From fedora at leemhuis.info Wed Jan 2 14:18:19 2008 From: fedora at leemhuis.info (Thorsten Leemhuis) Date: Wed, 02 Jan 2008 15:18:19 +0100 Subject: permission to use spec files in other projects Message-ID: <477B9D2B.9020708@leemhuis.info> Hi! The topic "permission to use Fedora spec files in other projects" is still on the EPEL agenda, as that's the area where the topic came up. @Board, @FESCo: Any progress on this? The last update on the topic and the discussion didn't solve the problem afaik. What's needed is afaics a official statement like "Spec files from Fedora are licensed as if not otherwise specified in the header of the spec file" from the Board in a official place. Reminder, the problem that needs to be solved: a random person (say: my neighbor who is no Fedora contributer and thus has never heard of or seen the CLA) should be sure that he won't get sued it he takes a SPEC file from the Fedora project, modifies it and publish SRPM build from it. Sure, it sounds a bit like a academic problem (which until now often is ignored), but it nevertheless should be solved IMHO. Cu knurd From matt at domsch.com Wed Jan 2 14:34:07 2008 From: matt at domsch.com (Matt Domsch) Date: Wed, 2 Jan 2008 08:34:07 -0600 Subject: permission to use spec files in other projects In-Reply-To: <477B9D2B.9020708@leemhuis.info> References: <477B9D2B.9020708@leemhuis.info> Message-ID: <20080102143407.GA446@domsch.com> On Wed, Jan 02, 2008 at 03:18:19PM +0100, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote: > Hi! > > The topic "permission to use Fedora spec files in other projects" is > still on the EPEL agenda, as that's the area where the topic came up. > > @Board, @FESCo: Any progress on this? The last update on the topic and > the discussion didn't solve the problem afaik. What's needed is afaics a > official statement like "Spec files from Fedora are licensed as if > not otherwise specified in the header of the spec file" from the Board > in a official place. The Board discussed this, and decided that the spec files need to be licensed in one of two ways: 1) preferred - with the same license as the source code it builds. This is the default unless the spec file specifies otherwise. As every Fedora-acceptable license allows for derivative works, this should satisfy people's needs and obeys the principle of least surprise. 2) less preferred - with a license that is extremely permissive, such as MIT/X11, specified in the spec file itself. Thanks, Matt From rdieter at math.unl.edu Wed Jan 2 14:34:39 2008 From: rdieter at math.unl.edu (Rex Dieter) Date: Wed, 02 Jan 2008 08:34:39 -0600 Subject: permission to use spec files in other projects In-Reply-To: <477B9D2B.9020708@leemhuis.info> References: <477B9D2B.9020708@leemhuis.info> Message-ID: <477BA0FF.4000505@math.unl.edu> Thorsten Leemhuis wrote: > Hi! > > The topic "permission to use Fedora spec files in other projects" is > still on the EPEL agenda, as that's the area where the topic came up. > @Board, @FESCo: Any progress on this? Pardon my ignorance and/or naivety, but isn't this covered by the CLA, clause 2: 2. Contributor Grant of License. You hereby grant to Red Hat, Inc., on behalf of the Project, and to recipients of software distributed by the Project: * (a) a perpetual, non-exclusive, worldwide, fully paid-up, royalty free, irrevocable copyright license to reproduce, prepare derivative works of, publicly display, publicly perform, sublicense, and distribute your Contribution and such derivative works; and, yada yada, basically says (to my own non-lawyer interpretation) that folks can take these fedora-contributed materials and do pretty much whatever. -- Rex From jkeating at redhat.com Wed Jan 2 14:33:40 2008 From: jkeating at redhat.com (Jesse Keating) Date: Wed, 2 Jan 2008 09:33:40 -0500 Subject: permission to use spec files in other projects In-Reply-To: <477BA0FF.4000505@math.unl.edu> References: <477B9D2B.9020708@leemhuis.info> <477BA0FF.4000505@math.unl.edu> Message-ID: <20080102093340.1733e06d@redhat.com> On Wed, 02 Jan 2008 08:34:39 -0600 Rex Dieter wrote: > yada yada, basically says (to my own non-lawyer interpretation) that > folks can take these fedora-contributed materials and do pretty much > whatever. Which is great from the pov of fedora contributed. Alas the side issue here is what to do about re-using in whole or in part specs from other projects that are under a specific license. -- 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 rdieter at math.unl.edu Wed Jan 2 14:40:10 2008 From: rdieter at math.unl.edu (Rex Dieter) Date: Wed, 02 Jan 2008 08:40:10 -0600 Subject: permission to use spec files in other projects In-Reply-To: <20080102093340.1733e06d@redhat.com> References: <477B9D2B.9020708@leemhuis.info> <477BA0FF.4000505@math.unl.edu> <20080102093340.1733e06d@redhat.com> Message-ID: <477BA24A.2060005@math.unl.edu> Jesse Keating wrote: > On Wed, 02 Jan 2008 08:34:39 -0600 > Rex Dieter wrote: > >> yada yada, basically says (to my own non-lawyer