007 13:37:54 +0200 Subject: [Bug 226377] Merge Review: rpm In-Reply-To: References: <200708240816.l7O8GhMC001124@bugzilla.redhat.com> <1187944054.31667.478.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> <20070824091736.GB5930@puariko.nirvana> <20070824093859.GA7232@hurricane.linuxnetz.de> Message-ID: <20070824113754.GB11762@puariko.nirvana> On Fri, Aug 24, 2007 at 01:53:08PM +0300, Panu Matilainen wrote: > Yes, we're talking about something we haven't even seen yet. > Everybody, please just calm down. Well, we don't want to see it. :) Actually we, or some of us, have seen the source (not the package) and the roadmap. If it's clear that we can't live with the base product what can a packaging layer still change? Unpatching all of rpm5's unneeded features is like diffing rpm5 and rpm.org ;) > All in all, rpm5 would have to be crippled in several ways to ensure not > to disturb distro rpm and the (python) tool stack above it. So much so, I > doubt it'd be of much interest to anybody at that point. It would be far > better served by something like Fedora Alternatives which was proposed > originally but never materialized: a repository where replacing the system > kernel, glibc and whatever for experimenting is ok and even encouraged. Experimenting with alternative kernels, libcs etc. may be encouraged as one can think of potential future benefits to Fedora/RHEL, but in the case of rpm5 where a RHEL/Fedora request is currently known to be ignored just because it comes from RHEL/Fedora is not worth encouraging or otherwise endorsing. I think rpm5 needs to stay out. Fesco can ban for technical reasons, the board for political and I think the latter has already happened. After all Fedora through Red Hat has invested into manpower and further resources because rpm5 (at that time w/o that particular name) was politically unbearable. -- Axel.Thimm at ATrpms.net -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: not available URL: From jkeating at redhat.com Fri Aug 24 12:50:57 2007 From: jkeating at redhat.com (Jesse Keating) Date: Fri, 24 Aug 2007 08:50:57 -0400 Subject: [Bug 226377] Merge Review: rpm In-Reply-To: <1187944054.31667.478.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> References: <200708240816.l7O8GhMC001124@bugzilla.redhat.com> <1187944054.31667.478.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> Message-ID: <20070824085057.0e5c21ae@ender> On Fri, 24 Aug 2007 10:27:34 +0200 Ralf Corsepius wrote: > IMO, we will not be able to avoid to have a management decision on how > to proceed with JBJ's rpm5. > > AFAICT, Fedora leadership clearly has set up a clear decision not to > switch to rpm5 but to continue with rpm.org. > > => IMO, there should not be any room for rpm5, may-be except as an > optional add-on package. Honestly while it's good to think about this now, it may become a moot point unless they can get rpm5 to be completely co-installable with rpm(.org). Our current packaging guidelines forbit any conflicts and that means it's up to rpm5 set up all the different paths for their package as to not conflict, override, usurp the rpm.org on the system. If they can do that, /and/ it's still usable for whatever they want to do with it, then we can make a political decision, if its even needed. If it doesn't conflict with rpm.org, if it doesn't disrupt rpm.org's actions on the system, if it doesn't take over calls from other tools that use rpmlib, if it doesn't otherwise disrupt the normal operation of a system wrt rpm(.org), is there really a problem in having the package existing in Fedora? Yes it sends something of a mixed message wrt what rpm we support, but that can be answered with wiki pages, and surely enforced in the comps file. (Note that these are just my opinions, I do not speak as FESCo, nor do I hold a position within the Fedora Board) -- Jesse Keating Fedora -- All my bits are free, are yours? -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: not available URL: From mspevack at redhat.com Fri Aug 24 14:57:10 2007 From: mspevack at redhat.com (Max Spevack) Date: Fri, 24 Aug 2007 10:57:10 -0400 (EDT) Subject: [Bug 226377] Merge Review: rpm In-Reply-To: <1187952349.31667.508.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> References: <200708240816.l7O8GhMC001124@bugzilla.redhat.com> <1187944054.31667.478.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> <20070824091736.GB5930@puariko.nirvana> <1187952349.31667.508.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> Message-ID: On Fri, 24 Aug 2007, Ralf Corsepius wrote: > In second place, seeing rpm5 in Fedora (which could be read as Fedora > supporting rpm5) is threatening the rpm.org project. > > In third place, setting up rpm5 not to conflict with "Fedora's" > nominal rpm is a true technical challenge. I would like to address these two points. The RPM 5 situation has been a very complicated one, as there are several different elements involved. ELEMENT #1 -- The Fedora Board (and therefore me) have said publicly that rpm.org is Fedora's upstream, and that Fedora's commitment to rpm.org is not something that is being questioned. Most recently, this was discussed publicly here -- http://lwn.net/Articles/237700/ -- at the very bottom of the article. I stand by what I said. Fedora is committed to rpm.org as its upstream. ELEMENT #2 -- The Fedora Project needs to be open-minded and inclusive to new ideas, and alternative implementations of things. What I have suggested to Robert in the past was quite simple: If he has a package, and if it can merit inclusion into Fedora on its TECHNICAL MERITS alone, then why would I do anything to stop it? In my opinion, there is a major difference between "allowing a package to be in the Fedora repository" and "using a specific package as the building block for the entire distribution". The first (allowing packages into the repositories) is a technical-level decision. The second (which packages are the core pieces of the Fedora distro) are both technical and political. In my opinion, at this point rpm5 is clearly in the first category, and not the second. I'm not in the business of telling people what they can or can not submit for inclusion into the Fedora repositories. That is what our already-existing review processes are for. I am in the business of (along with other folks) determining what comprises the core components of the Fedora distribution. And in that regard, the answer is the code produced by the upstream that is RPM.org --Max From fedora at leemhuis.info Fri Aug 24 15:27:36 2007 From: fedora at leemhuis.info (Thorsten Leemhuis) Date: Fri, 24 Aug 2007 17:27:36 +0200 Subject: [Bug 226377] Merge Review: rpm In-Reply-To: References: <200708240816.l7O8GhMC001124@bugzilla.redhat.com> <1187944054.31667.478.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> <20070824091736.GB5930@puariko.nirvana> <1187952349.31667.508.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> Message-ID: <46CEF8E8.1010802@leemhuis.info> On 24.08.2007 16:57, Max Spevack wrote: > On Fri, 24 Aug 2007, Ralf Corsepius wrote: > [...] > ELEMENT #2 -- The Fedora Project needs to be open-minded and inclusive > to new ideas, and alternative implementations of things. Agreed, but some thing might be tested somewhere outside first. I think for such cases we should open a kind of "alphaworks" "experimental kitchen", "Fedora experimental grounds" or something like that sooner or later. > What I have > suggested to Robert in the past was quite simple: If he has a package, > and if it can merit inclusion into Fedora on its TECHNICAL MERITS alone, > then why would I do anything to stop it? If using the packages does harm and/or confuses users it might be better for everyone to not ship it in our default repository, as both things will lead to a bad user experience, which is IMHO not what we want. To give an example outside of the current rpm problem: We had a package review where someone wanted to get Sax2 (Suse's configuration tool for X11) into Fedora. There the questions was raised if it makes sense to ship it in Fedora, as the configurations files it writes might not have been as good as those from s-c-d. There were also concerns that the sax2 config files might break other fedora tools or packages that rely on the format written by s-c-d. That problem never got solved properly, as the submitter stopped his efforts when above concerns were raised. > [...] Cu knurd From mspevack at redhat.com Fri Aug 24 15:37:45 2007 From: mspevack at redhat.com (Max Spevack) Date: Fri, 24 Aug 2007 11:37:45 -0400 (EDT) Subject: [Bug 226377] Merge Review: rpm In-Reply-To: <46CEF8E8.1010802@leemhuis.info> References: <200708240816.l7O8GhMC001124@bugzilla.redhat.com> <1187944054.31667.478.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> <20070824091736.GB5930@puariko.nirvana> <1187952349.31667.508.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> <46CEF8E8.1010802@leemhuis.info> Message-ID: On Fri, 24 Aug 2007, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote: > On 24.08.2007 16:57, Max Spevack wrote: >> On Fri, 24 Aug 2007, Ralf Corsepius wrote: >> [...] >> ELEMENT #2 -- The Fedora Project needs to be open-minded and inclusive >> to new ideas, and alternative implementations of things. > > Agreed, but some thing might be tested somewhere outside first. I > think for such cases we should open a kind of "alphaworks" > "experimental kitchen", "Fedora experimental grounds" or something > like that sooner or later. That's one of the things that was talked about surrounding this discussion. In short -- what would it take to have an "experimental" repository available for people to try things that might be considered particularly disruptive, etc to the "mainstream" Fedora processes. What are some of the bigger technical challenges that stop us from just setting something like that up pretty quickly/easily? --Max From caillon at redhat.com Fri Aug 24 15:40:54 2007 From: caillon at redhat.com (Christopher Aillon) Date: Fri, 24 Aug 2007 11:40:54 -0400 Subject: [Bug 226377] Merge Review: rpm In-Reply-To: <46CEF8E8.1010802@leemhuis.info> References: <200708240816.l7O8GhMC001124@bugzilla.redhat.com> <1187944054.31667.478.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> <20070824091736.GB5930@puariko.nirvana> <1187952349.31667.508.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> <46CEF8E8.1010802@leemhuis.info> Message-ID: <46CEFC06.1080908@redhat.com> Thorsten Leemhuis wrote: >> What I have >> suggested to Robert in the past was quite simple: If he has a package, >> and if it can merit inclusion into Fedora on its TECHNICAL MERITS alone, >> then why would I do anything to stop it? > > If using the packages does harm and/or confuses users it might be better > for everyone to not ship it in our default repository, as both things > will lead to a bad user experience, which is IMHO not what we want. > > To give an example outside of the current rpm problem: We had a package > review where someone wanted to get Sax2 (Suse's configuration tool for > X11) into Fedora. There the questions was raised if it makes sense to > ship it in Fedora, as the configurations files it writes might not have > been as good as those from s-c-d. There were also concerns that the sax2 > config files might break other fedora tools or packages that rely on the > format written by s-c-d. > > That problem never got solved properly, as the submitter stopped his > efforts when above concerns were raised. That is Max's point exactly. The review was halted on technical merit. If it ever did meet the technical requirements of matching the format of s-c-d, it might have gone through. Thankfully that's pretty moot now that the X guys are making things JustWork(tm). From matt at domsch.com Fri Aug 24 15:41:26 2007 From: matt at domsch.com (Matt Domsch) Date: Fri, 24 Aug 2007 10:41:26 -0500 Subject: [Bug 226377] Merge Review: rpm In-Reply-To: References: <200708240816.l7O8GhMC001124@bugzilla.redhat.com> <1187944054.31667.478.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> <20070824091736.GB5930@puariko.nirvana> <1187952349.31667.508.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> <46CEF8E8.1010802@leemhuis.info> Message-ID: <20070824154125.GB7047@domsch.com> On Fri, Aug 24, 2007 at 11:37:45AM -0400, Max Spevack wrote: > On Fri, 24 Aug 2007, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote: > > >On 24.08.2007 16:57, Max Spevack wrote: > >>On Fri, 24 Aug 2007, Ralf Corsepius wrote: > >>[...] > >>ELEMENT #2 -- The Fedora Project needs to be open-minded and inclusive > >>to new ideas, and alternative implementations of things. > > > >Agreed, but some thing might be tested somewhere outside first. I > >think for such cases we should open a kind of "alphaworks" > >"experimental kitchen", "Fedora experimental grounds" or something > >like that sooner or later. > > That's one of the things that was talked about surrounding this > discussion. In short -- what would it take to have an "experimental" > repository available for people to try things that might be considered > particularly disruptive, etc to the "mainstream" Fedora processes. > > What are some of the bigger technical challenges that stop us from just > setting something like that up pretty quickly/easily? With the compose tools open, anyone can compose to their hearts content. As for making their own repositories, that's one thing fedorapeople.org can assist with. For reasonable sizes of additional packages, any Fedora contributor can publish a yum repository on fedorapeople.org. -Matt From fedora at leemhuis.info Fri Aug 24 16:37:27 2007 From: fedora at leemhuis.info (Thorsten Leemhuis) Date: Fri, 24 Aug 2007 18:37:27 +0200 Subject: [Bug 226377] Merge Review: rpm In-Reply-To: <20070824154125.GB7047@domsch.com> References: <200708240816.l7O8GhMC001124@bugzilla.redhat.com> <1187944054.31667.478.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> <20070824091736.GB5930@puariko.nirvana> <1187952349.31667.508.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> <46CEF8E8.1010802@leemhuis.info> <20070824154125.GB7047@domsch.com> Message-ID: <46CF0947.5080605@leemhuis.info> On 24.08.2007 17:41, Matt Domsch wrote: > On Fri, Aug 24, 2007 at 11:37:45AM -0400, Max Spevack wrote: >> On Fri, 24 Aug 2007, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote: >> >>> On 24.08.2007 16:57, Max Spevack wrote: >>>> On Fri, 24 Aug 2007, Ralf Corsepius wrote: >>>> [...] >>>> ELEMENT #2 -- The Fedora Project needs to be open-minded and inclusive >>>> to new ideas, and alternative implementations of things. >>> Agreed, but some thing might be tested somewhere outside first. I >>> think for such cases we should open a kind of "alphaworks" >>> "experimental kitchen", "Fedora experimental grounds" or something >>> like that sooner or later. >> That's one of the things that was talked about surrounding this >> discussion. In short -- what would it take to have an "experimental" >> repository available for people to try things that might be considered >> particularly disruptive, etc to the "mainstream" Fedora processes. >> What are some of the bigger technical challenges that stop us from just >> setting something like that up pretty quickly/easily? > > With the compose tools open, anyone can compose to their hearts > content. /me wonders if he missed anything Sorry, not sure if I can't follow: what do you mean exactly "by compose tools"? The software we use in our build-stack? koji (+ mock), + bodhi? > As for making their own repositories, that's one thing > fedorapeople.org can assist with. For reasonable sizes of additional > packages, any Fedora contributor can publish a yum repository on > fedorapeople.org. Sure -- but the real repos for in that testing area likely should IMHO be maintained similar to our normal repo and with our normal tools. E.g. build with packages using koji (needs special tag, needs mock configs) and push with bodi. Now that most of KDE4 likely will miss F-8 it for example might be nice to have a "experimental" area with more space than fedorapeople.org to create a KDE4 overlay-repo for F8 there. It could server packages from a special cvs-tag/branch that got build by koji and pushed by bodhi to the special repo and maintained during the lifetime of F8. Maybe even an additional FC6-with-KDE4 spin could be hosted there once F8 is out. then those users that want KDE4 in as soon as it's released could get it there while normal F8 users get the well-tested old KDE 3.5.X CU thl From skvidal at fedoraproject.org Fri Aug 24 16:40:52 2007 From: skvidal at fedoraproject.org (seth vidal) Date: Fri, 24 Aug 2007 12:40:52 -0400 Subject: [Bug 226377] Merge Review: rpm In-Reply-To: <46CF0947.5080605@leemhuis.info> References: <200708240816.l7O8GhMC001124@bugzilla.redhat.com> <1187944054.31667.478.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> <20070824091736.GB5930@puariko.nirvana> <1187952349.31667.508.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> <46CEF8E8.1010802@leemhuis.info> <20070824154125.GB7047@domsch.com> <46CF0947.5080605@leemhuis.info> Message-ID: <1187973652.2186.19.camel@cutter> On Fri, 2007-08-24 at 18:37 +0200, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote: > On 24.08.2007 17:41, Matt Domsch wrote: > > On Fri, Aug 24, 2007 at 11:37:45AM -0400, Max Spevack wrote: > >> On Fri, 24 Aug 2007, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote: > >> > >>> On 24.08.2007 16:57, Max Spevack wrote: > >>>> On Fri, 24 Aug 2007, Ralf Corsepius wrote: > >>>> [...] > >>>> ELEMENT #2 -- The Fedora Project needs to be open-minded and inclusive > >>>> to new ideas, and alternative implementations of things. > >>> Agreed, but some thing might be tested somewhere outside first. I > >>> think for such cases we should open a kind of "alphaworks" > >>> "experimental kitchen", "Fedora experimental grounds" or something > >>> like that sooner or later. > >> That's one of the things that was talked about surrounding this > >> discussion. In short -- what would it take to have an "experimental" > >> repository available for people to try things that might be considered > >> particularly disruptive, etc to the "mainstream" Fedora processes. > >> What are some of the bigger technical challenges that stop us from just > >> setting something like that up pretty quickly/easily? > > > > With the compose tools open, anyone can compose to their hearts > > content. > > /me wonders if he missed anything > > Sorry, not sure if I can't follow: what do you mean exactly "by compose > tools"? The software we use in our build-stack? koji (+ mock), + bodhi? > > > As for making their own repositories, that's one thing > > fedorapeople.org can assist with. For reasonable sizes of additional > > packages, any Fedora contributor can publish a yum repository on > > fedorapeople.org. > > Sure -- but the real repos for in that testing area likely should IMHO > be maintained similar to our normal repo and with our normal tools. E.g. > build with packages using koji (needs special tag, needs mock configs) > and push with bodi. > > Now that most of KDE4 > likely will miss F-8 it for example might be nice to have a > "experimental" area with more space than fedorapeople.org to create a > KDE4 overlay-repo for F8 there. It could server packages from a special > cvs-tag/branch that got build by koji and pushed by bodhi to the special > repo and maintained during the lifetime of F8. Maybe even an additional > FC6-with-KDE4 spin could be hosted there once F8 is out. then those > users that want KDE4 in as soon as it's released could get it there > while normal F8 users get the well-tested old KDE 3.5.X > There are ways, if it is much needed, to increase a quota on fedorapeople -sv From bugs.michael at gmx.net Fri Aug 24 16:42:52 2007 From: bugs.michael at gmx.net (Michael Schwendt) Date: Fri, 24 Aug 2007 18:42:52 +0200 Subject: [Bug 226377] Merge Review: rpm In-Reply-To: <46CF0947.5080605@leemhuis.info> References: <200708240816.l7O8GhMC001124@bugzilla.redhat.com> <1187944054.31667.478.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> <20070824091736.GB5930@puariko.nirvana> <1187952349.31667.508.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> <46CEF8E8.1010802@leemhuis.info> <20070824154125.GB7047@domsch.com> <46CF0947.5080605@leemhuis.info> Message-ID: <20070824184252.d78541f3.bugs.michael@gmx.net> On Fri, 24 Aug 2007 18:37:27 +0200, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote: > > With the compose tools open, anyone can compose to their hearts > > content. > > /me wonders if he missed anything > > Sorry, not sure if I can't follow: what do you mean exactly "by compose > tools"? The software we use in our build-stack? koji (+ mock), + bodhi? revisor, pungi From jwboyer at jdub.homelinux.org Fri Aug 24 16:45:01 2007 From: jwboyer at jdub.homelinux.org (Josh Boyer) Date: Fri, 24 Aug 2007 11:45:01 -0500 Subject: [Bug 226377] Merge Review: rpm In-Reply-To: <46CF0947.5080605@leemhuis.info> References: <200708240816.l7O8GhMC001124@bugzilla.redhat.com> <1187944054.31667.478.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> <20070824091736.GB5930@puariko.nirvana> <1187952349.31667.508.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> <46CEF8E8.1010802@leemhuis.info> <20070824154125.GB7047@domsch.com> <46CF0947.5080605@leemhuis.info> Message-ID: <20070824114501.2c65833f@weaponx.rchland.ibm.com> On Fri, 24 Aug 2007 18:37:27 +0200 Thorsten Leemhuis wrote: > On 24.08.2007 17:41, Matt Domsch wrote: > > On Fri, Aug 24, 2007 at 11:37:45AM -0400, Max Spevack wrote: > >> On Fri, 24 Aug 2007, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote: > >> > >>> On 24.08.2007 16:57, Max Spevack wrote: > >>>> On Fri, 24 Aug 2007, Ralf Corsepius wrote: > >>>> [...] > >>>> ELEMENT #2 -- The Fedora Project needs to be open-minded and inclusive > >>>> to new ideas, and alternative implementations of things. > >>> Agreed, but some thing might be tested somewhere outside first. I > >>> think for such cases we should open a kind of "alphaworks" > >>> "experimental kitchen", "Fedora experimental grounds" or something > >>> like that sooner or later. > >> That's one of the things that was talked about surrounding this > >> discussion. In short -- what would it take to have an "experimental" > >> repository available for people to try things that might be considered > >> particularly disruptive, etc to the "mainstream" Fedora processes. > >> What are some of the bigger technical challenges that stop us from just > >> setting something like that up pretty quickly/easily? > > > > With the compose tools open, anyone can compose to their hearts > > content. > > /me wonders if he missed anything > > Sorry, not sure if I can't follow: what do you mean exactly "by compose > tools"? The software we use in our build-stack? koji (+ mock), + bodhi? > > > As for making their own repositories, that's one thing > > fedorapeople.org can assist with. For reasonable sizes of additional > > packages, any Fedora contributor can publish a yum repository on > > fedorapeople.org. > > Sure -- but the real repos for in that testing area likely should IMHO > be maintained similar to our normal repo and with our normal tools. E.g. > build with packages using koji (needs special tag, needs mock configs) > and push with bodi. My largest issue with an experimental repo is that it has the potential to lessen the test base of rawhide. How much it would do that I guess is the question. josh From skvidal at fedoraproject.org Fri Aug 24 16:46:02 2007 From: skvidal at fedoraproject.org (seth vidal) Date: Fri, 24 Aug 2007 12:46:02 -0400 Subject: [Bug 226377] Merge Review: rpm In-Reply-To: <20070824114501.2c65833f@weaponx.rchland.ibm.com> References: <200708240816.l7O8GhMC001124@bugzilla.redhat.com> <1187944054.31667.478.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> <20070824091736.GB5930@puariko.nirvana> <1187952349.31667.508.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> <46CEF8E8.1010802@leemhuis.info> <20070824154125.GB7047@domsch.com> <46CF0947.5080605@leemhuis.info> <20070824114501.2c65833f@weaponx.rchland.ibm.com> Message-ID: <1187973962.2186.21.camel@cutter> On Fri, 2007-08-24 at 11:45 -0500, Josh Boyer wrote: > My largest issue with an experimental repo is that it has the potential > to lessen the test base of rawhide. How much it would do that I guess > is the question. > And a potential to make bug reports excruciating. esp if the person experimenting and the normal maintainer are not the same. -sv From fedora at leemhuis.info Fri Aug 24 16:59:20 2007 From: fedora at leemhuis.info (Thorsten Leemhuis) Date: Fri, 24 Aug 2007 18:59:20 +0200 Subject: [Bug 226377] Merge Review: rpm In-Reply-To: <20070824114501.2c65833f@weaponx.rchland.ibm.com> References: <200708240816.l7O8GhMC001124@bugzilla.redhat.com> <1187944054.31667.478.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> <20070824091736.GB5930@puariko.nirvana> <1187952349.31667.508.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> <46CEF8E8.1010802@leemhuis.info> <20070824154125.GB7047@domsch.com> <46CF0947.5080605@leemhuis.info> <20070824114501.2c65833f@weaponx.rchland.ibm.com> Message-ID: <46CF0E68.9070303@leemhuis.info> On 24.08.2007 18:45, Josh Boyer wrote: > On Fri, 24 Aug 2007 18:37:27 +0200 > > My largest issue with an experimental repo is that it has the potential > to lessen the test base of rawhide. Well, I suppose lot's of people likely will look our for a stable distro with KDE4 (which this stuff could provide) then for a experimental distro where lots of other stuff is broken (as well), as there is not only hte new KDE4, but also a new python, new kernel, new . So I think we get more users that way -- users that would wander of to other distros where they get KDE4 quicker. And rawhide/F9 will benefit from such a repo as well, if the RPMS come from the same spec file, which should be possible most of the time. Cu knurd From fedora at leemhuis.info Fri Aug 24 17:02:37 2007 From: fedora at leemhuis.info (Thorsten Leemhuis) Date: Fri, 24 Aug 2007 19:02:37 +0200 Subject: [Bug 226377] Merge Review: rpm In-Reply-To: <1187973652.2186.19.camel@cutter> References: <200708240816.l7O8GhMC001124@bugzilla.redhat.com> <1187944054.31667.478.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> <20070824091736.GB5930@puariko.nirvana> <1187952349.31667.508.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> <46CEF8E8.1010802@leemhuis.info> <20070824154125.GB7047@domsch.com> <46CF0947.5080605@leemhuis.info> <1187973652.2186.19.camel@cutter> Message-ID: <46CF0F2D.3060604@leemhuis.info> On 24.08.2007 18:40, seth vidal wrote: > On Fri, 2007-08-24 at 18:37 +0200, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote: > > There are ways, if it is much needed, to increase a quota on > fedorapeople So you just have to set up things like cvs, mock/plague(koji?), some push scripts and stuff like that if you want to have a sane repo on some machine. Sure, for small stuff that fits on fedorapeople that would be overkill, but for a official KDE4 overlay repo for F8 it would be worth the trouble (or AIGLX for FC5, which was similar) That's a whole lot of work. Reusing parts of the Fedora-intra would make such things a lot more easier. Cu knurd From Axel.Thimm at ATrpms.net Fri Aug 24 17:31:48 2007 From: Axel.Thimm at ATrpms.net (Axel Thimm) Date: Fri, 24 Aug 2007 19:31:48 +0200 Subject: [Bug 226377] Merge Review: rpm In-Reply-To: References: <200708240816.l7O8GhMC001124@bugzilla.redhat.com> <1187944054.31667.478.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> <20070824091736.GB5930@puariko.nirvana> <1187952349.31667.508.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> Message-ID: <20070824173148.GG11762@puariko.nirvana> On Fri, Aug 24, 2007 at 10:57:10AM -0400, Max Spevack wrote: > In my opinion, there is a major difference between "allowing a package > to be in the Fedora repository" and "using a specific package as the > building block for the entire distribution". The first (allowing > packages into the repositories) is a technical-level decision. The > second (which packages are the core pieces of the Fedora distro) are > both technical and political. > > In my opinion, at this point rpm5 is clearly in the first category, and > not the second. As Panu nicely outlined, if rpm5 was to be in Fedora and not to disrupt normal rpm/yum/etc operation it would be quite useless (it wouldn't even know about the packages installed on this system). I'd argue that it would even be still dnagerous if it's using its own /var/lib/rpm5 rpmdb, as the rpm5-tesing user will not be really aware that rpm5 -U/i foo is not really uninstalling the old package but simply overwriting the files under rpm.org control. If one were to address even the last issue raised above then rpm5 would hava a mandatory chroot (-r) argument to not pollute the normal filespace. What this means is that for rpm5 to technically play nice with rpm it needs to be castrated beyond recognition. It would be probably blend just as much as dpkg or gentoo build tools. These technical blockers could be addressed if there were not the political issues created by rpm5's developer. Personally I think rpm is really in the second category above, after all the operation of the low level package manager, e.g. rpm, is where all our packages base upon. So it is a critical system component we shouldn't be messing with even if the poiltical cliamte were different. (If the political climate *were* different there wouldn't be rpm.org and rpm5 coexisting in the first place, so bringing in rpm5 into Fedora would be quite a paradoxon ;) -- Axel.Thimm at ATrpms.net -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: not available URL: From dennis at ausil.us Fri Aug 24 17:38:03 2007 From: dennis at ausil.us (Dennis Gilmore) Date: Fri, 24 Aug 2007 12:38:03 -0500 Subject: [Bug 226377] Merge Review: rpm In-Reply-To: <46CF0F2D.3060604@leemhuis.info> References: <200708240816.l7O8GhMC001124@bugzilla.redhat.com> <1187973652.2186.19.camel@cutter> <46CF0F2D.3060604@leemhuis.info> Message-ID: <200708241238.03362.dennis@ausil.us> Once upon a time Friday 24 August 2007, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote: > On 24.08.2007 18:40, seth vidal wrote: > > On Fri, 2007-08-24 at 18:37 +0200, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote: > > > > There are ways, if it is much needed, to increase a quota on > > fedorapeople > > So you just have to set up things like cvs, mock/plague(koji?), some > push scripts and stuff like that if you want to have a sane repo on some > machine. Sure, for small stuff that fits on fedorapeople that would be > overkill, but for a official KDE4 overlay repo for F8 it would be worth > the trouble (or AIGLX for FC5, which was similar) > > That's a whole lot of work. Reusing parts of the Fedora-intra would make > such things a lot more easier. build your own packages as you see fit. then use pungi, revisor,etc to make your own spin. or run createrepo on your tree and upload it. Dennis From jkeating at redhat.com Fri Aug 24 17:34:59 2007 From: jkeating at redhat.com (Jesse Keating) Date: Fri, 24 Aug 2007 13:34:59 -0400 Subject: [Bug 226377] Merge Review: rpm In-Reply-To: <20070824173148.GG11762@puariko.nirvana> References: <200708240816.l7O8GhMC001124@bugzilla.redhat.com> <1187944054.31667.478.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> <20070824091736.GB5930@puariko.nirvana> <1187952349.31667.508.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> <20070824173148.GG11762@puariko.nirvana> Message-ID: <20070824133459.3336f5df@ender> On Fri, 24 Aug 2007 19:31:48 +0200 Axel Thimm wrote: > As Panu nicely outlined, if rpm5 was to be in Fedora and not to > disrupt normal rpm/yum/etc operation it would be quite useless (it > wouldn't even know about the packages installed on this system). It could be useful to use in creating chroots, or installs into different installroots that aren't your system root. There is plenty of usefulness and can prove as a tool for technical review of rpm5 without messing with your system. -- Jesse Keating Fedora -- All my bits are free, are yours? -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: not available URL: From Axel.Thimm at ATrpms.net Fri Aug 24 17:46:48 2007 From: Axel.Thimm at ATrpms.net (Axel Thimm) Date: Fri, 24 Aug 2007 19:46:48 +0200 Subject: [Bug 226377] Merge Review: rpm In-Reply-To: <20070824133459.3336f5df@ender> References: <200708240816.l7O8GhMC001124@bugzilla.redhat.com> <1187944054.31667.478.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> <20070824091736.GB5930@puariko.nirvana> <1187952349.31667.508.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> <20070824173148.GG11762@puariko.nirvana> <20070824133459.3336f5df@ender> Message-ID: <20070824174648.GJ11762@puariko.nirvana> On Fri, Aug 24, 2007 at 01:34:59PM -0400, Jesse Keating wrote: > On Fri, 24 Aug 2007 19:31:48 +0200 > Axel Thimm wrote: > > > As Panu nicely outlined, if rpm5 was to be in Fedora and not to > > disrupt normal rpm/yum/etc operation it would be quite useless (it > > wouldn't even know about the packages installed on this system). > > It could be useful to use in creating chroots, or installs into > different installroots that aren't your system root. There is plenty > of usefulness and can prove as a tool for technical review of rpm5 > without messing with your system. That sounds more like using the tarball though. If a software's use is only restricted to looking onto it in a chroot or perform limited operation with is as to not shoot away the rest of the system it should not be a yum install bomb away from your fingertipps (well, not your, but the users') -- Axel.Thimm at ATrpms.net -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: not available URL: From jkeating at redhat.com Fri Aug 24 17:52:59 2007 From: jkeating at redhat.com (Jesse Keating) Date: Fri, 24 Aug 2007 13:52:59 -0400 Subject: [Bug 226377] Merge Review: rpm In-Reply-To: <20070824174648.GJ11762@puariko.nirvana> References: <200708240816.l7O8GhMC001124@bugzilla.redhat.com> <1187944054.31667.478.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> <20070824091736.GB5930@puariko.nirvana> <1187952349.31667.508.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> <20070824173148.GG11762@puariko.nirvana> <20070824133459.3336f5df@ender> <20070824174648.GJ11762@puariko.nirvana> Message-ID: <20070824135259.7e740931@ender> On Fri, 24 Aug 2007 19:46:48 +0200 Axel Thimm wrote: > That sounds more like using the tarball though. If a software's use is > only restricted to looking onto it in a chroot or perform limited > operation with is as to not shoot away the rest of the system it > should not be a yum install bomb away from your fingertipps (well, not > your, but the users') Again, if it is made to live completely outside the range of the system yum and not to interact at all with any thing that uses rpmlib, how can it "bomb" your system? The value would be that it's pre-compiled for our distro, it passes our guidelines for packaging quality, and given our constraints people can be confident that using rpm5 to play around with that fork won't "bomb" their system as it's being forced to be sufficiently walled off from the rest of the system. Just chucking a tarball at people or forcing it to live in some other repo is just invitation to have it be actively hostile toward your system should you install it, or fail to get the compile flags right, or whatever else. Having it in the distro I think is a lot more protection than keeping it out. At least this way we can dictate how it interacts and can tell people that if they want to play with rpm5 it's already in and they don't have to muck with compiling it themselves or getting otherwise unchecked quality builds and ruining their system. (and this is all technical discussion, not a single thought to the political in this reply) -- Jesse Keating Fedora -- All my bits are free, are yours? -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: not available URL: From tcallawa at redhat.com Fri Aug 24 18:04:14 2007 From: tcallawa at redhat.com (Tom "spot" Callaway) Date: Fri, 24 Aug 2007 14:04:14 -0400 Subject: [Bug 226377] Merge Review: rpm In-Reply-To: <20070824135259.7e740931@ender> References: <200708240816.l7O8GhMC001124@bugzilla.redhat.com> <1187944054.31667.478.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> <20070824091736.GB5930@puariko.nirvana> <1187952349.31667.508.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> <20070824173148.GG11762@puariko.nirvana> <20070824133459.3336f5df@ender> <20070824174648.GJ11762@puariko.nirvana> <20070824135259.7e740931@ender> Message-ID: <1187978654.3439.888.camel@dhcp83-165.boston.redhat.com> On Fri, 2007-08-24 at 13:52 -0400, Jesse Keating wrote: > On Fri, 24 Aug 2007 19:46:48 +0200 > Axel Thimm wrote: > > > That sounds more like using the tarball though. If a software's use is > > only restricted to looking onto it in a chroot or perform limited > > operation with is as to not shoot away the rest of the system it > > should not be a yum install bomb away from your fingertipps (well, not > > your, but the users') > > Again, if it is made to live completely outside the range of the system > yum and not to interact at all with any thing that uses rpmlib, how can > it "bomb" your system? The value would be that it's pre-compiled for > our distro, it passes our guidelines for packaging quality, and given > our constraints people can be confident that using rpm5 to play around > with that fork won't "bomb" their system as it's being forced to be > sufficiently walled off from the rest of the system. Just chucking a > tarball at people or forcing it to live in some other repo is just > invitation to have it be actively hostile toward your system should you > install it, or fail to get the compile flags right, or whatever else. Even with a separate database, it will overwrite the files on the system when rpm5 does an install/update transaction, and the rpm.org db (the system database) will not reflect these changes. BOOM. ~spot From Axel.Thimm at ATrpms.net Fri Aug 24 18:05:10 2007 From: Axel.Thimm at ATrpms.net (Axel Thimm) Date: Fri, 24 Aug 2007 20:05:10 +0200 Subject: [Bug 226377] Merge Review: rpm In-Reply-To: <20070824135259.7e740931@ender> References: <200708240816.l7O8GhMC001124@bugzilla.redhat.com> <1187944054.31667.478.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> <20070824091736.GB5930@puariko.nirvana> <1187952349.31667.508.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> <20070824173148.GG11762@puariko.nirvana> <20070824133459.3336f5df@ender> <20070824174648.GJ11762@puariko.nirvana> <20070824135259.7e740931@ender> Message-ID: <20070824180510.GL11762@puariko.nirvana> On Fri, Aug 24, 2007 at 01:52:59PM -0400, Jesse Keating wrote: > On Fri, 24 Aug 2007 19:46:48 +0200 > Axel Thimm wrote: > > > That sounds more like using the tarball though. If a software's use is > > only restricted to looking onto it in a chroot or perform limited > > operation with is as to not shoot away the rest of the system it > > should not be a yum install bomb away from your fingertipps (well, not > > your, but the users') > > Again, if it is made to live completely outside the range of the system > yum and not to interact at all with any thing that uses rpmlib, how can > it "bomb" your system? rpm(5) is a tool to manipulate the filesystem by default under /. If rpm5 is even deprived of the knowledge of what is already there any file operation rpm5 will be doing will be wrong. It will not know how to call existing package's %preun/%postun script, neither that the package is an upgrade vs a new install etc. > The value would be that it's pre-compiled for our distro, No, it can't be. The distro is defined by paramters like kernel, glibc version and among other rpm and the rpmdb. If it is incompatible with out rpmdb, it isn't compiled for our distro, just like a xen image of Ubuntu running under Fedora isn't compiled for our distro either. > (and this is all technical discussion, not a single thought to the > political in this reply) Sure, but the technical differences stem from a political fork. And rpm5 hasn't a chance with the technical constraints, just like kernel22 wouldn't have, and at least there the politics are sane. -- Axel.Thimm at ATrpms.net -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: not available URL: From jkeating at redhat.com Fri Aug 24 18:01:47 2007 From: jkeating at redhat.com (Jesse Keating) Date: Fri, 24 Aug 2007 14:01:47 -0400 Subject: [Bug 226377] Merge Review: rpm In-Reply-To: <1187978654.3439.888.camel@dhcp83-165.boston.redhat.com> References: <200708240816.l7O8GhMC001124@bugzilla.redhat.com> <1187944054.31667.478.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> <20070824091736.GB5930@puariko.nirvana> <1187952349.31667.508.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> <20070824173148.GG11762@puariko.nirvana> <20070824133459.3336f5df@ender> <20070824174648.GJ11762@puariko.nirvana> <20070824135259.7e740931@ender> <1187978654.3439.888.camel@dhcp83-165.boston.redhat.com> Message-ID: <20070824140147.2f2b91d0@ender> On Fri, 24 Aug 2007 14:04:14 -0400 "Tom \"spot\" Callaway" wrote: > Even with a separate database, it will overwrite the files on the > system when rpm5 does an install/update transaction, and the rpm.org > db (the system database) will not reflect these changes. > > BOOM. Ah, but that should fall under the noconflicts barrier of inclusion. They have to make it know to not accept --root / or some such so that it can't be used to drop packages in the existing file system. If they can't do that, it can't come in. So we're still in the technical range without having to get political. -- Jesse Keating Fedora -- All my bits are free, are yours? -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: not available URL: From mmcgrath at redhat.com Fri Aug 24 18:57:57 2007 From: mmcgrath at redhat.com (Mike McGrath) Date: Fri, 24 Aug 2007 13:57:57 -0500 Subject: Respin (revisited) Message-ID: <46CF2A35.30804@redhat.com> Can someone give me a technical definition of exactly what Fedora is considering a respin? Seems like a lot of people say "A respin is super top of cool shape in the world!!1!!one!" But I'm not quite sure what that means? Take the following three scenarios: Scenario 1) Using only software available on our mirrors, someone has created a respin and wants us to host it. Scenario 2) Using only software available on our mirrors, someone has created a respin by mixing our mirrors with some re-compiled software and wants us to host it. The main difference here is they have re-compiled one or two of our SRPMS with different flags *or* they've taken the F7 distribution and merged some SRPMS from rawhide in it. Again, this is all fedora software though it has been 'altered' in a way that is different from how we ship it. Scenario 3) Using software available on our mirrors as well as some backgrounds and templates available on a creative commons website (or some other Open Source content website) a user has created a respin and wants us to host it. Which of the above scenarios are we considering 'OK'? Second, when we agree that something is an official spin, answer the following questions: What are they asking us to do? Is this a bootable CD/DVD? A live cd? Is this the RPMS and boot images? Could it be all of the above? How does the user keep this re-spin up to date? Is what we are storing just a diff of what they've changed? When do we stop hosting something, does it have the same release cycle as the rest of Fedora? -Mike From jwboyer at jdub.homelinux.org Fri Aug 24 19:10:08 2007 From: jwboyer at jdub.homelinux.org (Josh Boyer) Date: Fri, 24 Aug 2007 14:10:08 -0500 Subject: Respin (revisited) In-Reply-To: <46CF2A35.30804@redhat.com> References: <46CF2A35.30804@redhat.com> Message-ID: <20070824141008.0d554117@weaponx.rchland.ibm.com> On Fri, 24 Aug 2007 13:57:57 -0500 Mike McGrath wrote: > Can someone give me a technical definition of exactly what Fedora is > considering a respin? Seems like a lot of people say "A respin is super > top of cool shape in the world!!1!!one!" But I'm not quite sure what > that means? Take the following three scenarios: > > Scenario 1) Using only software available on our mirrors, someone has > created a respin and wants us to host it. > > Scenario 2) Using only software available on our mirrors, someone has > created a respin by mixing our mirrors with some re-compiled software > and wants us to host it. The main difference here is they have > re-compiled one or two of our SRPMS with different flags *or* they've > taken the F7 distribution and merged some SRPMS from rawhide in it. > Again, this is all fedora software though it has been 'altered' in a way > that is different from how we ship it. > > Scenario 3) Using software available on our mirrors as well as some > backgrounds and templates available on a creative commons website (or > some other Open Source content website) a user has created a respin and > wants us to host it. > > Which of the above scenarios are we considering 'OK'? All of them need Board ack before being called "Fedora". > Second, when we agree that something is an official spin, answer the > following questions: > What are they asking us to do? Allow them to use the Fedora name and logos? > Is this a bootable CD/DVD? > A live cd? > Is this the RPMS and boot images? > Could it be all of the above? I think it can be all of the above... > How does the user keep this re-spin up to date? I don't understand that question. > Is what we are storing just a diff of what they've changed? > When do we stop hosting something, does it have the same release cycle > as the rest of Fedora? I don't think we've ever hosted a respin before. josh From mmcgrath at redhat.com Fri Aug 24 19:13:12 2007 From: mmcgrath at redhat.com (Mike McGrath) Date: Fri, 24 Aug 2007 14:13:12 -0500 Subject: Respin (revisited) In-Reply-To: <20070824141008.0d554117@weaponx.rchland.ibm.com> References: <46CF2A35.30804@redhat.com> <20070824141008.0d554117@weaponx.rchland.ibm.com> Message-ID: <46CF2DC8.3030203@redhat.com> Josh Boyer wrote: > On Fri, 24 Aug 2007 13:57:57 -0500 > Mike McGrath wrote: > > > All of them need Board ack before being called "Fedora". > > Fedora Board or the Advisory Board? > >> How does the user keep this re-spin up to date? >> > > I don't understand that question. > > We keep Fedora up to date by means of the updates repo. If the owners of the respin have an update to make, how does that work? Is a respin always just a fixed point in time? I know that a respin can use our own Updates repo (they would be smart to do so) but whatever makes their spin unique may also need updates. -Mike From jkeating at redhat.com Fri Aug 24 19:11:03 2007 From: jkeating at redhat.com (Jesse Keating) Date: Fri, 24 Aug 2007 15:11:03 -0400 Subject: Respin (revisited) In-Reply-To: <20070824141008.0d554117@weaponx.rchland.ibm.com> References: <46CF2A35.30804@redhat.com> <20070824141008.0d554117@weaponx.rchland.ibm.com> Message-ID: <20070824151103.22aa58bc@ender> On Fri, 24 Aug 2007 14:10:08 -0500 Josh Boyer wrote: > I don't understand that question. If their spin makes use of rpms outside the Fedora repo, how do the spinners plan on keeping those rpms up to date. "If their spin makes use of rpms outside the Fedora repo" Full stop. That's NOT Fedora and wouldn't be fully hosted by us (see exceptions like the creative commons spin for which we provided bittorrent hosting) -- Jesse Keating Fedora -- All my bits are free, are yours? -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: not available URL: From jkeating at redhat.com Fri Aug 24 19:20:11 2007 From: jkeating at redhat.com (Jesse Keating) Date: Fri, 24 Aug 2007 15:20:11 -0400 Subject: Respin (revisited) In-Reply-To: <46CF2DC8.3030203@redhat.com> References: <46CF2A35.30804@redhat.com> <20070824141008.0d554117@weaponx.rchland.ibm.com> <46CF2DC8.3030203@redhat.com> Message-ID: <20070824152011.5e01591e@ender> On Fri, 24 Aug 2007 14:13:12 -0500 Mike McGrath wrote: > We keep Fedora up to date by means of the updates repo. If the > owners of the respin have an update to make, how does that work? Is > a respin always just a fixed point in time? I know that a respin can > use our own Updates repo (they would be smart to do so) but whatever > makes their spin unique may also need updates. If "whatever makes their spin unique" == packages outside of Fedora and not served by fedora updates repos, they can't call it Fedora and they likely need to provide their own hosting and their own update system for their users. -- Jesse Keating Fedora -- All my bits are free, are yours? -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: not available URL: From caillon at redhat.com Fri Aug 24 19:27:47 2007 From: caillon at redhat.com (Christopher Aillon) Date: Fri, 24 Aug 2007 15:27:47 -0400 Subject: Respin (revisited) In-Reply-To: <20070824152011.5e01591e@ender> References: <46CF2A35.30804@redhat.com> <20070824141008.0d554117@weaponx.rchland.ibm.com> <46CF2DC8.3030203@redhat.com> <20070824152011.5e01591e@ender> Message-ID: <46CF3133.4050307@redhat.com> Jesse Keating wrote: > On Fri, 24 Aug 2007 14:13:12 -0500 > Mike McGrath wrote: > >> We keep Fedora up to date by means of the updates repo. If the >> owners of the respin have an update to make, how does that work? Is >> a respin always just a fixed point in time? I know that a respin can >> use our own Updates repo (they would be smart to do so) but whatever >> makes their spin unique may also need updates. > > If "whatever makes their spin unique" == packages outside of Fedora and > not served by fedora updates repos, they can't call it Fedora and they > likely need to provide their own hosting and their own update system > for their users. Is this written down somewhere? From mmcgrath at redhat.com Fri Aug 24 19:26:46 2007 From: mmcgrath at redhat.com (Mike McGrath) Date: Fri, 24 Aug 2007 14:26:46 -0500 Subject: Respin (revisited) In-Reply-To: <20070824152011.5e01591e@ender> References: <46CF2A35.30804@redhat.com> <20070824141008.0d554117@weaponx.rchland.ibm.com> <46CF2DC8.3030203@redhat.com> <20070824152011.5e01591e@ender> Message-ID: <46CF30F6.8000402@redhat.com> Jesse Keating wrote: > On Fri, 24 Aug 2007 14:13:12 -0500 > Mike McGrath wrote: > > >> We keep Fedora up to date by means of the updates repo. If the >> owners of the respin have an update to make, how does that work? Is >> a respin always just a fixed point in time? I know that a respin can >> use our own Updates repo (they would be smart to do so) but whatever >> makes their spin unique may also need updates. >> > > If "whatever makes their spin unique" == packages outside of Fedora and > not served by fedora updates repos, they can't call it Fedora and they > likely need to provide their own hosting and their own update system > for their users. > This is kind of a loaded question but, in light of that, how many re-spins could we possibly host that would still be compelling to the rest of the world? -Mike From jspaleta at gmail.com Fri Aug 24 19:33:51 2007 From: jspaleta at gmail.com (Jeff Spaleta) Date: Fri, 24 Aug 2007 11:33:51 -0800 Subject: Respin (revisited) In-Reply-To: <46CF30F6.8000402@redhat.com> References: <46CF2A35.30804@redhat.com> <20070824141008.0d554117@weaponx.rchland.ibm.com> <46CF2DC8.3030203@redhat.com> <20070824152011.5e01591e@ender> <46CF30F6.8000402@redhat.com> Message-ID: <604aa7910708241233v21075fe0rc41d650ed6c18c95@mail.gmail.com> On 8/24/07, Mike McGrath wrote: > This is kind of a loaded question but, in light of that, how many > re-spins could we possibly host that would still be compelling to the > rest of the world? enough. Isn't the electronics lab spin concept hostable under this definition? And if so, isn't it just scratching the surface in terms of niche productivity spins? -jef From mmcgrath at redhat.com Fri Aug 24 19:34:49 2007 From: mmcgrath at redhat.com (Mike McGrath) Date: Fri, 24 Aug 2007 14:34:49 -0500 Subject: Respin (revisited) In-Reply-To: <604aa7910708241233v21075fe0rc41d650ed6c18c95@mail.gmail.com> References: <46CF2A35.30804@redhat.com> <20070824141008.0d554117@weaponx.rchland.ibm.com> <46CF2DC8.3030203@redhat.com> <20070824152011.5e01591e@ender> <46CF30F6.8000402@redhat.com> <604aa7910708241233v21075fe0rc41d650ed6c18c95@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <46CF32D9.2060200@redhat.com> Jeff Spaleta wrote: > On 8/24/07, Mike McGrath wrote: > >> This is kind of a loaded question but, in light of that, how many >> re-spins could we possibly host that would still be compelling to the >> rest of the world? >> > > enough. > > Isn't the electronics lab spin concept hostable under this definition? > And if so, isn't it just scratching the surface in terms of niche > productivity spins? > Thats true. So lets use the electronics lab as a concept spin. Answer the questions from the first mail about it: What are they asking us to do? Is this a bootable CD/DVD? A live cd? Is this the RPMS and boot images? Could it be all of the above? How does the user keep this re-spin up to date? Is what we are storing just a diff of what they've changed? When do we stop hosting something, does it have the same release cycle as the rest of Fedora? -Mike From poelstra at redhat.com Fri Aug 24 19:40:23 2007 From: poelstra at redhat.com (John Poelstra) Date: Fri, 24 Aug 2007 12:40:23 -0700 Subject: Fedora Board Recap 2007-AUG-21 Message-ID: <46CF3427.7080507@redhat.com> http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Board/Meetings/2007-08-21 == Roll Call == Attendees: Max Spevack, Seth Vidal, John Poelstra, Jesse Keating, Jeremy Katz, Steve Dickson, Karsten Wade, Dennis Gilmore, Matt Domsch, Jef Spaleta, Mike McGrath, Chris Blizzard, Chris Aillon, and Paul W. Frields Regrets: Bill Nottingham Brainstorming and discussion meeting with the Fedora Board, past members, and key contributors. == Job Descriptions == * Max has been circulating a write-up formalizing his job responsibilities and possibly splitting some of them off to a separate marketing position. * All in draft form at this point. * Question raised as to viability of funding for an additional position * Could marketing position be a community position? * pros and cons to being full time paid Red Hat position or not * What about a business development position whose responsibilities would be to get more of the community involved == Leadership Impact == What are the places where better Fedora leadership could have the most immediate impact? 1. Marketing 1. Press 1. Community involvement 1. Hardware vendor pre-installs 1. University labs 1. Better funding for infrastructure needs == Future of Fedora == What are the big things we would like to see actively happening by the Fedora 10 release time frame? 1. More SIGs focused on different groups of users 1. Wevisor 1. Really good virtualization tools--Xen falls way short of VMWare 1. Real Marketing and Recognition of Fedora Brand 1. Fedora identified as the "model" for open community 1. Make it easy people to install Fedora to do exactly what they want to do--no extra stuff, just what they want to do 1. Better bug process--complete overhaul 1. Much better integration with Online Desktop/Mugshot 1. Smooth integration with a variety of online storage facilities such as Amazon's S3 1. Better high school and college integration 1. Tying Fedora account into other forums and locations 1. Define what "leading edge" is instead of "being it" 1. Ubiquity--desktop adoption * Embeded hypervisors are on the way for all new machines * Fedora could be attractive because it has no licensing fees == Quality == * F9 or F10 need to be amazing--not ordinary releases--quality must be a focus! * We do not have a real focus on testing * We need to have consistent, good bug days and attract people * What is the status of Beaker? * What is Red Hat's level of involvement and strategy for the testing project they announced last year? From katzj at redhat.com Fri Aug 24 19:38:32 2007 From: katzj at redhat.com (Jeremy Katz) Date: Fri, 24 Aug 2007 15:38:32 -0400 Subject: Respin (revisited) In-Reply-To: <46CF32D9.2060200@redhat.com> References: <46CF2A35.30804@redhat.com> <20070824141008.0d554117@weaponx.rchland.ibm.com> <46CF2DC8.3030203@redhat.com> <20070824152011.5e01591e@ender> <46CF30F6.8000402@redhat.com> <604aa7910708241233v21075fe0rc41d650ed6c18c95@mail.gmail.com> <46CF32D9.2060200@redhat.com> Message-ID: <1187984312.23199.1.camel@localhost.localdomain> On Fri, 2007-08-24 at 14:34 -0500, Mike McGrath wrote: > Jeff Spaleta wrote: > > Isn't the electronics lab spin concept hostable under this definition? > > And if so, isn't it just scratching the surface in terms of niche > > productivity spins? > > > > Thats true. So lets use the electronics lab as a concept spin. Answer > the questions from the first mail about it: > > What are they asking us to do? > Is this a bootable CD/DVD? > A live cd? > Is this the RPMS and boot images? > Could it be all of the above? It's a live image. Could conceivably be the others, but that's not the way the "market" is being targeted. > How does the user keep this re-spin up to date? Just as with the Fedora Desktop, KDE, etc -- after they've installed, they grab updates from the -updates repo. > Is what we are storing just a diff of what they've changed? No, we have to host the full live image. There's not a good way to host just diffs of live images. > When do we stop hosting something, does it have the same release cycle > as the rest of Fedora? I suspect the answer to this is yes as they're using our updates, etc. Jeremy From katzj at redhat.com Fri Aug 24 19:39:03 2007 From: katzj at redhat.com (Jeremy Katz) Date: Fri, 24 Aug 2007 15:39:03 -0400 Subject: Respin (revisited) In-Reply-To: <46CF2DC8.3030203@redhat.com> References: <46CF2A35.30804@redhat.com> <20070824141008.0d554117@weaponx.rchland.ibm.com> <46CF2DC8.3030203@redhat.com> Message-ID: <1187984343.23199.3.camel@localhost.localdomain> On Fri, 2007-08-24 at 14:13 -0500, Mike McGrath wrote: > Josh Boyer wrote: > > On Fri, 24 Aug 2007 13:57:57 -0500 > > Mike McGrath wrote: > > All of them need Board ack before being called "Fedora". > > > > Fedora Board or the Advisory Board? Fedora Board Jeremy From katzj at redhat.com Fri Aug 24 19:39:48 2007 From: katzj at redhat.com (Jeremy Katz) Date: Fri, 24 Aug 2007 15:39:48 -0400 Subject: Respin (revisited) In-Reply-To: <46CF3133.4050307@redhat.com> References: <46CF2A35.30804@redhat.com> <20070824141008.0d554117@weaponx.rchland.ibm.com> <46CF2DC8.3030203@redhat.com> <20070824152011.5e01591e@ender> <46CF3133.4050307@redhat.com> Message-ID: <1187984388.23199.5.camel@localhost.localdomain> On Fri, 2007-08-24 at 15:27 -0400, Christopher Aillon wrote: > Jesse Keating wrote: > > On Fri, 24 Aug 2007 14:13:12 -0500 > > Mike McGrath wrote: > > > >> We keep Fedora up to date by means of the updates repo. If the > >> owners of the respin have an update to make, how does that work? Is > >> a respin always just a fixed point in time? I know that a respin can > >> use our own Updates repo (they would be smart to do so) but whatever > >> makes their spin unique may also need updates. > > > > If "whatever makes their spin unique" == packages outside of Fedora and > > not served by fedora updates repos, they can't call it Fedora and they > > likely need to provide their own hosting and their own update system > > for their users. > > Is this written down somewhere? The trademark policy is. And it says that you can only use bits in the main Fedora repo and continue to call it Fedora. Jeremy From sundaram at fedoraproject.org Fri Aug 24 19:46:51 2007 From: sundaram at fedoraproject.org (Rahul Sundaram) Date: Sat, 25 Aug 2007 01:16:51 +0530 Subject: Fedora Board Recap 2007-AUG-21 In-Reply-To: <46CF3427.7080507@redhat.com> References: <46CF3427.7080507@redhat.com> Message-ID: <46CF35AB.30201@fedoraproject.org> John Poelstra wrote: > > http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Board/Meetings/2007-08-21 > > == Roll Call == > > Attendees: Max Spevack, Seth Vidal, John Poelstra, Jesse Keating, Jeremy > Katz, Steve Dickson, Karsten Wade, Dennis Gilmore, Matt Domsch, Jef > Spaleta, Mike McGrath, Chris Blizzard, Chris Aillon, and Paul W. Frields > > Regrets: Bill Nottingham > > Brainstorming and discussion meeting with the Fedora Board, past > members, and key contributors. Max was supposed to discuss with legal on codec buddy. Did that happen? Rahul From kwade at redhat.com Fri Aug 24 19:55:41 2007 From: kwade at redhat.com (Karsten Wade) Date: Fri, 24 Aug 2007 12:55:41 -0700 Subject: Fedora Board Recap 2007-AUG-21 In-Reply-To: <46CF35AB.30201@fedoraproject.org> References: <46CF3427.7080507@redhat.com> <46CF35AB.30201@fedoraproject.org> Message-ID: <1187985341.31494.188.camel@erato.phig.org> On Sat, 2007-08-25 at 01:16 +0530, Rahul Sundaram wrote: > John Poelstra wrote: > > > > http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Board/Meetings/2007-08-21 > > > > == Roll Call == > > > > Attendees: Max Spevack, Seth Vidal, John Poelstra, Jesse Keating, Jeremy > > Katz, Steve Dickson, Karsten Wade, Dennis Gilmore, Matt Domsch, Jef > > Spaleta, Mike McGrath, Chris Blizzard, Chris Aillon, and Paul W. Frields > > > > Regrets: Bill Nottingham > > > > Brainstorming and discussion meeting with the Fedora Board, past > > members, and key contributors. > > Max was supposed to discuss with legal on codec buddy. Did that happen? What was reported in the minutes ... is what was reported. I'm sure if there is something to discuss, we'll hear about it. - Karsten -- Karsten Wade ^ Fedora Documentation Project Sr. Developer Relations Mgr. | fedoraproject.org/wiki/DocsProject quaid.fedorapeople.org | gpg key: AD0E0C41 ////////////////////////////////// \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\ From sundaram at fedoraproject.org Fri Aug 24 19:59:38 2007 From: sundaram at fedoraproject.org (Rahul Sundaram) Date: Sat, 25 Aug 2007 01:29:38 +0530 Subject: Fedora Board Recap 2007-AUG-21 In-Reply-To: <1187985341.31494.188.camel@erato.phig.org> References: <46CF3427.7080507@redhat.com> <46CF35AB.30201@fedoraproject.org> <1187985341.31494.188.camel@erato.phig.org> Message-ID: <46CF38AA.1000104@fedoraproject.org> Karsten Wade wrote: > On Sat, 2007-08-25 at 01:16 +0530, Rahul Sundaram wrote: >> John Poelstra wrote: >>> http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Board/Meetings/2007-08-21 >>> >>> == Roll Call == >>> >>> Attendees: Max Spevack, Seth Vidal, John Poelstra, Jesse Keating, Jeremy >>> Katz, Steve Dickson, Karsten Wade, Dennis Gilmore, Matt Domsch, Jef >>> Spaleta, Mike McGrath, Chris Blizzard, Chris Aillon, and Paul W. Frields >>> >>> Regrets: Bill Nottingham >>> >>> Brainstorming and discussion meeting with the Fedora Board, past >>> members, and key contributors. >> Max was supposed to discuss with legal on codec buddy. Did that happen? > > What was reported in the minutes ... is what was reported. I'm sure if > there is something to discuss, we'll hear about it. Lack of communication in this is causing us to lose this feature for the second release after it has originally been planned. In the last board meeting, the plan was to get legal involved. We are hitting feature freeze within a week. My mails offlist have went unanswered. I would appreciate an update. Thanks. Rahul From caillon at redhat.com Fri Aug 24 20:27:06 2007 From: caillon at redhat.com (Christopher Aillon) Date: Fri, 24 Aug 2007 16:27:06 -0400 Subject: Fedora Board Recap 2007-AUG-21 In-Reply-To: <46CF38AA.1000104@fedoraproject.org> References: <46CF3427.7080507@redhat.com> <46CF35AB.30201@fedoraproject.org> <1187985341.31494.188.camel@erato.phig.org> <46CF38AA.1000104@fedoraproject.org> Message-ID: <46CF3F1A.1070304@redhat.com> Rahul Sundaram wrote: > Karsten Wade wrote: >> On Sat, 2007-08-25 at 01:16 +0530, Rahul Sundaram wrote: >>> Max was supposed to discuss with legal on codec buddy. Did that happen? >> >> What was reported in the minutes ... is what was reported. I'm sure if >> there is something to discuss, we'll hear about it. > > Lack of communication in this is causing us to lose this feature for the > second release after it has originally been planned. In the last board > meeting, the plan was to get legal involved. We are hitting feature > freeze within a week. My mails offlist have went unanswered. I would > appreciate an update. Thanks. Feature Freeze is mostly concerned with the engineering in packages in Fedora. From what I understand, the engineering work is essentially done. Totem supports fetching missing plugins, and CodecBuddy is built into rawhide already under the name codeina. Once we are satisfied that everything is clear legally (I don't know status on this), we can just make the needed adjustments on the website. We can do this after feature freeze. Sadly, we won't get as much testing on it if the legal bits aren't cleared up soon. But fortunately, this either works or it doesn't. I do not believe this feature is in jeopardy of being dropped due to the impending freeze, however. If I'm mistaken and the legal/website work also must be also done by Feature Freeze, then I believe exceptions can be requested, and if I had to vote, I would vote for an exception here. From dominik at greysector.net Fri Aug 24 21:25:58 2007 From: dominik at greysector.net (Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski) Date: Fri, 24 Aug 2007 23:25:58 +0200 Subject: The Multimedia Question In-Reply-To: <1184954710.30158.83.camel@localhost.localdomain> References: <46A02C59.2050201@redhat.com> <1184913116.26011.1120.camel@erato.phig.org> <46A06732.6020406@gmail.com> <1184933749.3329.14.camel@dawkins> <1184954710.30158.83.camel@localhost.localdomain> Message-ID: <20070824212558.GA23695@ryvius.pekin.waw.pl> Hi. Sorry for replying to an older thread, but I've only just subscribed. On Friday, 20 July 2007 at 20:05, Toshio Kuratomi wrote: > On Fri, 2007-07-20 at 10:25 -0400, Elliot Lee wrote: > > >From what I can gather, here's what's important: > > 1. Promoting software freedom. > > 2. Making life easier for the users who want to play media files. > > > > It seems to me like goal #1 requires that the default install and > > official Fedora links not point users at software that is not really > > free. Simple as that. > > > Depending on your definition of free... > -1) Non-libre, non-gratis, software. > 0) Non-patent-encumbered, non-free software but free-as-in-beer software > 1) Patent-encumbered-in-the-US free software. > 2) Patent-encumbered-in-the-US non-free software that has a license > granting use of the patent. > 3) Patent-encumbered-in-the-US free software with the patent licensed > for use of a binary build of the software. > > #-1 is not in any repo I'm aware of us thinking of linking to but it > could exist in a repository we don't control. > #0 is not mentioned in this thread but is a part of third party repos we > may be contemplating linking to. > #1 includes mplayer, xine w/DVD support, etc. > #2 includes the Fluendo WMV codec plugin for gstreamer. > #3 includes the Fluendo mp3 codec plugin for gstreamer. > > If there were no legal issues, I'd like Fedora to be able to distribute, > automatically install, point to, or otherwise make as easy as possible > for users to get #1 and #3. So the open-ended question posed to legal > would be: how can we help end-users get #1 and #3. #0 and #2 are > proprietary software and are philosophically against the Fedora mission > of providing a complete OS built on free software. > > I think this is the basis of Max's original question of larger strategy. > Does the Board and the people who make up the Project *desire* to make > end-user's lives better WRT patent-encumbered free software or do we > lump patent-encumbered free software in the same category as non-free? > > So my personal open-ended question for legal would be: How can we help > users get #1 and #3? > > Targeted questions would be: > * Can we point users at a repository we don't control that has #1, #3, > and possibly things less legal (Since we don't control it)? > * Can we point users to a specific package of #1 or #3 in another > repository? > * Can we download and attempt to install the package for the user in > either of the above cases? Why were there no replies here? As MPlayer developer and Livna contributor I'm very much interested in answers to the above questions. Regards, R. -- Fedora contributor http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/DominikMierzejewski Livna contributor http://rpm.livna.org MPlayer developer http://mplayerhq.hu "Faith manages." -- Delenn to Lennier in Babylon 5:"Confessions and Lamentations" From dominik at greysector.net Fri Aug 24 21:44:36 2007 From: dominik at greysector.net (Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski) Date: Fri, 24 Aug 2007 23:44:36 +0200 Subject: [Bug 226377] Merge Review: rpm In-Reply-To: <20070824091736.GB5930@puariko.nirvana> References: <200708240816.l7O8GhMC001124@bugzilla.redhat.com> <1187944054.31667.478.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> <20070824091736.GB5930@puariko.nirvana> Message-ID: <20070824214436.GB23695@ryvius.pekin.waw.pl> On Friday, 24 August 2007 at 11:17, Axel Thimm wrote: > On Fri, Aug 24, 2007 at 10:27:34AM +0200, Ralf Corsepius wrote: > > On Fri, 2007-08-24 at 04:16 -0400, bugzilla at redhat.com wrote: > > > Please do not reply directly to this email. All additional > > > comments should be made in the comments box of this bug report. > > > > > > Summary: Merge Review: rpm > > > > > > > > > https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/show_bug.cgi?id=226377 > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > ------- Additional Comments From redhat at linuxnetz.de 2007-08-24 04:16 EST ------- > > > Panu, I already did this job more or less - but for rpm5. It is less pain and > > > seems to work well. If next week matches, my rpm5 package should reach review > > > and then you can copy over bits from there to get the rpm.spec file friendly to > > > rpmlint (of course, there will be some warnings and errors further on, because > > > rpm is a special package). > > > > IMO, we will not be able to avoid to have a management decision on how > > to proceed with JBJ's rpm5. > > > > AFAICT, Fedora leadership clearly has set up a clear decision not to > > switch to rpm5 but to continue with rpm.org. > > > > => IMO, there should not be any room for rpm5, may-be except as an > > optional add-on package. > > I think this decision has already been made when Jeff had announced > rpm as unmaintained and the ball was picked up by what is now under > rpm.org. > > I think rpm5 in Fedora is dangerous. At the very least it reverses > the ordering of letters and digits and thus breaks a ton of packaging > techniques. Any *-1.fc8 -> *.1.1.fc8 upgrade path is busted for > example. Are you 100% sure? I've seen Jeff deny this on IRC. Regards, R. -- Fedora contributor http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/DominikMierzejewski Livna contributor http://rpm.livna.org MPlayer developer http://mplayerhq.hu "Faith manages." -- Delenn to Lennier in Babylon 5:"Confessions and Lamentations" From dominik at greysector.net Fri Aug 24 21:46:32 2007 From: dominik at greysector.net (Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski) Date: Fri, 24 Aug 2007 23:46:32 +0200 Subject: [Bug 226377] Merge Review: rpm In-Reply-To: <20070824113104.GA11762@puariko.nirvana> References: <200708240816.l7O8GhMC001124@bugzilla.redhat.com> <1187944054.31667.478.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> <20070824091736.GB5930@puariko.nirvana> <20070824093859.GA7232@hurricane.linuxnetz.de> <20070824113104.GA11762@puariko.nirvana> Message-ID: <20070824214632.GC23695@ryvius.pekin.waw.pl> On Friday, 24 August 2007 at 13:31, Axel Thimm wrote: > On Fri, Aug 24, 2007 at 11:38:59AM +0200, Robert Scheck wrote: > > IMAO this is nothing that has to be discussed at advisory board. Or are we > > going to discuss glibc vs. uclibc or similar things there, too? Thanks. > > If the board had decided in the past to chose using only glibc because > the developer of uclibc has become actively non-cooperative, then we > sure would do so. The rpm5 political issue has been too often an issue > of the board in the past, and we should try to keep it there, in the > past. > > There is no benefit in Fedora carrying an alternative package to a > critical base system component with an anti-upstream. At the very > least we derail the efforts of the in-house rpm development. > > That's all a political discussion. The technical divergencies follow > from the non-cooperation policy. > > FWIW some of the decisions that made rpm5 incompatible to Fedora/RHEL > were made known to rpm5's developer beforehand and he didn't care > about it. In fact if you just try to conatct the devloper and say that > this and this is an issue in Fedora and whether he could make that a > compile time switch you will probably get very nasty vocal attributes > in return. That depends on who contacts him. To me, he's been quite approachable, but I imagine there are some @redhat folks he won't talk to. IMHO your generalization is unfounded. Regards, R. -- Fedora contributor http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/DominikMierzejewski Livna contributor http://rpm.livna.org MPlayer developer http://mplayerhq.hu "Faith manages." -- Delenn to Lennier in Babylon 5:"Confessions and Lamentations" From Axel.Thimm at ATrpms.net Fri Aug 24 23:01:28 2007 From: Axel.Thimm at ATrpms.net (Axel Thimm) Date: Sat, 25 Aug 2007 01:01:28 +0200 Subject: [Bug 226377] Merge Review: rpm In-Reply-To: <20070824214436.GB23695@ryvius.pekin.waw.pl> References: <200708240816.l7O8GhMC001124@bugzilla.redhat.com> <1187944054.31667.478.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> <20070824091736.GB5930@puariko.nirvana> <20070824214436.GB23695@ryvius.pekin.waw.pl> Message-ID: <20070824230128.GR11762@puariko.nirvana> On Fri, Aug 24, 2007 at 11:44:36PM +0200, Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski wrote: > > I think rpm5 in Fedora is dangerous. At the very least it reverses > > the ordering of letters and digits and thus breaks a ton of packaging > > techniques. Any *-1.fc8 -> *.1.1.fc8 upgrade path is busted for > > example. > > Are you 100% sure? I've seen Jeff deny this on IRC. Index: rpmvercmp.c =================================================================== RCS file: /cvs/devel/rpm/lib/rpmvercmp.c,v retrieving revision 2.8.2.2 diff -u -b -B -w -p -r2.8.2.2 rpmvercmp.c --- rpmvercmp.c 27 Aug 2006 12:58:19 -0000 2.8.2.2 +++ rpmvercmp.c 26 Apr 2007 22:36:26 -0000 @@ -76,7 +76,7 @@ int _rpmvercmp(const char * a, const cha /* different types: one numeric, the other alpha (i.e. empty) */ /* numeric segments are always newer than alpha segments */ /* XXX See patch #60884 (and details) from bugzilla #50977. */ - if (two == str2) return (isnum ? 1 : -1); + if (two == str2) return (isnum ? -1 : 1); if (isnum) { /* this used to be done by converting the digit segments */ -- Axel.Thimm at ATrpms.net -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: not available URL: From Axel.Thimm at ATrpms.net Fri Aug 24 23:08:17 2007 From: Axel.Thimm at ATrpms.net (Axel Thimm) Date: Sat, 25 Aug 2007 01:08:17 +0200 Subject: [Bug 226377] Merge Review: rpm In-Reply-To: <20070824214632.GC23695@ryvius.pekin.waw.pl> References: <200708240816.l7O8GhMC001124@bugzilla.redhat.com> <1187944054.31667.478.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> <20070824091736.GB5930@puariko.nirvana> <20070824093859.GA7232@hurricane.linuxnetz.de> <20070824113104.GA11762@puariko.nirvana> <20070824214632.GC23695@ryvius.pekin.waw.pl> Message-ID: <20070824230817.GS11762@puariko.nirvana> On Fri, Aug 24, 2007 at 11:46:32PM +0200, Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski wrote: > On Friday, 24 August 2007 at 13:31, Axel Thimm wrote: > > On Fri, Aug 24, 2007 at 11:38:59AM +0200, Robert Scheck wrote: > > > IMAO this is nothing that has to be discussed at advisory board. Or are we > > > going to discuss glibc vs. uclibc or similar things there, too? Thanks. > > > > If the board had decided in the past to chose using only glibc because > > the developer of uclibc has become actively non-cooperative, then we > > sure would do so. The rpm5 political issue has been too often an issue > > of the board in the past, and we should try to keep it there, in the > > past. > > > > There is no benefit in Fedora carrying an alternative package to a > > critical base system component with an anti-upstream. At the very > > least we derail the efforts of the in-house rpm development. > > > > That's all a political discussion. The technical divergencies follow > > from the non-cooperation policy. > > > > FWIW some of the decisions that made rpm5 incompatible to Fedora/RHEL > > were made known to rpm5's developer beforehand and he didn't care > > about it. In fact if you just try to conatct the devloper and say that > > this and this is an issue in Fedora and whether he could make that a > > compile time switch you will probably get very nasty vocal attributes > > in return. > > That depends on who contacts him. To me, he's been quite approachable, > but I imagine there are some @redhat folks he won't talk to. IMHO your > generalization is unfounded. I don't have a redhat.com address, contacted him in a friendly manner, pointed out that making rpm behave like dpkg would break Fedora and RHEL and was accused of premature ejaculation. Pointing out that this was a rude remark he started practicing his French and Greek on me. So this is not a generalization but personal experience. And forget about myself, he's on a crusade against Fedora/RHEL for whatever reasons he has. Just try the following: echo "Dear Jeff, for Fedora and RHEL we'd like to be able to switch back to letters < digits, could you make that a compile time switch? Thanks, Dominik" | mail jbj And turn off your spam filter that may be filtering on vulgar idioms. -- Axel.Thimm at ATrpms.net -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: not available URL: From herrold at owlriver.com Sat Aug 25 00:33:48 2007 From: herrold at owlriver.com (R P Herrold) Date: Fri, 24 Aug 2007 20:33:48 -0400 (EDT) Subject: Merge Review: rpm In-Reply-To: <20070824230817.GS11762@puariko.nirvana> References: <200708240816.l7O8GhMC001124@bugzilla.redhat.com> <1187944054.31667.478.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> <20070824091736.GB5930@puariko.nirvana> <20070824093859.GA7232@hurricane.linuxnetz.de> <20070824113104.GA11762@puariko.nirvana> <20070824214632.GC23695@ryvius.pekin.waw.pl> <20070824230817.GS11762@puariko.nirvana> Message-ID: On Sat, 25 Aug 2007, Axel Thimm wrote: >> Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewskiwrote: >> >> That depends on who contacts him. To me, he's been quite >> approachable, but I imagine there are some @redhat folks he >> won't talk to. IMHO your generalization is unfounded. > I don't have a redhat.com address, contacted him in a > friendly manner, pointed out that making rpm behave like > dpkg would break Fedora and RHEL and was accused of > premature ejaculation. Pointing out that this was a rude > remark he started practicing his French and Greek on me. Axel --- You can persist in stating your side as though it is gospel fact until you are blue in the face, but this is not what I see from the archive I maintain of the interchange in question. Nor does it have relevance as to the technical merit of the rpm5.org's ability to co-exist side by side with the Red Hat maintained variant. In this thread, people are stating assumptions about technical behaviours of rpm5 code which clearly reflect that they have NOT tested, nor looked, nor done the install. It may be sensible to tone down the rush to torches and pitchforks to chase rpm5 away, to look first. -- Russ Herrold From Axel.Thimm at ATrpms.net Sat Aug 25 08:17:00 2007 From: Axel.Thimm at ATrpms.net (Axel Thimm) Date: Sat, 25 Aug 2007 10:17:00 +0200 Subject: Merge Review: rpm In-Reply-To: References: <200708240816.l7O8GhMC001124@bugzilla.redhat.com> <1187944054.31667.478.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> <20070824091736.GB5930@puariko.nirvana> <20070824093859.GA7232@hurricane.linuxnetz.de> <20070824113104.GA11762@puariko.nirvana> <20070824214632.GC23695@ryvius.pekin.waw.pl> <20070824230817.GS11762@puariko.nirvana> Message-ID: <20070825081700.GB10590@puariko.nirvana> On Fri, Aug 24, 2007 at 08:33:48PM -0400, R P Herrold wrote: > On Sat, 25 Aug 2007, Axel Thimm wrote: > > >>Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewskiwrote: > >> > >>That depends on who contacts him. To me, he's been quite > >>approachable, but I imagine there are some @redhat folks he > >>won't talk to. IMHO your generalization is unfounded. > > >I don't have a redhat.com address, contacted him in a > >friendly manner, pointed out that making rpm behave like > >dpkg would break Fedora and RHEL and was accused of > >premature ejaculation. Pointing out that this was a rude > >remark he started practicing his French and Greek on me. > > Axel --- > > You can persist in stating your side as though it is gospel > fact until you are blue in the face, but this is not what I > see from the archive I maintain of the interchange in > question. Then you're not looking hard enough. > Nor does it have relevance as to the technical merit of the > rpm5.org's ability to co-exist side by side with the Red Hat > maintained variant. This is fab, which is about the political side. People have been saying that rpm5 is dead already on technical merits in Fedora (or need to be killed and kept in vaseline if it enters Fedora), so they would like to avoid the political statement, which was given long time ago anyway. > In this thread, people are stating assumptions about technical > behaviours of rpm5 code which clearly reflect that they have > NOT tested, nor looked, nor done the install. So I have looked and tested and know that rpm5 breaks Fedora upgrade paths (and RHEL/CentOS) and was also later backed up by the Mandriva maintainer of rpm who tested it on Mandriva where it also breaks their assumptions. What else do you need? The fact that feeding this info to rpm5 development only bounces back insults in various European languages is not helpful either. > It may be sensible to tone down the rush to torches and pitchforks > to chase rpm5 away, to look first. Please do look, and if you think changing the ordering to claim dpkg compatibility was worth overthrowing - no breaking - all current rpm disto conventions then that's an interpretation that I can't share. On the pure technical level. Just try it in CentOS and we'll see who will be blue in the face then. -- Axel.Thimm at ATrpms.net -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: not available URL: From kanarip at kanarip.com Sat Aug 25 11:19:41 2007 From: kanarip at kanarip.com (Jeroen van Meeuwen) Date: Sat, 25 Aug 2007 13:19:41 +0200 Subject: Respin (revisited) In-Reply-To: <1187984388.23199.5.camel@localhost.localdomain> References: <46CF2A35.30804@redhat.com> <20070824141008.0d554117@weaponx.rchland.ibm.com> <46CF2DC8.3030203@redhat.com> <20070824152011.5e01591e@ender> <46CF3133.4050307@redhat.com> <1187984388.23199.5.camel@localhost.localdomain> Message-ID: <46D0104D.3070201@kanarip.com> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Jeremy Katz wrote: > On Fri, 2007-08-24 at 15:27 -0400, Christopher Aillon wrote: >> Jesse Keating wrote: >>> On Fri, 24 Aug 2007 14:13:12 -0500 >>> Mike McGrath wrote: >>> >>>> We keep Fedora up to date by means of the updates repo. If the >>>> owners of the respin have an update to make, how does that work? Is >>>> a respin always just a fixed point in time? I know that a respin can >>>> use our own Updates repo (they would be smart to do so) but whatever >>>> makes their spin unique may also need updates. >>> If "whatever makes their spin unique" == packages outside of Fedora and >>> not served by fedora updates repos, they can't call it Fedora and they >>> likely need to provide their own hosting and their own update system >>> for their users. >> Is this written down somewhere? > > The trademark policy is. And it says that you can only use bits in the > main Fedora repo and continue to call it Fedora. > > Jeremy > Does this mean a Fedora derivative that may not be called Fedora in any way and has been rebranded cannot even use the Fedora repositories? Do we require these new upstreams to also rebuild all packages they pick from Fedora, like CentOS does with RHEL? - -- Kind regards, Jeroen van Meeuwen - -kanarip - -- http://www.kanarip.com/ RHCE, LPIC-2, MCP, CCNA C6B0 7FB4 43E6 CDDA D258 F70B 28DE 9FDA 9342 BF08 -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.7 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFG0BBMKN6f2pNCvwgRAilyAKC175Q3xzW5wEE2JFqo+BKiIQtMuwCeNjRV LE4/x9YYmLmMZZmU9RixvCk= =kiir -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From jkeating at redhat.com Sat Aug 25 11:21:25 2007 From: jkeating at redhat.com (Jesse Keating) Date: Sat, 25 Aug 2007 07:21:25 -0400 Subject: Respin (revisited) In-Reply-To: <46D0104D.3070201@kanarip.com> References: <46CF2A35.30804@redhat.com> <20070824141008.0d554117@weaponx.rchland.ibm.com> <46CF2DC8.3030203@redhat.com> <20070824152011.5e01591e@ender> <46CF3133.4050307@redhat.com> <1187984388.23199.5.camel@localhost.localdomain> <46D0104D.3070201@kanarip.com> Message-ID: <20070825072125.48353fcc@ender> On Sat, 25 Aug 2007 13:19:41 +0200 Jeroen van Meeuwen wrote: > Does this mean a Fedora derivative that may not be called Fedora in > any way and has been rebranded cannot even use the Fedora > repositories? It doesn't say you can't use the Fedora repos to augment the updates for the derivative. But without explicit approval from the Fedora Board it cannot use the Fedora trademarks and logos. > > Do we require these new upstreams to also rebuild all packages they > pick from Fedora, like CentOS does with RHEL? No. Only the packages which carry trademark material. -- Jesse Keating Fedora -- All my bits are free, are yours? -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: not available URL: From sankarshan.mukhopadhyay at gmail.com Mon Aug 27 04:47:10 2007 From: sankarshan.mukhopadhyay at gmail.com (Sankarshan Mukhopadhyay) Date: Mon, 27 Aug 2007 10:17:10 +0530 Subject: Respin (revisited) In-Reply-To: <46CF2A35.30804@redhat.com> References: <46CF2A35.30804@redhat.com> Message-ID: <46D2574E.3010505@gmail.com> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Mike McGrath wrote: > Which of the above scenarios are we considering 'OK'? Ok from the perspective of being called a "Fedora" respin or, a MyCoolOS based on Fedora respun with certain extra coolness ? :Sankarshan - -- You see things; and you say 'Why?'; But I dream things that never were; and I say 'Why not?' - George Bernard Shaw www.linkedin.com/in/sankarshan -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.7 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Fedora - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFG0ldOXQZpNTcrCzMRAj9RAJ9Cxrcushp8RjUV0s0qsiFojaUIXQCdGZQs KTY0Od0IfYMmfC9dr9PDDYU= =u+ks -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From chitlesh at fedoraproject.org Mon Aug 27 09:45:51 2007 From: chitlesh at fedoraproject.org (Chitlesh GOORAH) Date: Mon, 27 Aug 2007 11:45:51 +0200 Subject: FEL image - ( was Respin (revisited) ) Message-ID: <13dbfe4f0708270245n52c92f7cre4063dbe7043ae4c@mail.gmail.com> On 8/24/07, Mike McGrath wrote: > > Isn't the electronics lab spin concept hostable under this definition? > > And if so, isn't it just scratching the surface in terms of niche > > productivity spins? > > > > Thats true. So lets use the electronics lab as a concept spin. Answer > the questions from the first mail about it: Hello there, Well, what I have planned about the electronic lab spin is: * it will be released when FX is released (just like the fedora kde spin is released) * it entails no other rpms from other repositories but that of fedora's only. * it would have NO other updated spin each month. Updates of individual packages will be available on fedora-updates only. > Scenario 1) Using only software available on our mirrors, someone has > created a respin and wants us to host it. This scenario could be appropriate. But I would like FEL to get the same status like Fedora KDE spin. That is, FEL live image will be released when FX is released. I would like to know whether fedora project will host the FEL or not under such conditions ? regards, Chitlesh -- http://clunixchit.blogspot.com From matt at domsch.com Mon Aug 27 11:43:10 2007 From: matt at domsch.com (Matt Domsch) Date: Mon, 27 Aug 2007 06:43:10 -0500 Subject: FEL image - ( was Respin (revisited) ) In-Reply-To: <13dbfe4f0708270245n52c92f7cre4063dbe7043ae4c@mail.gmail.com> References: <13dbfe4f0708270245n52c92f7cre4063dbe7043ae4c@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <20070827114310.GA28304@domsch.com> On Mon, Aug 27, 2007 at 11:45:51AM +0200, Chitlesh GOORAH wrote: > On 8/24/07, Mike McGrath wrote: > > > > Isn't the electronics lab spin concept hostable under this definition? > > > And if so, isn't it just scratching the surface in terms of niche > > > productivity spins? > > > > > > > Thats true. So lets use the electronics lab as a concept spin. Answer > > the questions from the first mail about it: > > Hello there, > > Well, what I have planned about the electronic lab spin is: > * it will be released when FX is released (just like the fedora kde > spin is released) > * it entails no other rpms from other repositories but that of fedora's only. > * it would have NO other updated spin each month. Updates of > individual packages will be available on fedora-updates only. > > > Scenario 1) Using only software available on our mirrors, someone has > > created a respin and wants us to host it. > > This scenario could be appropriate. But I would like FEL to get the > same status like Fedora KDE spin. That is, FEL live image will be > released when FX is released. > > I would like to know whether fedora project will host the FEL or not > under such conditions ? It sounds like we could, but do you have a feel for the size of the audience? One thing I want to be careful of is adding too many Fedora derivatives for extremely niche audiences to the master servers. It already is difficult to get all the bits out to the internal master mirror servers, much less all the other mirrors, in the few days between when Jesse's done cutting trees and ISOs, and when we want to go public with them. The more space we devote to such custom spins, the longer it takes, even with tiered mirroring, to get the bits that most people want out to the them public mirrors. So, I'm not saying Fedora's infrastructure can't handle hosting any more derivatives, I just want to be careful about saying "sure" to each without understanding the likely number of people downloading it, if such can be guesstimated. Thanks, Matt Fedora Mirror Wrangler From jkeating at redhat.com Mon Aug 27 12:04:21 2007 From: jkeating at redhat.com (Jesse Keating) Date: Mon, 27 Aug 2007 08:04:21 -0400 Subject: FEL image - ( was Respin (revisited) ) In-Reply-To: <13dbfe4f0708270245n52c92f7cre4063dbe7043ae4c@mail.gmail.com> References: <13dbfe4f0708270245n52c92f7cre4063dbe7043ae4c@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <20070827080421.7c1d4981@ender> On Mon, 27 Aug 2007 11:45:51 +0200 "Chitlesh GOORAH" wrote: > This scenario could be appropriate. But I would like FEL to get the > same status like Fedora KDE spin. That is, FEL live image will be > released when FX is released. You would have to have a spin ready to test by Test2, of which the freeze is tomorrow. -- Jesse Keating Fedora -- All my bits are free, are yours? -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: not available URL: From mmcgrath at redhat.com Mon Aug 27 13:02:50 2007 From: mmcgrath at redhat.com (Mike McGrath) Date: Mon, 27 Aug 2007 08:02:50 -0500 Subject: FEL image - ( was Respin (revisited) ) In-Reply-To: <20070827080421.7c1d4981@ender> References: <13dbfe4f0708270245n52c92f7cre4063dbe7043ae4c@mail.gmail.com> <20070827080421.7c1d4981@ender> Message-ID: <46D2CB7A.80702@redhat.com> Jesse Keating wrote: > On Mon, 27 Aug 2007 11:45:51 +0200 > "Chitlesh GOORAH" wrote: > > >> This scenario could be appropriate. But I would like FEL to get the >> same status like Fedora KDE spin. That is, FEL live image will be >> released when FX is released. >> > > You would have to have a spin ready to test by Test2, of which the > freeze is tomorrow. > > Well the F9 Test2 freeze isn't too far away :) -Mike From robert at fedoraproject.org Mon Aug 27 16:13:13 2007 From: robert at fedoraproject.org (Robert Scheck) Date: Mon, 27 Aug 2007 18:13:13 +0200 Subject: [Bug 226377] Merge Review: rpm In-Reply-To: <20070824173148.GG11762@puariko.nirvana> References: <200708240816.l7O8GhMC001124@bugzilla.redhat.com> <1187944054.31667.478.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> <20070824091736.GB5930@puariko.nirvana> <1187952349.31667.508.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> <20070824173148.GG11762@puariko.nirvana> Message-ID: <20070827161313.GA10752@hurricane.linuxnetz.de> Hello you two, hope you enjoyed the weekend so that we can go on without routinely taking quotes out of context as in the past. I don't want to use names here, the persons itself know exactly, where I'm talking about. On Fri, 24 Aug 2007, Axel Thimm wrote: > Personally I think rpm is really in the second category above, after > all the operation of the low level package manager, e.g. rpm, is where > all our packages base upon. So it is a critical system component we > shouldn't be messing with even if the poiltical cliamte were > different. I would like to tell you an example which IMHO matches this scenario and should hink only very less. Fedora is shipping glibc as standard libc and it is also shipping dietlibc. Per default glibc is used, but the users can install dietlibc, compile stuff against dietlibc, they even could rebuild there whole system against dietlibc, right? But nobody of Fedora would take care of it, when there are dietlibc specific issues, bug reports or similar things. AFAIK glibc and dietlibc can be installed in parallel and dietlibc can be used by the brave ones interested in breaking what they do. So far so good. And please now replace "glibc" by "rpm.org rpm" and "dietlibc" by "rpm5.org rpm" and re-read the clause. If you can't agree with my glibc vs. dietlibc example, dietlibc has to be removed immediately from Fedora as it violates for the same reasons. > I think rpm5 in Fedora is dangerous. At the very least it reverses > the ordering of letters and digits and thus breaks a ton of packaging > techniques. Any *-1.fc8 -> *.1.1.fc8 upgrade path is busted for > example. Can you please immediately stop talking such bullshit? The thing, you are describing above does not exist in the 4.5 branch of rpm5. Otherwise please point out things like this e.g. in CVS of rpm5.org. > What this means is that for rpm5 to technically play nice with rpm it > needs to be castrated beyond recognition. It would be probably blend > just as much as dpkg or gentoo build tools. Why do you want to castrate rpm5? As of now, there is no good reason to do so. And please read on first (especially the last part of this mail before replying to it). I'm only interested in facts and not in common blah-foo. > These technical blockers could be addressed if there were not the > political issues created by rpm5's developer. Nice try. Wie man in den Wald schreit, so schallt es heraus. As I don't know how to translate this phrase best: If you're nice to everybody, they are nice to you, too. I think this says everything. And I don't want to talk about the history of the political things. Finally, rpm5 is just even more than the one special developer you maybe personally dislike or simply hate. > Personally I think rpm is really in the second category above, after > all the operation of the low level package manager, e.g. rpm, is where > all our packages base upon. So it is a critical system component we > shouldn't be messing with even if the poiltical cliamte were > different. How does low level have an impact, if I don't want to replace rpm.org rpm? If you think, there's an impact somehow, dietlibc has the same impact to glibc, as dietlibc (or maybe take uclibc, if you want to think of another example) is just same low level and system critical. The problem are not the political issues (if they really exist) itself but the thinking of individuals of us within the Fedora project and the personal antiphaty to rpm5 developers is the real problem behind the doors. Think about it... > (If the political climate *were* different there wouldn't be rpm.org > and rpm5 coexisting in the first place, so bringing in rpm5 into > Fedora would be quite a paradoxon ;) Well Axel...you're only speaking for yourself, not for all of us. But I don't want to feed the trolls, so lets switch to the technical things as the politics for normal only rarely produces something usable. IIRC Max said something, that the technical points matter, right? On Fri, 24 Aug 2007, Panu Matilainen wrote: > 1) The internal BDB version differs, IIRC rpm5 uses BDB 4.6 which is > on-disk incompatible with older versions used by current rpm.org. > Database format upgrade is done automatically but downgrading is a > manual, not entirely trivial operation. Well, rpm5 is able to ship any BDB version (maybe with some exceptions) if this would be a real blocker. An alternative that was proposed would be to link rpm.org libraries which inadvertently re-export BDB routines through ABI because of no loader map (as far as it is known out of the box). And if looking deeper into, there is maybe another solution for this. > 2) Even ignoring 1), rpm5 uses so called "tagged indexes" to speed up > certain operations. Once something has been installed with tagged > indexes, trying to remove the package without them will segfault due to > rpmdb internal incompatibility. This sounds to me that you dislike performance speed-ups *shrug* okay, without fun: This feature can be reverted easily or IIRC there is a chance to disable this by a macro. Finally: No real problem. > 3) There are some other potential rpmdb format differences between the > two such as file digest implementation. Digest was parameterized, not only md5 is permitted. Meanwhile only md5 is everywhere, no other choice is anywhere. So we can remove this point from the list of possible incompatibilities. Panu, but you should go and e.g. backport the __db* removal, because this is a real flaw in rpm.org rpm which many users are complaining about and which would make some things regarding the possibility to integrate rpm5 as optional thing into Fedora more easily. I'm loving it (TM) not to be forced to type "rm -rf /var/lib/rpm*/__db*" from time to time. Oh and ever thought about the Fedora users using sqlite as rpmdb? This is already an incompatibility within Fedora which could hurt - as of the rpmdb format differences. Whenever you're doing something on your own, it's your private party and your mess, not Fedora's one. And exactly the same applies when you replace "sqlite" by "rpm5" in this scheme. At this time, it is a good point to say "thank you" to the rpm5 developers which also had a look to things that were pointed out until now. To avoid the unwished names here, just in general and one special guy knows, that I am talking about him. > Another issue is that while most of rpm5.org could (can, I think) be > parallel-installable, the python bindings wont. Or at least, they'd have > to live in a path where it won't be picked up by the other tools such as > yum & co. So either there's a direct conflict which is not ok, or the > parallel-installable rpm5 python bindings are just useless for almost all > practical purposes. Why would a direct conflict not okay? There are many packages in Fedora which can conflict each other. But on the other hand: "What's yum?" Again, I don't want to replace rpm.org. If you compile one package using dietlibc, not your whole system uses dietlibc after it. If rpm5 is compatible to your result of your daily job, what's the problem? Use "yum foo bar" by rpm.org and do some nice things by using /usr/bin/rpm5 or however I'll call it... At least: I'm ignoring some politics and personal interferences, that's why I'm using Fedora and rpm5, I like features in rpm5 which are not in rpm.org rpm and I still hope, there are many other people, too. Are there further technical-only related things which could be a real problem? As far as I understood Max, there should be nothing preventing me from my way. I would like to see this mostly useless discussion stopped here right now, come up with real matters, if my review proposal went into. Otherwise we are only talking about hot air and for normal nothing is eaten such hot as cooked. Axel, as we all know, you like to have the last word on the list, I left you enough points to put them in a mail to fill my personal expectation ;-) Greetings, Robert From tcallawa at redhat.com Mon Aug 27 16:47:34 2007 From: tcallawa at redhat.com (Tom "spot" Callaway) Date: Mon, 27 Aug 2007 12:47:34 -0400 Subject: [Bug 226377] Merge Review: rpm In-Reply-To: <20070827161313.GA10752@hurricane.linuxnetz.de> References: <200708240816.l7O8GhMC001124@bugzilla.redhat.com> <1187944054.31667.478.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> <20070824091736.GB5930@puariko.nirvana> <1187952349.31667.508.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> <20070824173148.GG11762@puariko.nirvana> <20070827161313.GA10752@hurricane.linuxnetz.de> Message-ID: <1188233255.28181.39.camel@dhcp83-165.boston.redhat.com> >From a purely technical perspective, I think it boils down to the following: 1. Does rpm5 use the same database as Fedora's rpm? If so, it MUST NOT EVER cause any database operation changes that would in any way affect Fedora's rpm functionality. If not, rpm5 must not install system packages into /, only into chroots. Having two, disconnected databases here is not acceptable for the same set of system files. 2. Does rpm5 conflict in any way with Fedora's rpm, either implicitly or explicitly? If so, it is not acceptable. My understanding is that rpm5 uses the same database, and is not fully db compatible with Fedora's rpm. If that is correct, then we can stop flaming each other, and simply say no to rpm5. ~spot From mmcgrath at redhat.com Mon Aug 27 16:50:40 2007 From: mmcgrath at redhat.com (Mike McGrath) Date: Mon, 27 Aug 2007 11:50:40 -0500 Subject: [Bug 226377] Merge Review: rpm In-Reply-To: <1188233255.28181.39.camel@dhcp83-165.boston.redhat.com> References: <200708240816.l7O8GhMC001124@bugzilla.redhat.com> <1187944054.31667.478.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> <20070824091736.GB5930@puariko.nirvana> <1187952349.31667.508.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> <20070824173148.GG11762@puariko.nirvana> <20070827161313.GA10752@hurricane.linuxnetz.de> <1188233255.28181.39.camel@dhcp83-165.boston.redhat.com> Message-ID: <46D300E0.1070903@redhat.com> Tom "spot" Callaway wrote: > > > >From a purely technical perspective, I think it boils down to the > following: > > 1. Does rpm5 use the same database as Fedora's rpm? > If so, it MUST NOT EVER cause any database operation changes that > would in any way affect Fedora's rpm functionality. > If not, rpm5 must not install system packages into /, only into > chroots. Having two, disconnected databases here is not acceptable > for the same set of system files. > > 2. Does rpm5 conflict in any way with Fedora's rpm, either implicitly > or explicitly? If so, it is not acceptable. > > My understanding is that rpm5 uses the same database, and is not fully > db compatible with Fedora's rpm. If that is correct, then we can stop > flaming each other, and simply say no to rpm5. > Just so I'm clear here, it is my understanding that there are no political or legal issues in allowing RPM5 into Fedora. Any other issues technical in origin should probably be taken to the fedora-devel list for further discussion. -Mike From jkeating at redhat.com Mon Aug 27 17:10:52 2007 From: jkeating at redhat.com (Jesse Keating) Date: Mon, 27 Aug 2007 13:10:52 -0400 Subject: [Bug 226377] Merge Review: rpm In-Reply-To: <20070827161313.GA10752@hurricane.linuxnetz.de> References: <200708240816.l7O8GhMC001124@bugzilla.redhat.com> <1187944054.31667.478.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> <20070824091736.GB5930@puariko.nirvana> <1187952349.31667.508.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> <20070824173148.GG11762@puariko.nirvana> <20070827161313.GA10752@hurricane.linuxnetz.de> Message-ID: <20070827131052.23ee783f@mentok.boston.redhat.com> On Mon, 27 Aug 2007 18:13:13 +0200 Robert Scheck wrote: > Why would a direct conflict not okay? There are many packages in > Fedora which can conflict each other. Conflicts are not allowed per the packaging guidelines. Any instance of current Fedora packages that conflict either explicitly or implicitly (via files) with another current Fedora package is considered a bug and would not pass review if brought new to the project. -- Jesse Keating Fedora -- All my bits are free, are yours? -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: not available URL: From dominik at greysector.net Mon Aug 27 17:15:07 2007 From: dominik at greysector.net (Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski) Date: Mon, 27 Aug 2007 19:15:07 +0200 Subject: [Bug 226377] Merge Review: rpm In-Reply-To: <20070824230128.GR11762@puariko.nirvana> References: <200708240816.l7O8GhMC001124@bugzilla.redhat.com> <1187944054.31667.478.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> <20070824091736.GB5930@puariko.nirvana> <20070824214436.GB23695@ryvius.pekin.waw.pl> <20070824230128.GR11762@puariko.nirvana> Message-ID: <20070827171507.GA12247@ryvius.pekin.waw.pl> On Saturday, 25 August 2007 at 01:01, Axel Thimm wrote: > On Fri, Aug 24, 2007 at 11:44:36PM +0200, Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski wrote: > > > I think rpm5 in Fedora is dangerous. At the very least it reverses > > > the ordering of letters and digits and thus breaks a ton of packaging > > > techniques. Any *-1.fc8 -> *.1.1.fc8 upgrade path is busted for > > > example. > > > > Are you 100% sure? I've seen Jeff deny this on IRC. > > Index: rpmvercmp.c > =================================================================== > RCS file: /cvs/devel/rpm/lib/rpmvercmp.c,v > retrieving revision 2.8.2.2 > diff -u -b -B -w -p -r2.8.2.2 rpmvercmp.c > --- rpmvercmp.c 27 Aug 2006 12:58:19 -0000 2.8.2.2 > +++ rpmvercmp.c 26 Apr 2007 22:36:26 -0000 > @@ -76,7 +76,7 @@ int _rpmvercmp(const char * a, const cha > /* different types: one numeric, the other alpha (i.e. > empty) */ > /* numeric segments are always newer than alpha segments */ > /* XXX See patch #60884 (and details) from bugzilla > #50977. */ > - if (two == str2) return (isnum ? 1 : -1); > + if (two == str2) return (isnum ? -1 : 1); > if (isnum) { > /* this used to be done by converting the digit segments > */ The code present in current CVS HEAD is a bit different. Also I can't find this change in rpm5.org's CVS. Which revision were you comparing to 2.8.2.2? Regards, R. -- Fedora contributor http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/DominikMierzejewski Livna contributor http://rpm.livna.org MPlayer developer http://mplayerhq.hu "Faith manages." -- Delenn to Lennier in Babylon 5:"Confessions and Lamentations" From bugs.michael at gmx.net Mon Aug 27 17:21:53 2007 From: bugs.michael at gmx.net (Michael Schwendt) Date: Mon, 27 Aug 2007 19:21:53 +0200 Subject: Conflicts =?utf-8?b?wrc=?= Re: [Bug 226377] Merge Review: rpm In-Reply-To: <20070827131052.23ee783f@mentok.boston.redhat.com> References: <200708240816.l7O8GhMC001124@bugzilla.redhat.com> <1187944054.31667.478.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> <20070824091736.GB5930@puariko.nirvana> <1187952349.31667.508.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> <20070824173148.GG11762@puariko.nirvana> <20070827161313.GA10752@hurricane.linuxnetz.de> <20070827131052.23ee783f@mentok.boston.redhat.com> Message-ID: <20070827192153.e94473e9.bugs.michael@gmx.net> On Mon, 27 Aug 2007 13:10:52 -0400, Jesse Keating wrote: > Conflicts are not allowed per the packaging guidelines. Any instance of > current Fedora packages that conflict either explicitly or implicitly > (via files) with another current Fedora package is considered a bug and > would not pass review if brought new to the project. Still not true. There are exceptions. Else a few current Fedora packages, which conflict explicitly, could not be in the collection. Other packages live on happily with bugs filed but no fix for a very long time. http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Conflicts From jkeating at redhat.com Mon Aug 27 17:39:06 2007 From: jkeating at redhat.com (Jesse Keating) Date: Mon, 27 Aug 2007 13:39:06 -0400 Subject: Conflicts =?utf-8?b?wrc=?= Re: [Bug 226377] Merge Review: rpm In-Reply-To: <20070827192153.e94473e9.bugs.michael@gmx.net> References: <200708240816.l7O8GhMC001124@bugzilla.redhat.com> <1187944054.31667.478.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> <20070824091736.GB5930@puariko.nirvana> <1187952349.31667.508.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> <20070824173148.GG11762@puariko.nirvana> <20070827161313.GA10752@hurricane.linuxnetz.de> <20070827131052.23ee783f@mentok.boston.redhat.com> <20070827192153.e94473e9.bugs.michael@gmx.net> Message-ID: <20070827133906.35ae1ab3@mentok.boston.redhat.com> On Mon, 27 Aug 2007 19:21:53 +0200 Michael Schwendt wrote: > Still not true. There are exceptions. Else a few current Fedora > packages, which conflict explicitly, could not be in the collection. > Other packages live on happily with bugs filed but no fix for a very > long time. > > http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Conflicts Sure, pedantic, but true, there are /some/ exceptions. compat packages where no other reasonable approach will work, and ways of marking a package incompatible with other versions of packages (but not versions in the same release of Fedora!!). Open bugs aside, the rpm.org vs rpm5 scenario wouldn't be granted an exception to the Conflicts rule. -- Jesse Keating Fedora -- All my bits are free, are yours? -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: not available URL: From tcallawa at redhat.com Mon Aug 27 17:40:19 2007 From: tcallawa at redhat.com (Tom "spot" Callaway) Date: Mon, 27 Aug 2007 13:40:19 -0400 Subject: Conflicts =?iso-8859-1?q?=B7?= Re: [Bug 226377] Merge Review: rpm In-Reply-To: <20070827192153.e94473e9.bugs.michael@gmx.net> References: <200708240816.l7O8GhMC001124@bugzilla.redhat.com> <1187944054.31667.478.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> <20070824091736.GB5930@puariko.nirvana> <1187952349.31667.508.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> <20070824173148.GG11762@puariko.nirvana> <20070827161313.GA10752@hurricane.linuxnetz.de> <20070827131052.23ee783f@mentok.boston.redhat.com> <20070827192153.e94473e9.bugs.michael@gmx.net> Message-ID: <1188236419.28181.52.camel@dhcp83-165.boston.redhat.com> On Mon, 2007-08-27 at 19:21 +0200, Michael Schwendt wrote: > On Mon, 27 Aug 2007 13:10:52 -0400, Jesse Keating wrote: > > > Conflicts are not allowed per the packaging guidelines. Any instance of > > current Fedora packages that conflict either explicitly or implicitly > > (via files) with another current Fedora package is considered a bug and > > would not pass review if brought new to the project. > > Still not true. There are exceptions. Else a few current Fedora > packages, which conflict explicitly, could not be in the collection. > Other packages live on happily with bugs filed but no fix for a very > long time. > > http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Conflicts Existing bugs not withstanding, nothing new should Conflict. ~spot From jspaleta at gmail.com Mon Aug 27 17:44:40 2007 From: jspaleta at gmail.com (Jeff Spaleta) Date: Mon, 27 Aug 2007 09:44:40 -0800 Subject: =?iso-8859-1?q?Re=3A_Conflicts_=B7_Re=3A_=5BBug_226377=5D_Merge_?= =?iso-8859-1?q?Review=3A_rpm?= In-Reply-To: <20070827192153.e94473e9.bugs.michael@gmx.net> References: <200708240816.l7O8GhMC001124@bugzilla.redhat.com> <1187944054.31667.478.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> <20070824091736.GB5930@puariko.nirvana> <1187952349.31667.508.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> <20070824173148.GG11762@puariko.nirvana> <20070827161313.GA10752@hurricane.linuxnetz.de> <20070827131052.23ee783f@mentok.boston.redhat.com> <20070827192153.e94473e9.bugs.michael@gmx.net> Message-ID: <604aa7910708271044p776f900crdf89e69664d36950@mail.gmail.com> On 8/27/07, Michael Schwendt wrote: > Still not true. There are exceptions. Else a few current Fedora > packages, which conflict explicitly, could not be in the collection. > Other packages live on happily with bugs filed but no fix for a very > long time. > > http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Conflicts Exceptions prove the rule. However, in the case of rpm and other pieces of technology we acknowledge as critical, I think we have to be exceedingly careful. We must insist that secondary implementations in fedora avoid conflicts with the primary implementation that the distribution relies on. -jef From jspaleta at gmail.com Mon Aug 27 17:48:48 2007 From: jspaleta at gmail.com (Jeff Spaleta) Date: Mon, 27 Aug 2007 09:48:48 -0800 Subject: FEL image - ( was Respin (revisited) ) In-Reply-To: <20070827114310.GA28304@domsch.com> References: <13dbfe4f0708270245n52c92f7cre4063dbe7043ae4c@mail.gmail.com> <20070827114310.GA28304@domsch.com> Message-ID: <604aa7910708271048y732676b3u754676ee4f54ff6a@mail.gmail.com> On 8/27/07, Matt Domsch wrote: > So, I'm not saying Fedora's infrastructure can't handle hosting any > more derivatives, I just want to be careful about saying "sure" to > each without understanding the likely number of people downloading it, > if such can be guesstimated. Even if it didn't get to the mirror network at release time. Could we still provide it via the torrent server ? -jef From bugs.michael at gmx.net Mon Aug 27 18:38:05 2007 From: bugs.michael at gmx.net (Michael Schwendt) Date: Mon, 27 Aug 2007 20:38:05 +0200 Subject: Conflicts =?utf-8?b?wrc=?= Re: [Bug 226377] Merge Review: rpm In-Reply-To: <604aa7910708271044p776f900crdf89e69664d36950@mail.gmail.com> References: <200708240816.l7O8GhMC001124@bugzilla.redhat.com> <1187944054.31667.478.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> <20070824091736.GB5930@puariko.nirvana> <1187952349.31667.508.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> <20070824173148.GG11762@puariko.nirvana> <20070827161313.GA10752@hurricane.linuxnetz.de> <20070827131052.23ee783f@mentok.boston.redhat.com> <20070827192153.e94473e9.bugs.michael@gmx.net> <604aa7910708271044p776f900crdf89e69664d36950@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <20070827203805.8014e84e.bugs.michael@gmx.net> On Mon, 27 Aug 2007 09:44:40 -0800, Jeff Spaleta wrote: > > Still not true. There are exceptions. Else a few current Fedora > > packages, which conflict explicitly, could not be in the collection. > > Other packages live on happily with bugs filed but no fix for a very > > long time. > > > > http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Conflicts > > > Exceptions prove the rule. However, in the case of rpm and other > pieces of technology we acknowledge as critical, I think we have to be > exceedingly careful. We must insist that secondary implementations in > fedora avoid conflicts with the primary implementation that the > distribution relies on. Yes. And my quoted paragraph above was no plead for allowing rpm5.org to replace rpm.org in Fedora. It only showed that at the packaging-level it is possible to have explicit conflicts, and some are even between alternative implementations of libraries. From pmatilai at redhat.com Mon Aug 27 19:42:15 2007 From: pmatilai at redhat.com (Panu Matilainen) Date: Mon, 27 Aug 2007 22:42:15 +0300 (EEST) Subject: [Bug 226377] Merge Review: rpm In-Reply-To: <1188233255.28181.39.camel@dhcp83-165.boston.redhat.com> References: <200708240816.l7O8GhMC001124@bugzilla.redhat.com> <1187944054.31667.478.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> <20070824091736.GB5930@puariko.nirvana> <1187952349.31667.508.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> <20070824173148.GG11762@puariko.nirvana> <20070827161313.GA10752@hurricane.linuxnetz.de> <1188233255.28181.39.camel@dhcp83-165.boston.redhat.com> Message-ID: On Mon, 27 Aug 2007, Tom "spot" Callaway wrote: > > >> From a purely technical perspective, I think it boils down to the > following: > > 1. Does rpm5 use the same database as Fedora's rpm? > If so, it MUST NOT EVER cause any database operation changes that > would in any way affect Fedora's rpm functionality. > If not, rpm5 must not install system packages into /, only into > chroots. Having two, disconnected databases here is not acceptable > for the same set of system files. > > 2. Does rpm5 conflict in any way with Fedora's rpm, either implicitly > or explicitly? If so, it is not acceptable. > > My understanding is that rpm5 uses the same database, and is not fully > db compatible with Fedora's rpm. If that is correct, then we can stop > flaming each other, and simply say no to rpm5. Unless configured otherwise (and probably patched for a few hardcoded spots, dunno), it uses the same rpmdb. The exact format of rpmdb is not a standard set in stone but an version and implementation specific detail, the two trees have different features, some of which are visible in the db even now. Both ways 100% compatibility cannot be guaranteed, especially over time and different versions. Sharing the rpm database between two wildly different versions is out of the question. - Panu - From matt at domsch.com Mon Aug 27 20:06:34 2007 From: matt at domsch.com (Matt Domsch) Date: Mon, 27 Aug 2007 15:06:34 -0500 Subject: FEL image - ( was Respin (revisited) ) In-Reply-To: <604aa7910708271048y732676b3u754676ee4f54ff6a@mail.gmail.com> References: <13dbfe4f0708270245n52c92f7cre4063dbe7043ae4c@mail.gmail.com> <20070827114310.GA28304@domsch.com> <604aa7910708271048y732676b3u754676ee4f54ff6a@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <20070827200633.GA8671@domsch.com> On Mon, Aug 27, 2007 at 09:48:48AM -0800, Jeff Spaleta wrote: > On 8/27/07, Matt Domsch wrote: > > So, I'm not saying Fedora's infrastructure can't handle hosting any > > more derivatives, I just want to be careful about saying "sure" to > > each without understanding the likely number of people downloading it, > > if such can be guesstimated. > > Even if it didn't get to the mirror network at release time. Could we > still provide it via the torrent server ? Quite likely, yes. That'll depend on how much space it takes. The process to make such a request of the Infrastructure team is documented here: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Infrastructure/RFR Thanks, Matt From chitlesh at fedoraproject.org Mon Aug 27 20:46:31 2007 From: chitlesh at fedoraproject.org (Chitlesh GOORAH) Date: Mon, 27 Aug 2007 22:46:31 +0200 Subject: FEL image - ( was Respin (revisited) ) In-Reply-To: <20070827114310.GA28304@domsch.com> References: <13dbfe4f0708270245n52c92f7cre4063dbe7043ae4c@mail.gmail.com> <20070827114310.GA28304@domsch.com> Message-ID: <13dbfe4f0708271346r6214d150tb47c43861008dcb3@mail.gmail.com> On 8/27/07, Matt Domsch wrote: > It sounds like we could, but do you have a feel for the size of the > audience? Less than 700 MB in order to fit into a CD. > One thing I want to be careful of is adding too many Fedora > derivatives for extremely niche audiences to the master servers. I would like to clarify a bit about the audience. Surely these are related to a particular group of people, but however if an university tries to migrate fedora, there would be fedora in their local laboratory. The number of fedora installed will grow, which I hope. If one will google for VLSI lecture notes, he/she will find lecture notes based on either magic/Alliance or Cadence applications. The first half fedora does have already. This livecd might take some space on the mirrors, but eventually might also make a lot of publicity to fedora around universities (either american or worldwide) and students. Chitlesh -- http://clunixchit.blogspot.com From Axel.Thimm at ATrpms.net Mon Aug 27 21:11:44 2007 From: Axel.Thimm at ATrpms.net (Axel Thimm) Date: Mon, 27 Aug 2007 23:11:44 +0200 Subject: [Bug 226377] Merge Review: rpm In-Reply-To: <20070827171507.GA12247@ryvius.pekin.waw.pl> References: <200708240816.l7O8GhMC001124@bugzilla.redhat.com> <1187944054.31667.478.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> <20070824091736.GB5930@puariko.nirvana> <20070824214436.GB23695@ryvius.pekin.waw.pl> <20070824230128.GR11762@puariko.nirvana> <20070827171507.GA12247@ryvius.pekin.waw.pl> Message-ID: <20070827211144.GA29341@puariko.nirvana> On Mon, Aug 27, 2007 at 07:15:07PM +0200, Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski wrote: > On Saturday, 25 August 2007 at 01:01, Axel Thimm wrote: > > On Fri, Aug 24, 2007 at 11:44:36PM +0200, Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski wrote: > > > > I think rpm5 in Fedora is dangerous. At the very least it reverses > > > > the ordering of letters and digits and thus breaks a ton of packaging > > > > techniques. Any *-1.fc8 -> *.1.1.fc8 upgrade path is busted for > > > > example. > > > > > > Are you 100% sure? I've seen Jeff deny this on IRC. > > > > Index: rpmvercmp.c > > =================================================================== > > RCS file: /cvs/devel/rpm/lib/rpmvercmp.c,v > > retrieving revision 2.8.2.2 > > diff -u -b -B -w -p -r2.8.2.2 rpmvercmp.c > > --- rpmvercmp.c 27 Aug 2006 12:58:19 -0000 2.8.2.2 > > +++ rpmvercmp.c 26 Apr 2007 22:36:26 -0000 > > @@ -76,7 +76,7 @@ int _rpmvercmp(const char * a, const cha > > /* different types: one numeric, the other alpha (i.e. > > empty) */ > > /* numeric segments are always newer than alpha segments */ > > /* XXX See patch #60884 (and details) from bugzilla > > #50977. */ > > - if (two == str2) return (isnum ? 1 : -1); > > + if (two == str2) return (isnum ? -1 : 1); > > if (isnum) { > > /* this used to be done by converting the digit segments > > */ > > The code present in current CVS HEAD is a bit different. Also I can't find > this change in rpm5.org's CVS. Which revision were you comparing to 2.8.2.2? I copy and pasted this from an original mail to rpm-devel by rpm5's developer. Any later refactoring didn't undo the change AFAIK. -- Axel.Thimm at ATrpms.net -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: not available URL: From dominik at greysector.net Tue Aug 28 08:21:14 2007 From: dominik at greysector.net (Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski) Date: Tue, 28 Aug 2007 10:21:14 +0200 Subject: [Bug 226377] Merge Review: rpm In-Reply-To: <20070827211144.GA29341@puariko.nirvana> References: <200708240816.l7O8GhMC001124@bugzilla.redhat.com> <1187944054.31667.478.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> <20070824091736.GB5930@puariko.nirvana> <20070824214436.GB23695@ryvius.pekin.waw.pl> <20070824230128.GR11762@puariko.nirvana> <20070827171507.GA12247@ryvius.pekin.waw.pl> <20070827211144.GA29341@puariko.nirvana> Message-ID: <20070828082114.GB8876@ryvius.pekin.waw.pl> On Monday, 27 August 2007 at 23:11, Axel Thimm wrote: > On Mon, Aug 27, 2007 at 07:15:07PM +0200, Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski wrote: > > On Saturday, 25 August 2007 at 01:01, Axel Thimm wrote: > > > On Fri, Aug 24, 2007 at 11:44:36PM +0200, Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski wrote: > > > > > I think rpm5 in Fedora is dangerous. At the very least it reverses > > > > > the ordering of letters and digits and thus breaks a ton of packaging > > > > > techniques. Any *-1.fc8 -> *.1.1.fc8 upgrade path is busted for > > > > > example. > > > > > > > > Are you 100% sure? I've seen Jeff deny this on IRC. > > > > > > Index: rpmvercmp.c > > > =================================================================== > > > RCS file: /cvs/devel/rpm/lib/rpmvercmp.c,v > > > retrieving revision 2.8.2.2 > > > diff -u -b -B -w -p -r2.8.2.2 rpmvercmp.c > > > --- rpmvercmp.c 27 Aug 2006 12:58:19 -0000 2.8.2.2 > > > +++ rpmvercmp.c 26 Apr 2007 22:36:26 -0000 > > > @@ -76,7 +76,7 @@ int _rpmvercmp(const char * a, const cha > > > /* different types: one numeric, the other alpha (i.e. > > > empty) */ > > > /* numeric segments are always newer than alpha segments */ > > > /* XXX See patch #60884 (and details) from bugzilla > > > #50977. */ > > > - if (two == str2) return (isnum ? 1 : -1); > > > + if (two == str2) return (isnum ? -1 : 1); > > > if (isnum) { > > > /* this used to be done by converting the digit segments > > > */ > > > > The code present in current CVS HEAD is a bit different. Also I can't find > > this change in rpm5.org's CVS. Which revision were you comparing to 2.8.2.2? > > I copy and pasted this from an original mail to rpm-devel by rpm5's > developer. Any later refactoring didn't undo the change AFAIK. I'm willing to test this with current CVS HEAD. Do you have a test case? If not, I'll try testing it on my own when I get some free time. Regards, R. -- Fedora contributor http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/DominikMierzejewski Livna contributor http://rpm.livna.org MPlayer developer http://mplayerhq.hu "Faith manages." -- Delenn to Lennier in Babylon 5:"Confessions and Lamentations" From Axel.Thimm at ATrpms.net Tue Aug 28 11:31:26 2007 From: Axel.Thimm at ATrpms.net (Axel Thimm) Date: Tue, 28 Aug 2007 13:31:26 +0200 Subject: [Bug 226377] Merge Review: rpm In-Reply-To: <20070828082114.GB8876@ryvius.pekin.waw.pl> References: <200708240816.l7O8GhMC001124@bugzilla.redhat.com> <1187944054.31667.478.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> <20070824091736.GB5930@puariko.nirvana> <20070824214436.GB23695@ryvius.pekin.waw.pl> <20070824230128.GR11762@puariko.nirvana> <20070827171507.GA12247@ryvius.pekin.waw.pl> <20070827211144.GA29341@puariko.nirvana> <20070828082114.GB8876@ryvius.pekin.waw.pl> Message-ID: <20070828113126.GC5218@puariko.nirvana> On Tue, Aug 28, 2007 at 10:21:14AM +0200, Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski wrote: > On Monday, 27 August 2007 at 23:11, Axel Thimm wrote: > > On Mon, Aug 27, 2007 at 07:15:07PM +0200, Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski wrote: > > > On Saturday, 25 August 2007 at 01:01, Axel Thimm wrote: > > > > On Fri, Aug 24, 2007 at 11:44:36PM +0200, Dominik 'Rathann' Mierzejewski wrote: > > > > > > I think rpm5 in Fedora is dangerous. At the very least it reverses > > > > > > the ordering of letters and digits and thus breaks a ton of packaging > > > > > > techniques. Any *-1.fc8 -> *.1.1.fc8 upgrade path is busted for > > > > > > example. > > > > > > > > > > Are you 100% sure? I've seen Jeff deny this on IRC. > > > > > > > > Index: rpmvercmp.c > > > > =================================================================== > > > > RCS file: /cvs/devel/rpm/lib/rpmvercmp.c,v > > > > retrieving revision 2.8.2.2 > > > > diff -u -b -B -w -p -r2.8.2.2 rpmvercmp.c > > > > --- rpmvercmp.c 27 Aug 2006 12:58:19 -0000 2.8.2.2 > > > > +++ rpmvercmp.c 26 Apr 2007 22:36:26 -0000 > > > > @@ -76,7 +76,7 @@ int _rpmvercmp(const char * a, const cha > > > > /* different types: one numeric, the other alpha (i.e. > > > > empty) */ > > > > /* numeric segments are always newer than alpha segments */ > > > > /* XXX See patch #60884 (and details) from bugzilla > > > > #50977. */ > > > > - if (two == str2) return (isnum ? 1 : -1); > > > > + if (two == str2) return (isnum ? -1 : 1); > > > > if (isnum) { > > > > /* this used to be done by converting the digit segments > > > > */ > > > > > > The code present in current CVS HEAD is a bit different. Also I can't find > > > this change in rpm5.org's CVS. Which revision were you comparing to 2.8.2.2? > > > > I copy and pasted this from an original mail to rpm-devel by rpm5's > > developer. Any later refactoring didn't undo the change AFAIK. > > I'm willing to test this with current CVS HEAD. Do you have a test case? > If not, I'll try testing it on my own when I get some free time. Test case? See above: "Any *-1.fc8 -> *.1.1.fc8 upgrade path is busted" (where the second should had read hyphen instead of the first dot, but you get the picture). But you don't need to empirically test, read the code especially the parts that advertize full dpkg compatibility achived by putting letters higher than numbers. Even refactored you either are compatible to rpm.org or dpdkpg in ordering, both is not possible. -- Axel.Thimm at ATrpms.net -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: not available URL: From dff at redhat.com Tue Aug 28 14:07:53 2007 From: dff at redhat.com (Donald Fischer) Date: Tue, 28 Aug 2007 10:07:53 -0400 Subject: Live Fedora start page proposal Message-ID: <91fcd7990708280707g4d00ca82q7059f6579c33747@mail.gmail.com> Hi, I work with the online desktop team at Red Hat. I'd like to propose that starting with Fedora 8, the default browser start page be changed to a live web page centered on web search. Here's why I think this simple change makes sense: * More useful to users. The vast majority of the time when Fedora users are launching a new browser, they're looking to do something on the web, not to read the operating system release notes. Thus, we've proposed to put search front-and-center. * Fedora-tuned search features. For example, we can make it easy to search for Creative Commons licensed content, a feature that should be especially interesting and relevant to Fedora users. Likewise, we could make it easy to search within, or highlight results from, certain sites likely to be more relevant to Fedora users (such as Fedora documentation, user discussion lists, and community forums). * Opportunity for ad-subsidized sponsorships. Fedora's large user audience is potentially valuable to web search providers whose business is to display contextual text ads next to search results. Fedora can pursue an affiliate relationship to share in the ad revenue for search traffic originating at the start page, thus enabling additional investment in the broader Fedora Project. * An ongoing connection to users. A hosted start page is a chance to have a live channel to communicate news or announcements to the Fedora user base (for example, a simple one-liner to announce the availability of a new release or a new community resource). We put together a working prototype in order to make the discussion concrete, which you can try out here: http://start.fedoraproject.org That design and functionality there is definitely not set in stone, but gets the basic idea across and would be a serviceable starting point for user testing. To try this out, there's only one small change required in the distribution itself, which is to swap the default URL in the browser configuration to http://start.fedoraproject.org. This switch is a time-sensitive issue with respect to Test2, since we'd like to field this in at least one and ideally two test releases before deciding to release it in a final Fedora version. Independent of the release cycle, and across all versions of Fedora, we can evolve the contents on the page, including discussing and investigating possible sponsorship/affiliate agreements. Those changes don't need to be bound to the distribution release cycle. Some further comments on points raised in prior discussions of this topic with the advisory board and community members earlier this year: * The change is only to the default. Just like now, users will be able to change the start page to whatever they like whenever they like. * There is already a link to the release notes in the default browser bookmarks toolbar, which is visible by default, so the content previously on the start page is still just one click away. We could explore featuring links to release notes or documentation in the start page itself, though keeping the start page simple and lightweight seems best (both for ease of use and performance reasons). * Internationalization of the hosted start page and search results pages is certainly doable, just as with the local release notes. * Red Hat will supply the server infrastructure and bandwidth required for this project. * Starting with a hosted page featuring search prominently is already the default behavior of upstream Firefox on Linux, as well as Firefox on Mac and Windows. * For users without Internet connectivity, we could do something fancy to avoid showing an error message, though that would be more than upstream Firefox does. In fact we have prototyped modifications to Firefox to achieve this, but our conclusion was that the additional complexity is not justified. Using a web browser without access to the web seems to be a corner case and one in which a warning message is appropriate! In the offline case, local release notes would still be available from the default bookmarks toolbar. Tuning offline behavior is an area that we could look at further in conjunction with the community. While there are a number of details left to figure out, I think we understand this sufficiently well to merit fielding it for a test as the default start page in Test2. thanks, don From skvidal at fedoraproject.org Tue Aug 28 14:15:38 2007 From: skvidal at fedoraproject.org (seth vidal) Date: Tue, 28 Aug 2007 10:15:38 -0400 Subject: Live Fedora start page proposal In-Reply-To: <91fcd7990708280707g4d00ca82q7059f6579c33747@mail.gmail.com> References: <91fcd7990708280707g4d00ca82q7059f6579c33747@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <1188310538.2186.108.camel@cutter> On Tue, 2007-08-28 at 10:07 -0400, Donald Fischer wrote: > Hi, > > Here's why I think this simple change makes sense: > > * More useful to users. The vast majority of the time when Fedora > users are launching a new browser, they're looking to do something on > the web, not to read the operating system release notes. Thus, we've > proposed to put search front-and-center. Isn't the search already on the search bar that defaults in firefox? > * Fedora-tuned search features. For example, we can make it easy to > search for Creative Commons licensed content, a feature that should be > especially interesting and relevant to Fedora users. Likewise, we > could make it easy to search within, or highlight results from, > certain sites likely to be more relevant to Fedora users (such as > Fedora documentation, user discussion lists, and community forums). This sounds good. > To try this out, there's only one small change required in the > distribution itself, which is to swap the default URL in the browser > configuration to http://start.fedoraproject.org. This switch is a > time-sensitive issue with respect to Test2, since we'd like to field > this in at least one and ideally two test releases before deciding to > release it in a final Fedora version. I'm not trying to be snide but is there a reason you waited until the eleventh-hour before test2 went out to ask about this? > * Internationalization of the hosted start page and search results > pages is certainly doable, just as with the local release notes. doable, but not done? > * Red Hat will supply the server infrastructure and bandwidth > required for this project. Red Hat will? or will fedora's infrastructure provide it? Who will control it? What, if any, software is required server-side to facilitate this? > * For users without Internet connectivity, we could do something > fancy to avoid showing an error message, though that would be more > than upstream Firefox does. In fact we have prototyped modifications > to Firefox to achieve this, but our conclusion was that the additional > complexity is not justified. Using a web browser without access to > the web seems to be a corner case and one in which a warning message > is appropriate! In the offline case, local release notes would still > be available from the default bookmarks toolbar. Tuning offline > behavior is an area that we could look at further in conjunction with > the community. It's not just w/o internet access. It is with limited/controlled internet access, too. Remember, it's not just the possibility of the page not loading, it's the possibility of the whole thing stalling out waiting 2 minutes or more for a dns resolution that ISN'T going to come. -sv From dff at redhat.com Tue Aug 28 14:53:05 2007 From: dff at redhat.com (Donald Fischer) Date: Tue, 28 Aug 2007 10:53:05 -0400 Subject: Live Fedora start page proposal In-Reply-To: <1188310538.2186.108.camel@cutter> References: <91fcd7990708280707g4d00ca82q7059f6579c33747@mail.gmail.com> <1188310538.2186.108.camel@cutter> Message-ID: <91fcd7990708280753k1a0c5170ubb9b85ef825913ec@mail.gmail.com> On 8/28/07, seth vidal wrote: > > Here's why I think this simple change makes sense: > > > > * More useful to users. The vast majority of the time when Fedora > > users are launching a new browser, they're looking to do something on > > the web, not to read the operating system release notes. Thus, we've > > proposed to put search front-and-center. > > Isn't the search already on the search bar that defaults in firefox? There is also search there, yes. This proposal doesn't consider modifying that in any way, but rather adding a search box to the start page that has the mentioned Fedora tweaks. > > To try this out, there's only one small change required in the > > distribution itself, which is to swap the default URL in the browser > > configuration to http://start.fedoraproject.org. This switch is a > > time-sensitive issue with respect to Test2, since we'd like to field > > this in at least one and ideally two test releases before deciding to > > release it in a final Fedora version. > > I'm not trying to be snide but is there a reason you waited until the > eleventh-hour before test2 went out to ask about this? No ulterior motive here; getting our ducks in a row and the prototype page set up took longer than we anticipated but I wanted to push to make the deadline to try it in Test2 rather than delaying to Test3. > > * Internationalization of the hosted start page and search results > > pages is certainly doable, just as with the local release notes. > > doable, but not done? Not done yet, but there is minimal text to be translated on the start page itself and the third party search services that we'd build on are widely internationalized. We'd use the regular Fedora documentation i18n workflow for the necessary translations, I suppose. > > * Red Hat will supply the server infrastructure and bandwidth > > required for this project. > > Red Hat will? or will fedora's infrastructure provide it? Who will > control it? What, if any, software is required server-side to facilitate > this? Red Hat will pay for the incremental server and bandwidth so that it's not an additional cost burden competing with existing Fedora project expenses. Open to discussing the governance model the server itself, presumably we could handle it like other Fedora infrastructure services. At present it's just a static web page and a few images; in the future we anticipate also having a hosted results page that would be a simple JSP. > > * For users without Internet connectivity, we could do something > > fancy to avoid showing an error message, though that would be more > > than upstream Firefox does. In fact we have prototyped modifications > > to Firefox to achieve this, but our conclusion was that the additional > > complexity is not justified. Using a web browser without access to > > the web seems to be a corner case and one in which a warning message > > is appropriate! In the offline case, local release notes would still > > be available from the default bookmarks toolbar. Tuning offline > > behavior is an area that we could look at further in conjunction with > > the community. > > It's not just w/o internet access. It is with limited/controlled > internet access, too. Remember, it's not just the possibility of the > page not loading, it's the possibility of the whole thing stalling out > waiting 2 minutes or more for a dns resolution that ISN'T going to come. I hear you, definitely think we could look at doing various things here and the online desktop team has the resources to do so. When we tried out some workarounds for this issue, the general feeling was that we might be trying to be too smart for our own good (e.g. how long should you wait before you decide that the user is offline vs. has a slow connection?) Fielding in a test release sooner than later would give us some real data about what this issue actually looks like in the field. thanks, don From skvidal at fedoraproject.org Tue Aug 28 15:00:39 2007 From: skvidal at fedoraproject.org (seth vidal) Date: Tue, 28 Aug 2007 11:00:39 -0400 Subject: Live Fedora start page proposal In-Reply-To: <91fcd7990708280753k1a0c5170ubb9b85ef825913ec@mail.gmail.com> References: <91fcd7990708280707g4d00ca82q7059f6579c33747@mail.gmail.com> <1188310538.2186.108.camel@cutter> <91fcd7990708280753k1a0c5170ubb9b85ef825913ec@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <1188313239.2186.115.camel@cutter> On Tue, 2007-08-28 at 10:53 -0400, Donald Fischer wrote: > No ulterior motive here; getting our ducks in a row and the prototype > page set up took longer than we anticipated but I wanted to push to > make the deadline to try it in Test2 rather than delaying to Test3. I wasn't suggesting an ulterior motive. I was more suggesting that last minute changes like this have gotten us a lot of bad flack before. You may not remember the 'tracking image' fiasco but it was not much fun. > Not done yet, but there is minimal text to be translated on the start > page itself and the third party search services that we'd build on are > widely internationalized. We'd use the regular Fedora documentation > i18n workflow for the necessary translations, I suppose. okay - not sure how this fits in with the translation freeze, though. > Red Hat will pay for the incremental server and bandwidth so that it's > not an additional cost burden competing with existing Fedora project > expenses. Open to discussing the governance model the server itself, > presumably we could handle it like other Fedora infrastructure > services. At present it's just a static web page and a few images; in > the future we anticipate also having a hosted results page that would > be a simple JSP. If we handle it like the other fedora infrastructure services then JSPs are a non-starter. Especially considering we do not, yet, have a free java on our server installs. Moreover, the consensus of the infrastructure group has been repeatedly, "no" to all things java. Mainly b/c of the non-free java but also b/c of the tumbling morass that is all things java on websites. > I hear you, definitely think we could look at doing various things > here and the online desktop team has the resources to do so. When we > tried out some workarounds for this issue, the general feeling was > that we might be trying to be too smart for our own good (e.g. how > long should you wait before you decide that the user is offline vs. > has a slow connection?) Fielding in a test release sooner than later > would give us some real data about what this issue actually looks like > in the field. But it won't give us any real data about our offline users. They don't download test releases b/c of the limited bandwidth they have. -sv From dennis at ausil.us Tue Aug 28 15:12:35 2007 From: dennis at ausil.us (Dennis Gilmore) Date: Tue, 28 Aug 2007 10:12:35 -0500 Subject: Live Fedora start page proposal In-Reply-To: <91fcd7990708280753k1a0c5170ubb9b85ef825913ec@mail.gmail.com> References: <91fcd7990708280707g4d00ca82q7059f6579c33747@mail.gmail.com> <1188310538.2186.108.camel@cutter> <91fcd7990708280753k1a0c5170ubb9b85ef825913ec@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <200708281012.36276.dennis@ausil.us> On Tuesday 28 August 2007 9:53:05 am Donald Fischer wrote: > On 8/28/07, seth vidal wrote: > > > Here's why I think this simple change makes sense: > > > > > > * More useful to users. The vast majority of the time when Fedora > > > users are launching a new browser, they're looking to do something on > > > the web, not to read the operating system release notes. Thus, we've > > > proposed to put search front-and-center. > > > > Isn't the search already on the search bar that defaults in firefox? > > There is also search there, yes. This proposal doesn't consider > modifying that in any way, but rather adding a search box to the start > page that has the mentioned Fedora tweaks. > > > > To try this out, there's only one small change required in the > > > distribution itself, which is to swap the default URL in the browser > > > configuration to http://start.fedoraproject.org. This switch is a > > > time-sensitive issue with respect to Test2, since we'd like to field > > > this in at least one and ideally two test releases before deciding to > > > release it in a final Fedora version. > > > > I'm not trying to be snide but is there a reason you waited until the > > eleventh-hour before test2 went out to ask about this? > > No ulterior motive here; getting our ducks in a row and the prototype > page set up took longer than we anticipated but I wanted to push to > make the deadline to try it in Test2 rather than delaying to Test3. also your links to fedora are wrong they should be fedoraproject.org not fedora.redhat.com minor detail but fedora.redhat.com is dead. > > > * Red Hat will supply the server infrastructure and bandwidth > > > required for this project. > > > > Red Hat will? or will fedora's infrastructure provide it? Who will > > control it? What, if any, software is required server-side to facilitate > > this? > > Red Hat will pay for the incremental server and bandwidth so that it's > not an additional cost burden competing with existing Fedora project > expenses. Open to discussing the governance model the server itself, > presumably we could handle it like other Fedora infrastructure > services. At present it's just a static web page and a few images; in > the future we anticipate also having a hosted results page that would > be a simple JSP. Any Fedora Infrastructure type thing (which this is) has a few rules. It needs to be completely open. i.e somebody else needs to be able to deploy it themselves using whats provided in Fedora. (* We allow exceptions at times for things in review) all components need to be free and open source. We Just got the whole OS on a free and open platform. We can not change this now. So your JSP stuff had better work with gcj. the servers need to be under the control of fedora Infrastructure. This would be a critical thing that needs to be open. Have i mentioned that this needs to be completely open and transparent. Dennis From sundaram at fedoraproject.org Tue Aug 28 15:08:17 2007 From: sundaram at fedoraproject.org (Rahul Sundaram) Date: Tue, 28 Aug 2007 20:38:17 +0530 Subject: Live Fedora start page proposal In-Reply-To: <91fcd7990708280707g4d00ca82q7059f6579c33747@mail.gmail.com> References: <91fcd7990708280707g4d00ca82q7059f6579c33747@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <46D43A61.9060809@fedoraproject.org> Donald Fischer wrote: > * Fedora-tuned search features. For example, we can make it easy to > search for Creative Commons licensed content, a feature that should be > especially interesting and relevant to Fedora users. Is this a commercial deal with Creative Commons or just something we are doing because our interests are aligned to the extend it is? > * Opportunity for ad-subsidized sponsorships. Fedora's large user > audience is potentially valuable to web search providers whose > business is to display contextual text ads next to search results. Are you thinking of putting ads in the home page itself or just the usual ads on search results that we aren't directly involved with? > We put together a working prototype in order to make the discussion > concrete, which you can try out here: > > http://start.fedoraproject.org > > That design and functionality there is definitely not set in stone, > but gets the basic idea across and would be a serviceable starting > point for user testing. The Fedora 7 link should be fedoraproject.org instead of fedora.redhat.com FYI Rahul From katzj at redhat.com Tue Aug 28 15:15:13 2007 From: katzj at redhat.com (Jeremy Katz) Date: Tue, 28 Aug 2007 11:15:13 -0400 Subject: Live Fedora start page proposal In-Reply-To: <91fcd7990708280707g4d00ca82q7059f6579c33747@mail.gmail.com> References: <91fcd7990708280707g4d00ca82q7059f6579c33747@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <1188314113.17567.29.camel@localhost.localdomain> First off, I'm glad to see this discussion starting now (well, earlier would have been better, but as we all know, stuff happens... so let's just see what we can come to here) On Tue, 2007-08-28 at 10:07 -0400, Donald Fischer wrote: > I work with the online desktop team at Red Hat. I'd like to propose > that starting with Fedora 8, the default browser start page be changed > to a live web page centered on web search. So, I don't think that I fundamentally disagree with the premise, but... > * More useful to users. The vast majority of the time when Fedora > users are launching a new browser, they're looking to do something on > the web, not to read the operating system release notes. Thus, we've > proposed to put search front-and-center. The current default page has quite a bit more than just the release notes. And I think that continuing to provide some of that high-profile linking to community sites and documentation is important. Yes, they're in the toolbar, but the fact that they're in the page and with more words than just "Planet Fedora? What's a planet?" is pretty important. That said, there's no reason we couldn't do that in the online page which also has search. > To try this out, there's only one small change required in the > distribution itself, which is to swap the default URL in the browser > configuration to http://start.fedoraproject.org. This switch is a > time-sensitive issue with respect to Test2, since we'd like to field > this in at least one and ideally two test releases before deciding to > release it in a final Fedora version. Ignoring the above, yes, if we're going to switch to an online page, we should get it in for test2. And then we can tweak the content a bit. > * There is already a link to the release notes in the default browser > bookmarks toolbar, which is visible by default, so the content > previously on the start page is still just one click away. We could > explore featuring links to release notes or documentation in the start > page itself, though keeping the start page simple and lightweight > seems best (both for ease of use and performance reasons). FWIW, the current index.html is like 7.5k. So I think we can probably have a little bit more than just a search entry and still have it be simple and lightweight :) > * Internationalization of the hosted start page and search results > pages is certainly doable, just as with the local release notes. I think that this needs to be more than doable and really has to be a requirement. And that if we do it, we need to have that bit up and running and testable with test3, if not earlier (the advantage of it being hosted is that we can change it out more easily, right?) > * For users without Internet connectivity, we could do something > fancy to avoid showing an error message, though that would be more > than upstream Firefox does. In fact we have prototyped modifications > to Firefox to achieve this, but our conclusion was that the additional > complexity is not justified. Using a web browser without access to > the web seems to be a corner case and one in which a warning message > is appropriate! In the offline case, local release notes would still > be available from the default bookmarks toolbar. Tuning offline > behavior is an area that we could look at further in conjunction with > the community. While not as critical as internationalization, I do think we need to handle this nicely. While it might seem like a corner case, something that continues to come up is starting the desktop with a browser already running. At which case, you didn't start a web browser, you just logged in. And for that, you want to be able to have a nice experience even if the network isn't up. Jeremy From dff at redhat.com Tue Aug 28 15:22:45 2007 From: dff at redhat.com (Donald Fischer) Date: Tue, 28 Aug 2007 11:22:45 -0400 Subject: Live Fedora start page proposal In-Reply-To: <200708281012.36276.dennis@ausil.us> References: <91fcd7990708280707g4d00ca82q7059f6579c33747@mail.gmail.com> <1188310538.2186.108.camel@cutter> <91fcd7990708280753k1a0c5170ubb9b85ef825913ec@mail.gmail.com> <200708281012.36276.dennis@ausil.us> Message-ID: <91fcd7990708280822h5937f716q252caf7532a220d5@mail.gmail.com> On 8/28/07, Dennis Gilmore wrote: > also your links to fedora are wrong they should be fedoraproject.org not > fedora.redhat.com minor detail but fedora.redhat.com is dead. Whoops, easy enough to fix. > Any Fedora Infrastructure type thing (which this is) has a few rules. It > needs to be completely open. i.e somebody else needs to be able to deploy > it themselves using whats provided in Fedora. (* We allow exceptions at > times for things in review) all components need to be free and open source. > We Just got the whole OS on a free and open platform. We can not change this > now. So your JSP stuff had better work with gcj. the servers need to be > under the control of fedora Infrastructure. This would be a critical thing > that needs to be open. I don't forsee any problem having 100% FOSS dependencies. We can make sure the results page works with gcj or worst case write it in another language. It's pretty trivial code wise. > Have i mentioned that this needs to be completely open and transparent. Hence the open, transparent discussion here ;-) don From mmcgrath at redhat.com Tue Aug 28 15:22:09 2007 From: mmcgrath at redhat.com (Mike McGrath) Date: Tue, 28 Aug 2007 10:22:09 -0500 Subject: Live Fedora start page proposal In-Reply-To: <91fcd7990708280822h5937f716q252caf7532a220d5@mail.gmail.com> References: <91fcd7990708280707g4d00ca82q7059f6579c33747@mail.gmail.com> <1188310538.2186.108.camel@cutter> <91fcd7990708280753k1a0c5170ubb9b85ef825913ec@mail.gmail.com> <200708281012.36276.dennis@ausil.us> <91fcd7990708280822h5937f716q252caf7532a220d5@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <46D43DA1.4090208@redhat.com> Donald Fischer wrote: > On 8/28/07, Dennis Gilmore wrote: > >> also your links to fedora are wrong they should be fedoraproject.org not >> fedora.redhat.com minor detail but fedora.redhat.com is dead. >> > > Whoops, easy enough to fix. > > >> Any Fedora Infrastructure type thing (which this is) has a few rules. It >> needs to be completely open. i.e somebody else needs to be able to deploy >> it themselves using whats provided in Fedora. (* We allow exceptions at >> times for things in review) all components need to be free and open source. >> We Just got the whole OS on a free and open platform. We can not change this >> now. So your JSP stuff had better work with gcj. the servers need to be >> under the control of fedora Infrastructure. This would be a critical thing >> that needs to be open. >> > > I don't forsee any problem having 100% FOSS dependencies. We can make > sure the results page works with gcj or worst case write it in another > language. It's pretty trivial code wise. > FWIW, if it could be written in python it would align well with the rest of our applications. -Mike From dff at redhat.com Tue Aug 28 15:26:06 2007 From: dff at redhat.com (Donald Fischer) Date: Tue, 28 Aug 2007 11:26:06 -0400 Subject: Live Fedora start page proposal In-Reply-To: <46D43A61.9060809@fedoraproject.org> References: <91fcd7990708280707g4d00ca82q7059f6579c33747@mail.gmail.com> <46D43A61.9060809@fedoraproject.org> Message-ID: <91fcd7990708280826g78f0f5bal9963709a371acfb7@mail.gmail.com> On 8/28/07, Rahul Sundaram wrote: > > * Fedora-tuned search features. For example, we can make it easy to > > search for Creative Commons licensed content, a feature that should be > > especially interesting and relevant to Fedora users. > > Is this a commercial deal with Creative Commons or just something we are > doing because our interests are aligned to the extend it is? Our idea was that supporting open content would be of interest to the Fedora community. Not sure what commercial deal might be possible with Creative Commons around something like this -- was there a commercial element to the recent F7 based CC spin that I missed? > > * Opportunity for ad-subsidized sponsorships. Fedora's large user > > audience is potentially valuable to web search providers whose > > business is to display contextual text ads next to search results. > > Are you thinking of putting ads in the home page itself or just the > usual ads on search results that we aren't directly involved with? The idea would be that we'd get a share of the revenue from ads that you already see on a commercial web search results page like those from google.com or search.yahoo.com. Not adding any more ads to the experience that would otherwise be there, just getting some credit to Fedora for the audience it is driving. > > We put together a working prototype in order to make the discussion > > concrete, which you can try out here: > > > > http://start.fedoraproject.org > > > > That design and functionality there is definitely not set in stone, > > but gets the basic idea across and would be a serviceable starting > > point for user testing. > > The Fedora 7 link should be fedoraproject.org instead of > fedora.redhat.com FYI Yep, already noted, easy fix. thanks, don From dff at redhat.com Tue Aug 28 15:31:58 2007 From: dff at redhat.com (Donald Fischer) Date: Tue, 28 Aug 2007 11:31:58 -0400 Subject: Live Fedora start page proposal In-Reply-To: <1188314113.17567.29.camel@localhost.localdomain> References: <91fcd7990708280707g4d00ca82q7059f6579c33747@mail.gmail.com> <1188314113.17567.29.camel@localhost.localdomain> Message-ID: <91fcd7990708280831i46fb9cb1i616991817aa650f1@mail.gmail.com> On 8/28/07, Jeremy Katz wrote: > > * More useful to users. The vast majority of the time when Fedora > > users are launching a new browser, they're looking to do something on > > the web, not to read the operating system release notes. Thus, we've > > proposed to put search front-and-center. > > The current default page has quite a bit more than just the release > notes. And I think that continuing to provide some of that high-profile > linking to community sites and documentation is important. Yes, they're > in the toolbar, but the fact that they're in the page and with more > words than just "Planet Fedora? What's a planet?" is pretty > important. > > That said, there's no reason we couldn't do that in the online page > which also has search. Yup, I think there's a good discussion to be had here on what exactly should be on the page. Personally I'm a fan of keeping it simple, but I recognize that others will have good input. > > * There is already a link to the release notes in the default browser > > bookmarks toolbar, which is visible by default, so the content > > previously on the start page is still just one click away. We could > > explore featuring links to release notes or documentation in the start > > page itself, though keeping the start page simple and lightweight > > seems best (both for ease of use and performance reasons). > > FWIW, the current index.html is like 7.5k. So I think we can probably > have a little bit more than just a search entry and still have it be > simple and lightweight :) Sure, we haven't really optimized for the purposes of the current prototype. > > * Internationalization of the hosted start page and search results > > pages is certainly doable, just as with the local release notes. > > I think that this needs to be more than doable and really has to be a > requirement. And that if we do it, we need to have that bit up and > running and testable with test3, if not earlier (the advantage of it > being hosted is that we can change it out more easily, right?) Exactly. I don't thing translating prior to Test3 would be a problem, though we haven't actually engaged with the i18n team on this yet. > > * For users without Internet connectivity, we could do something > > fancy to avoid showing an error message, though that would be more > > than upstream Firefox does. In fact we have prototyped modifications > > to Firefox to achieve this, but our conclusion was that the additional > > complexity is not justified. Using a web browser without access to > > the web seems to be a corner case and one in which a warning message > > is appropriate! In the offline case, local release notes would still > > be available from the default bookmarks toolbar. Tuning offline > > behavior is an area that we could look at further in conjunction with > > the community. > > While not as critical as internationalization, I do think we need to > handle this nicely. While it might seem like a corner case, something > that continues to come up is starting the desktop with a browser already > running. At which case, you didn't start a web browser, you just logged > in. And for that, you want to be able to have a nice experience even if > the network isn't up. Sure, I'm confident that we can come up with a sane behavior here, and ideally even push it upstream to Firefox so other distros and platforms benefit as well. don From sundaram at fedoraproject.org Tue Aug 28 15:44:34 2007 From: sundaram at fedoraproject.org (Rahul Sundaram) Date: Tue, 28 Aug 2007 21:14:34 +0530 Subject: Live Fedora start page proposal In-Reply-To: <91fcd7990708280826g78f0f5bal9963709a371acfb7@mail.gmail.com> References: <91fcd7990708280707g4d00ca82q7059f6579c33747@mail.gmail.com> <46D43A61.9060809@fedoraproject.org> <91fcd7990708280826g78f0f5bal9963709a371acfb7@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <46D442E2.9090701@fedoraproject.org> Donald Fischer wrote: > > Our idea was that supporting open content would be of interest to the > Fedora community. Not sure what commercial deal might be possible > with Creative Commons around something like this -- was there a > commercial element to the recent F7 based CC spin that I missed? No the spin wasn't. I was merely wondering if there was such a deal in this instance. > The idea would be that we'd get a share of the revenue from ads that > you already see on a commercial web search results page like those > from google.com or search.yahoo.com. What are you going to do with that revenue? How much would it be? How transparent are those details? Rahul From dff at redhat.com Tue Aug 28 16:33:18 2007 From: dff at redhat.com (Donald Fischer) Date: Tue, 28 Aug 2007 12:33:18 -0400 Subject: Live Fedora start page proposal In-Reply-To: <46D442E2.9090701@fedoraproject.org> References: <91fcd7990708280707g4d00ca82q7059f6579c33747@mail.gmail.com> <46D43A61.9060809@fedoraproject.org> <91fcd7990708280826g78f0f5bal9963709a371acfb7@mail.gmail.com> <46D442E2.9090701@fedoraproject.org> Message-ID: <91fcd7990708280933m429f19c7l427ca86995fc0533@mail.gmail.com> On 8/28/07, Rahul Sundaram wrote: > > The idea would be that we'd get a share of the revenue from ads that > > you already see on a commercial web search results page like those > > from google.com or search.yahoo.com. > > What are you going to do with that revenue? How much would it be? How > transparent are those details? The idea of the sponsorship/affiliate element would be to enable additional investment in Fedora. (Though I think there are other reasons to move to the live start page beyond just sponsorship -- user experience, communications channel, etc as pointed out in my initial note). Potential revenue would depend on the size and behavior of Fedora's audience, and the terms that could be negotiated with a commercial search provider. Agree on the need for transparency. don From tchung at fedoraproject.org Tue Aug 28 17:04:09 2007 From: tchung at fedoraproject.org (Thomas Chung) Date: Tue, 28 Aug 2007 10:04:09 -0700 Subject: Live Fedora start page proposal In-Reply-To: <91fcd7990708280933m429f19c7l427ca86995fc0533@mail.gmail.com> References: <91fcd7990708280707g4d00ca82q7059f6579c33747@mail.gmail.com> <46D43A61.9060809@fedoraproject.org> <91fcd7990708280826g78f0f5bal9963709a371acfb7@mail.gmail.com> <46D442E2.9090701@fedoraproject.org> <91fcd7990708280933m429f19c7l427ca86995fc0533@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <369bce3b0708281004we372cfbv8f58e9478f3b4a82@mail.gmail.com> On 8/28/07, Donald Fischer wrote: > On 8/28/07, Rahul Sundaram wrote: > > > The idea would be that we'd get a share of the revenue from ads that > > > you already see on a commercial web search results page like those > > > from google.com or search.yahoo.com. > > > > What are you going to do with that revenue? How much would it be? How > > transparent are those details? > > The idea of the sponsorship/affiliate element would be to enable > additional investment in Fedora. (Though I think there are other > reasons to move to the live start page beyond just sponsorship -- user > experience, communications channel, etc as pointed out in my initial > note). > > Potential revenue would depend on the size and behavior of Fedora's > audience, and the terms that could be negotiated with a commercial > search provider. Agree on the need for transparency. > > don For whatever worth, I support his idea :) Regards, -- Thomas Chung http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/ThomasChung From jspaleta at gmail.com Tue Aug 28 17:34:19 2007 From: jspaleta at gmail.com (Jeff Spaleta) Date: Tue, 28 Aug 2007 09:34:19 -0800 Subject: Live Fedora start page proposal In-Reply-To: <91fcd7990708280826g78f0f5bal9963709a371acfb7@mail.gmail.com> References: <91fcd7990708280707g4d00ca82q7059f6579c33747@mail.gmail.com> <46D43A61.9060809@fedoraproject.org> <91fcd7990708280826g78f0f5bal9963709a371acfb7@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <604aa7910708281034w32c2a99xc67e1d3bc14b836c@mail.gmail.com> On 8/28/07, Donald Fischer wrote: > Our idea was that supporting open content would be of interest to the > Fedora community. I for one am very interested in exposing Fedora users to open content. I don't think a "lightweight" start page is the optimal format by which to expose open content...but its a start. If I ruled the world....a moderately dynamic "portal" entity which focused on content instead of search would be the honey by which I would catch the flies willing to taste the sweet sweet nectar of open content. -jef From skvidal at fedoraproject.org Tue Aug 28 17:37:52 2007 From: skvidal at fedoraproject.org (seth vidal) Date: Tue, 28 Aug 2007 13:37:52 -0400 Subject: Live Fedora start page proposal In-Reply-To: <604aa7910708281034w32c2a99xc67e1d3bc14b836c@mail.gmail.com> References: <91fcd7990708280707g4d00ca82q7059f6579c33747@mail.gmail.com> <46D43A61.9060809@fedoraproject.org> <91fcd7990708280826g78f0f5bal9963709a371acfb7@mail.gmail.com> <604aa7910708281034w32c2a99xc67e1d3bc14b836c@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <1188322672.27085.5.camel@cutter> On Tue, 2007-08-28 at 09:34 -0800, Jeff Spaleta wrote: > On 8/28/07, Donald Fischer wrote: > > Our idea was that supporting open content would be of interest to the > > Fedora community. > > I for one am very interested in exposing Fedora users to open content. > I don't think a "lightweight" start page is the optimal format by > which to expose open content...but its a start. > > If I ruled the world....a moderately dynamic "portal" entity which > focused on content instead of search would be the honey by which I > would catch the flies willing to taste the sweet sweet nectar of open > content. > So, something more like "featured open content of the day:...." type of thing? -sv From blizzard at redhat.com Tue Aug 28 17:37:53 2007 From: blizzard at redhat.com (Christopher Blizzard) Date: Tue, 28 Aug 2007 13:37:53 -0400 Subject: Live Fedora start page proposal In-Reply-To: <1188313239.2186.115.camel@cutter> References: <91fcd7990708280707g4d00ca82q7059f6579c33747@mail.gmail.com> <1188310538.2186.108.camel@cutter> <91fcd7990708280753k1a0c5170ubb9b85ef825913ec@mail.gmail.com> <1188313239.2186.115.camel@cutter> Message-ID: <1188322673.2781.39.camel@localhost.localdomain> On Tue, 2007-08-28 at 11:00 -0400, seth vidal wrote: > > > But it won't give us any real data about our offline users. They don't > download test releases b/c of the limited bandwidth they have. > We don't have statistics about those people anyway. This can only be additive. --Chris From blizzard at redhat.com Tue Aug 28 17:40:11 2007 From: blizzard at redhat.com (Christopher Blizzard) Date: Tue, 28 Aug 2007 13:40:11 -0400 Subject: Live Fedora start page proposal In-Reply-To: <1188310538.2186.108.camel@cutter> References: <91fcd7990708280707g4d00ca82q7059f6579c33747@mail.gmail.com> <1188310538.2186.108.camel@cutter> Message-ID: <1188322811.2781.41.camel@localhost.localdomain> On Tue, 2007-08-28 at 10:15 -0400, seth vidal wrote: > > On Tue, 2007-08-28 at 10:07 -0400, Donald Fischer wrote: > > Hi, > > > > Here's why I think this simple change makes sense: > > > > * More useful to users. The vast majority of the time when Fedora > > users are launching a new browser, they're looking to do something > on > > the web, not to read the operating system release notes. Thus, > we've > > proposed to put search front-and-center. > > Isn't the search already on the search bar that defaults in firefox? > Statistics show that a lot of people use the search bar, but they also use the search in the home page. A very large percentage. It's very useful to have it in the home page. (This is coming from my Mozilla experience with a search-powered home page, not Fedora-specific.) --Chris From jspaleta at gmail.com Tue Aug 28 18:07:16 2007 From: jspaleta at gmail.com (Jeff Spaleta) Date: Tue, 28 Aug 2007 10:07:16 -0800 Subject: Live Fedora start page proposal In-Reply-To: <1188322672.27085.5.camel@cutter> References: <91fcd7990708280707g4d00ca82q7059f6579c33747@mail.gmail.com> <46D43A61.9060809@fedoraproject.org> <91fcd7990708280826g78f0f5bal9963709a371acfb7@mail.gmail.com> <604aa7910708281034w32c2a99xc67e1d3bc14b836c@mail.gmail.com> <1188322672.27085.5.camel@cutter> Message-ID: <604aa7910708281107p70b076b9g5c61d7c2caf0657c@mail.gmail.com> On 8/28/07, seth vidal wrote: > So, something more like "featured open content of the day:...." type of > thing? Yes. I believe that open content adoption is not a question of searching for what you want. People not familiar with open content don't know what they want, because its all new to them. By and large open content is not going to be what they are exposed to via radio or tv or cell phones or friends (unless they are friends with me..but since I hate people that's a doomed grassroots strategy). There is a need for a showcase space that we can put in front of Fedora users. Not a bandwidth sucking portal site with crazy amounts of dynamic content and pointless interactivity. But something dynamic enough so users can get a sense that there is a large pool of quality content out there as they come back repeatedly to our site. -jef From a.badger at gmail.com Tue Aug 28 18:18:57 2007 From: a.badger at gmail.com (Toshio Kuratomi) Date: Tue, 28 Aug 2007 11:18:57 -0700 Subject: Live Fedora start page proposal In-Reply-To: <1188322673.2781.39.camel@localhost.localdomain> References: <91fcd7990708280707g4d00ca82q7059f6579c33747@mail.gmail.com> <1188310538.2186.108.camel@cutter> <91fcd7990708280753k1a0c5170ubb9b85ef825913ec@mail.gmail.com> <1188313239.2186.115.camel@cutter> <1188322673.2781.39.camel@localhost.localdomain> Message-ID: <46D46711.7020202@gmail.com> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Christopher Blizzard wrote: > On Tue, 2007-08-28 at 11:00 -0400, seth vidal wrote: >> >> But it won't give us any real data about our offline users. They don't >> download test releases b/c of the limited bandwidth they have. >> > > We don't have statistics about those people anyway. This can only be > additive. > I think Seth was trying to make the point that we won't know whether our offline users like or dislike the change. It's going to be an important change for them because they are the ones who won't be able to connect to a hosted start page. Seth is pointing out that they are also the ones who aren't able to download a test release and give feedback about how it broke their experience. - -Toshio -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.7 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Fedora - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFG1GcRX6yAic2E7kgRAqxYAJ4knv54HDcwzCBBJp8iQcy4DnYSAQCgji2I sg3jhHb2pnadPP/WZW0XHmw= =u6g/ -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From skvidal at fedoraproject.org Tue Aug 28 18:24:34 2007 From: skvidal at fedoraproject.org (seth vidal) Date: Tue, 28 Aug 2007 14:24:34 -0400 Subject: Live Fedora start page proposal In-Reply-To: <46D46711.7020202@gmail.com> References: <91fcd7990708280707g4d00ca82q7059f6579c33747@mail.gmail.com> <1188310538.2186.108.camel@cutter> <91fcd7990708280753k1a0c5170ubb9b85ef825913ec@mail.gmail.com> <1188313239.2186.115.camel@cutter> <1188322673.2781.39.camel@localhost.localdomain> <46D46711.7020202@gmail.com> Message-ID: <1188325474.27085.10.camel@cutter> On Tue, 2007-08-28 at 11:18 -0700, Toshio Kuratomi wrote: > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > Hash: SHA1 > > Christopher Blizzard wrote: > > On Tue, 2007-08-28 at 11:00 -0400, seth vidal wrote: > >> > >> But it won't give us any real data about our offline users. They don't > >> download test releases b/c of the limited bandwidth they have. > >> > > > > We don't have statistics about those people anyway. This can only be > > additive. > > > I think Seth was trying to make the point that we won't know whether our > offline users like or dislike the change. It's going to be an important > change for them because they are the ones who won't be able to connect > to a hosted start page. Seth is pointing out that they are also the > ones who aren't able to download a test release and give feedback about > how it broke their experience. > Thanks toshio, that's spot-on. -sv From hp at redhat.com Tue Aug 28 18:52:16 2007 From: hp at redhat.com (Havoc Pennington) Date: Tue, 28 Aug 2007 14:52:16 -0400 Subject: Live Fedora start page proposal In-Reply-To: <1188325474.27085.10.camel@cutter> References: <91fcd7990708280707g4d00ca82q7059f6579c33747@mail.gmail.com> <1188310538.2186.108.camel@cutter> <91fcd7990708280753k1a0c5170ubb9b85ef825913ec@mail.gmail.com> <1188313239.2186.115.camel@cutter> <1188322673.2781.39.camel@localhost.localdomain> <46D46711.7020202@gmail.com> <1188325474.27085.10.camel@cutter> Message-ID: <815098350708281152w337c2fdif6e20f84c52e089c@mail.gmail.com> Hi, If I use my system all the time with a network connection up that doesn't work [1], can't I just go to the browser prefs and set the default page to about:blank? As always the first choice should be a solution that is most useful for "most" people *and* works for everyone, rather than a pref, but I think a pref is better than a solution that compromises the common/expected case. It really seems to me that when opening an Internet browser, the common/expected case is that I'm on the Internet. Maybe I'm the only person who opens the web browser in order to browse the web? :-P Based on what blizzard said, we do have some real knowledge that lots of people use the default search page in Firefox upstream, so we aren't relying on theory alone to say that when someone opens a new browser window lots of times they're looking to search. Havoc [1] there's no big problem with _offline_ afaik since the DNS fails instantly, the problem is having a network interface up but it doesn't work / has huge latency for some reason, and if the browser had a bug maybe it would lock up in this case instead of letting you press stop. I don't know if it really does this though. It's (conceptually) easy to magically choose the web page if you are online and the local page otherwise if by "online" we mean "you have a network interface up" but if by "online" we mean "your internet actually works" there's no way to query that without waiting for some long timeout, afaik. Assuming the browser does not hang if the network isn't working, then the worst case behavior here doesn't seem catastrophic to me... it will say "can't load start.fedoraproject.org" and then people will be all "oh, I'm not on the Internet, that makes sense." From mspevack at redhat.com Tue Aug 28 19:14:42 2007 From: mspevack at redhat.com (Max Spevack) Date: Tue, 28 Aug 2007 15:14:42 -0400 (EDT) Subject: Live Fedora start page proposal In-Reply-To: <1188313239.2186.115.camel@cutter> References: <91fcd7990708280707g4d00ca82q7059f6579c33747@mail.gmail.com> <1188310538.2186.108.camel@cutter> <91fcd7990708280753k1a0c5170ubb9b85ef825913ec@mail.gmail.com> <1188313239.2186.115.camel@cutter> Message-ID: On Tue, 28 Aug 2007, seth vidal wrote: > On Tue, 2007-08-28 at 10:53 -0400, Donald Fischer wrote: > >> No ulterior motive here; getting our ducks in a row and the prototype >> page set up took longer than we anticipated but I wanted to push to >> make the deadline to try it in Test2 rather than delaying to Test3. > > I wasn't suggesting an ulterior motive. I was more suggesting that > last minute changes like this have gotten us a lot of bad flack > before. You may not remember the 'tracking image' fiasco but it was > not much fun. To be fair, the last two times something related to Firefox's homepage and the Fedora Distro came up, it was close to Release Candidate time and not Feature Freeze time. The conversation is happening far earlier in the cycle this time. There's also a distinction to be made here between "a feature that has to do with the actual distro" and "a feature related to the larger Fedora Project" The DISTRO specific part of this is: what happens when you click the Firefox button, and the various tradeoffs between a local start page and a network-required start page. That is something that needs to be determined quickly and allowed to be tested/debugged in the F8 cycle. The FEDORA PROJECT part is "what is at http://start.fedoraproject.org" and how do we make it (a) useful and (b) something that people go to. That work can proceed in any sort of timeframe that we like. It is in no way tied to a particular release of the distribution. It just so happens that we would like to come up with a way to use the browser in the distribution to help further our ends at start.fedoraproject.org --Max From mspevack at redhat.com Tue Aug 28 19:20:21 2007 From: mspevack at redhat.com (Max Spevack) Date: Tue, 28 Aug 2007 15:20:21 -0400 (EDT) Subject: Live Fedora start page proposal In-Reply-To: <369bce3b0708281004we372cfbv8f58e9478f3b4a82@mail.gmail.com> References: <91fcd7990708280707g4d00ca82q7059f6579c33747@mail.gmail.com> <46D43A61.9060809@fedoraproject.org> <91fcd7990708280826g78f0f5bal9963709a371acfb7@mail.gmail.com> <46D442E2.9090701@fedoraproject.org> <91fcd7990708280933m429f19c7l427ca86995fc0533@mail.gmail.com> <369bce3b0708281004we372cfbv8f58e9478f3b4a82@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: On Tue, 28 Aug 2007, Thomas Chung wrote: > For whatever worth, I support his idea :) As do I. I particularly like the ease of doing the creative commons filtered search. I think we've not moved on this in the last 2 releases because we waited too long each time, rather than because there was major objection. We have time left to get something into Test2 still, or at worst Rawhide soon after and then Test3. I don't want to put words into Chris Aillon's mouth, but I believe he supports the general idea too. I think Chris should Get Something In that folks can Look At and then we take it from there. But let's take the plunge and try it out, and do so ASAP. --Max From tibbs at math.uh.edu Tue Aug 28 19:34:43 2007 From: tibbs at math.uh.edu (Jason L Tibbitts III) Date: 28 Aug 2007 14:34:43 -0500 Subject: Live Fedora start page proposal In-Reply-To: <815098350708281152w337c2fdif6e20f84c52e089c@mail.gmail.com> References: <91fcd7990708280707g4d00ca82q7059f6579c33747@mail.gmail.com> <1188310538.2186.108.camel@cutter> <91fcd7990708280753k1a0c5170ubb9b85ef825913ec@mail.gmail.com> <1188313239.2186.115.camel@cutter> <1188322673.2781.39.camel@localhost.localdomain> <46D46711.7020202@gmail.com> <1188325474.27085.10.camel@cutter> <815098350708281152w337c2fdif6e20f84c52e089c@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: >>>>> "HP" == Havoc Pennington writes: HP> If I use my system all the time with a network connection up that HP> doesn't work [1], can't I just go to the browser prefs and set the HP> default page to about:blank? Although I can't help but agree here, it should also be pointed out that if we want to be smart about this, we just have the start page stored locally with some javascript magic that attempts to update some of the content with bits retrieved from the network. That still allows us to have the same content we have now (assuming, of course, that we still want it) but also to provide network-provided dynamic content. - J< From skvidal at fedoraproject.org Tue Aug 28 19:53:10 2007 From: skvidal at fedoraproject.org (seth vidal) Date: Tue, 28 Aug 2007 15:53:10 -0400 Subject: Live Fedora start page proposal In-Reply-To: References: <91fcd7990708280707g4d00ca82q7059f6579c33747@mail.gmail.com> <1188310538.2186.108.camel@cutter> <91fcd7990708280753k1a0c5170ubb9b85ef825913ec@mail.gmail.com> <1188313239.2186.115.camel@cutter> <1188322673.2781.39.camel@localhost.localdomain> <46D46711.7020202@gmail.com> <1188325474.27085.10.camel@cutter> <815098350708281152w337c2fdif6e20f84c52e089c@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <1188330790.27085.20.camel@cutter> On Tue, 2007-08-28 at 14:34 -0500, Jason L Tibbitts III wrote: > >>>>> "HP" == Havoc Pennington writes: > > HP> If I use my system all the time with a network connection up that > HP> doesn't work [1], can't I just go to the browser prefs and set the > HP> default page to about:blank? > > Although I can't help but agree here, it should also be pointed out > that if we want to be smart about this, we just have the start page > stored locally with some javascript magic that attempts to update some > of the content with bits retrieved from the network. That still > allows us to have the same content we have now (assuming, of course, > that we still want it) but also to provide network-provided dynamic > content. > I like this. So the page will render but if they aren't connected the special content won't get downloaded. That's a good idea. -sv From dimitris at glezos.com Tue Aug 28 22:37:03 2007 From: dimitris at glezos.com (Dimitris Glezos) Date: Tue, 28 Aug 2007 23:37:03 +0100 Subject: Live Fedora start page proposal In-Reply-To: <1188313239.2186.115.camel@cutter> References: <91fcd7990708280707g4d00ca82q7059f6579c33747@mail.gmail.com> <1188310538.2186.108.camel@cutter> <91fcd7990708280753k1a0c5170ubb9b85ef825913ec@mail.gmail.com> <1188313239.2186.115.camel@cutter> Message-ID: <1188340623.32095.32.camel@shuttle> ???? 28-08-2007, ????? ???, ??? ??? 11:00 -0400, ?/? seth vidal ??????: > On Tue, 2007-08-28 at 10:53 -0400, Donald Fischer wrote: > > Not done yet, but there is minimal text to be translated on the start > > page itself and the third party search services that we'd build on are > > widely internationalized. We'd use the regular Fedora documentation > > i18n workflow for the necessary translations, I suppose. > > okay - not sure how this fits in with the translation freeze, though. The string freeze for F8 was today, so shipped translatable resources should be finalized in a VCS by... today. The content for the offline browser start page (/cvs/docs/homepage) should be decided ASAP and a notification sent to fedora-trans-list. Start.fpo translations can happen incrementally, but having its content finalized and available early on would be a good thing. +1 for using the homepage as a gateway to useful information -- that was our purpose when we decided to put content on it. Let's just make sure that some offline content will be available for people with low network accessibility. Installing Fedora on a laptop and having the browser show nothing because the wireless hasn't been setup yet, won't make a good first impression. -d -- Dimitris Glezos Jabber ID: glezos at jabber.org, GPG: 0xA5A04C3B http://dimitris.glezos.com/ "He who gives up functionality for ease of use loses both and deserves neither." (Anonymous) -- From stickster at gmail.com Wed Aug 29 12:58:29 2007 From: stickster at gmail.com (Paul W. Frields) Date: Wed, 29 Aug 2007 08:58:29 -0400 Subject: Live Fedora start page proposal In-Reply-To: <1188313239.2186.115.camel@cutter> References: <91fcd7990708280707g4d00ca82q7059f6579c33747@mail.gmail.com> <1188310538.2186.108.camel@cutter> <91fcd7990708280753k1a0c5170ubb9b85ef825913ec@mail.gmail.com> <1188313239.2186.115.camel@cutter> Message-ID: <1188392309.3652.3.camel@localhost.localdomain> On Tue, 2007-08-28 at 11:00 -0400, seth vidal wrote: > On Tue, 2007-08-28 at 10:53 -0400, Donald Fischer wrote: > > > No ulterior motive here; getting our ducks in a row and the prototype > > page set up took longer than we anticipated but I wanted to push to > > make the deadline to try it in Test2 rather than delaying to Test3. > > I wasn't suggesting an ulterior motive. I was more suggesting that last > minute changes like this have gotten us a lot of bad flack before. You > may not remember the 'tracking image' fiasco but it was not much fun. > > > > Not done yet, but there is minimal text to be translated on the start > > page itself and the third party search services that we'd build on are > > widely internationalized. We'd use the regular Fedora documentation > > i18n workflow for the necessary translations, I suppose. > > okay - not sure how this fits in with the translation freeze, though. Docs normally have a different freeze schedule due to release notes requiring attention close to the final release. My main concern is getting this finalized in a form that can actually be processed through our existing toolchain. We've done it for the existing homepage but that document has no HTML form content. We normally start with DocBook XML and the rest is done with CSS styles. I'm sure there's a way to do it, even if it's as hacky as spraying some HTML into the middle of the file after rendering. -- Paul W. Frields, RHCE http://paul.frields.org/ gpg fingerprint: 3DA6 A0AC 6D58 FEC4 0233 5906 ACDB C937 BD11 3717 Fedora Project: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/PaulWFrields irc.freenode.net: stickster @ #fedora-docs, #fedora-devel, #fredlug -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: This is a digitally signed message part URL: From pjones at redhat.com Wed Aug 29 20:12:19 2007 From: pjones at redhat.com (Peter Jones) Date: Wed, 29 Aug 2007 16:12:19 -0400 Subject: [Bug 226377] Merge Review: rpm In-Reply-To: <20070824140147.2f2b91d0@ender> References: <200708240816.l7O8GhMC001124@bugzilla.redhat.com> <1187944054.31667.478.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> <20070824091736.GB5930@puariko.nirvana> <1187952349.31667.508.camel@mccallum.corsepiu.local> <20070824173148.GG11762@puariko.nirvana> <20070824133459.3336f5df@ender> <20070824174648.GJ11762@puariko.nirvana> <20070824135259.7e740931@ender> <1187978654.3439.888.camel@dhcp83-165.boston.redhat.com> <20070824140147.2f2b91d0@ender> Message-ID: <46D5D323.5080100@redhat.com> Jesse Keating wrote: > On Fri, 24 Aug 2007 14:04:14 -0400 > "Tom \"spot\" Callaway" wrote: > >> Even with a separate database, it will overwrite the files on the >> system when rpm5 does an install/update transaction, and the rpm.org >> db (the system database) will not reflect these changes. >> >> BOOM. > > Ah, but that should fall under the noconflicts barrier of inclusion. > They have to make it know to not accept --root / or some such so that > it can't be used to drop packages in the existing file system. If they > can't do that, it can't come in. So we're still in the technical range > without having to get political. This is a rat-hole. That's not something that's reasonably straightforward for it to check. Consider what happens when somebody bind mounts / to /foo and then does "rpm5 --root /foo -Uvh bar.rpm". If you make rpm5 force you to use --root, you still have the same problems. -- Peter From riel at redhat.com Fri Aug 31 13:44:54 2007 From: riel at redhat.com (Rik van Riel) Date: Fri, 31 Aug 2007 09:44:54 -0400 Subject: Live Fedora start page proposal In-Reply-To: <1188322672.27085.5.camel@cutter> References: <91fcd7990708280707g4d00ca82q7059f6579c33747@mail.gmail.com> <46D43A61.9060809@fedoraproject.org> <91fcd7990708280826g78f0f5bal9963709a371acfb7@mail.gmail.com> <604aa7910708281034w32c2a99xc67e1d3bc14b836c@mail.gmail.com> <1188322672.27085.5.camel@cutter> Message-ID: <46D81B56.7000809@redhat.com> seth vidal wrote: > So, something more like "featured open content of the day:...." type of > thing? Maybe also an index of online multimedia streams that Fedora users can access without having to grab extra software from the repository-that-shall-not-be-named ? Maybe we could even use mugshot-like infrastructure to populate the page with user driven content? -- Politics is the struggle between those who want to make their country the best in the world, and those who believe it already is. Each group calls the other unpatriotic. From skvidal at fedoraproject.org Fri Aug 31 14:13:57 2007 From: skvidal at fedoraproject.org (seth vidal) Date: Fri, 31 Aug 2007 10:13:57 -0400 Subject: Live Fedora start page proposal In-Reply-To: <46D81B56.7000809@redhat.com> References: <91fcd7990708280707g4d00ca82q7059f6579c33747@mail.gmail.com> <46D43A61.9060809@fedoraproject.org> <91fcd7990708280826g78f0f5bal9963709a371acfb7@mail.gmail.com> <604aa7910708281034w32c2a99xc67e1d3bc14b836c@mail.gmail.com> <1188322672.27085.5.camel@cutter> <46D81B56.7000809@redhat.com> Message-ID: <1188569637.27085.410.camel@cutter> On Fri, 2007-08-31 at 09:44 -0400, Rik van Riel wrote: > seth vidal wrote: > > > So, something more like "featured open content of the day:...." type of > > thing? > > Maybe also an index of online multimedia streams that Fedora > users can access without having to grab extra software from > the repository-that-shall-not-be-named ? > > Maybe we could even use mugshot-like infrastructure to populate > the page with user driven content? Maybe, I'm thinking the website team should probably determine what's on the page. -sv