interpretation) that >> folks can take these fedora-contributed materials and do pretty much >> whatever. > > Which is great from the pov of fedora contributed. Alas the side issue > here is what to do about re-using in whole or in part specs from other > projects that are under a specific license. Thorsten specifically asked if other projects could use fedora's specs, not the other way around. ?? -- Rex From rdieter at math.unl.edu Wed Jan 2 14:44:00 2008 From: rdieter at math.unl.edu (Rex Dieter) Date: Wed, 02 Jan 2008 08:44:00 -0600 Subject: permission to use spec files in other projects In-Reply-To: <477BA24A.2060005@math.unl.edu> References: <477B9D2B.9020708@leemhuis.info> <477BA0FF.4000505@math.unl.edu> <20080102093340.1733e06d@redhat.com> <477BA24A.2060005@math.unl.edu> Message-ID: <477BA330.5050108@math.unl.edu> Rex Dieter wrote: > Jesse Keating wrote: >> On Wed, 02 Jan 2008 08:34:39 -0600 >> Rex Dieter wrote: >> >>> yada yada, basically says (to my own non-lawyer interpretation) that >>> folks can take these fedora-contributed materials and do pretty much >>> whatever. >> >> Which is great from the pov of fedora contributed. Alas the side issue >> here is what to do about re-using in whole or in part specs from other >> projects that are under a specific license. > > Thorsten specifically asked if other projects could use fedora's specs, > not the other way around. ?? OK, I get it now, ignore me. Move along. :) -- Rex From tcallawa at redhat.com Wed Jan 2 14:42:31 2008 From: tcallawa at redhat.com (Tom "spot" Callaway) Date: Wed, 02 Jan 2008 09:42:31 -0500 Subject: permission to use spec files in other projects In-Reply-To: <477B9D2B.9020708@leemhuis.info> References: <477B9D2B.9020708@leemhuis.info> Message-ID: <1199284951.3610.8.camel@localhost.localdomain> On Wed, 2008-01-02 at 15:18 +0100, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote: > Hi! > > The topic "permission to use Fedora spec files in other projects" is > still on the EPEL agenda, as that's the area where the topic came up. > > @Board, @FESCo: Any progress on this? The last update on the topic and > the discussion didn't solve the problem afaik. What's needed is afaics a > official statement like "Spec files from Fedora are licensed as if > not otherwise specified in the header of the spec file" from the Board > in a official place. > > Reminder, the problem that needs to be solved: a random person (say: my > neighbor who is no Fedora contributer and thus has never heard of or > seen the CLA) should be sure that he won't get sued it he takes a SPEC > file from the Fedora project, modifies it and publish SRPM build from it. > > Sure, it sounds a bit like a academic problem (which until now often is > ignored), but it nevertheless should be solved IMHO. As I've said before, my stance is this: I don't think that the Fedora Board (or FESCo) can supercede the CLA, which states that original contributions without prior license are covered under the CLA. This is because the CLA is a signed agreement explicitly to cover this case. For the Fedora Board to say "all spec files are under the BSD license, unless otherwise specified", it would directly conflict with the CLA. Above and beyond that, I'd throw in the following points: - Most common free/open software licenses aren't really appropriate for spec files. - Even with such a policy in place, the only solidly enforceable way to implement a spec file license is to explicitly list it in the header. - There is the possibility of confusion around the license of the spec file vs the license of the bits contained within the generated SRPM/RPM. ~spot From sundaram at fedoraproject.org Wed Jan 2 14:59:50 2008 From: sundaram at fedoraproject.org (Rahul Sundaram) Date: Wed, 02 Jan 2008 20:29:50 +0530 Subject: permission to use spec files in other projects In-Reply-To: <1199284951.3610.8.camel@localhost.localdomain> References: <477B9D2B.9020708@leemhuis.info> <1199284951.3610.8.camel@localhost.localdomain> Message-ID: <477BA6E6.4030201@fedoraproject.org> Tom "spot" Callaway wrote: > On Wed, 2008-01-02 at 15:18 +0100, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote: >> Hi! >> >> The topic "permission to use Fedora spec files in other projects" is >> still on the EPEL agenda, as that's the area where the topic came up. >> >> @Board, @FESCo: Any progress on this? The last update on the topic and >> the discussion didn't solve the problem afaik. What's needed is afaics a >> official statement like "Spec files from Fedora are licensed as if >> not otherwise specified in the header of the spec file" from the Board >> in a official place. >> >> Reminder, the problem that needs to be solved: a random person (say: my >> neighbor who is no Fedora contributer and thus has never heard of or >> seen the CLA) should be sure that he won't get sued it he takes a SPEC >> file from the Fedora project, modifies it and publish SRPM build from it. >> >> Sure, it sounds a bit like a academic problem (which until now often is >> ignored), but it nevertheless should be solved IMHO. > > As I've said before, my stance is this: > > I don't think that the Fedora Board (or FESCo) can supercede the CLA, > which states that original contributions without prior license are > covered under the CLA. This is because the CLA is a signed agreement > explicitly to cover this case. > > For the Fedora Board to say "all spec files are under the BSD license, > unless otherwise specified", it would directly conflict with the CLA. Red Hat as the copyright holder can do this however IIUC which then can choose to declare the license of the specs under a permissive license via a header on the spec files. Wouldn't that solve this issue? Rahul From rc040203 at freenet.de Wed Jan 2 15:22:24 2008 From: rc040203 at freenet.de (Ralf Corsepius) Date: Wed, 02 Jan 2008 16:22:24 +0100 Subject: permission to use spec files in other projects In-Reply-To: <477BA6E6.4030201@fedoraproject.org> References: <477B9D2B.9020708@leemhuis.info> <1199284951.3610.8.camel@localhost.localdomain> <477BA6E6.4030201@fedoraproject.org> Message-ID: <1199287344.6022.33.camel@beck.corsepiu.local> On Wed, 2008-01-02 at 20:29 +0530, Rahul Sundaram wrote: > Tom "spot" Callaway wrote: > > On Wed, 2008-01-02 at 15:18 +0100, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote: > >> Hi! > >> > >> The topic "permission to use Fedora spec files in other projects" is > >> still on the EPEL agenda, as that's the area where the topic came up. > >> > >> @Board, @FESCo: Any progress on this? The last update on the topic and > >> the discussion didn't solve the problem afaik. What's needed is afaics a > >> official statement like "Spec files from Fedora are licensed as if > >> not otherwise specified in the header of the spec file" from the Board > >> in a official place. > >> > >> Reminder, the problem that needs to be solved: a random person (say: my > >> neighbor who is no Fedora contributer and thus has never heard of or > >> seen the CLA) should be sure that he won't get sued it he takes a SPEC > >> file from the Fedora project, modifies it and publish SRPM build from it. > >> > >> Sure, it sounds a bit like a academic problem (which until now often is > >> ignored), but it nevertheless should be solved IMHO. > > > > As I've said before, my stance is this: > > > > I don't think that the Fedora Board (or FESCo) can supercede the CLA, > > which states that original contributions without prior license are > > covered under the CLA. This is because the CLA is a signed agreement > > explicitly to cover this case. > > > > For the Fedora Board to say "all spec files are under the BSD license, > > unless otherwise specified", it would directly conflict with the CLA. > > Red Hat as the copyright holder Red Hat is not the copyright holder - period. > can do this however IIUC which then can > choose to declare the license of the specs under a permissive license > via a header on the spec files. Wouldn't that solve this issue? > > Rahul > > _______________________________________________ > fedora-advisory-board mailing list > fedora-advisory-board at redhat.com > http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-advisory-board From gdk at redhat.com Wed Jan 2 15:23:03 2008 From: gdk at redhat.com (Greg DeKoenigsberg) Date: Wed, 2 Jan 2008 10:23:03 -0500 (EST) Subject: dormant bugs and our perception In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Mon, 31 Dec 2007, Jon Stanley wrote: > I was triaging old bugs in the FC6 kernel, and got this back form a > reporter. While I agree that a lack of response can be frustrating > to a reporter, I'm not entirely sure what (if anything) we can do > about it.- I'm sending this to marketing-list since it seems to be a > problem for us rather than QA - though probably both, and I'm sure > alot of us are on both. Handling this exact kind of problem is why bug triagers are worth their weight in gold. Because here's the thing: people don't expect all of their bugs to be magically fixed. (Well, some do, but it doesn't make good business sense or good community sense to cater to unreasonable people.) What they *do* expect is for someone to say, "gee, thanks for posting this bug, we'll set the priority accordingly and maybe poke a developer." And we fail pretty miserably at that. Cross-posting to the Fedora advisory board list. Our inability to create and nurture a bug triage community continues to be painful, and our current QA resources within Red Hat continue to be (necessarily) technically focused rather than community focused. This is a problem we need to solve. --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 sundaram at fedoraproject.org Wed Jan 2 15:22:16 2008 From: sundaram at fedoraproject.org (Rahul Sundaram) Date: Wed, 02 Jan 2008 20:52:16 +0530 Subject: permission to use spec files in other projects In-Reply-To: <1199287344.6022.33.camel@beck.corsepiu.local> References: <477B9D2B.9020708@leemhuis.info> <1199284951.3610.8.camel@localhost.localdomain> <477BA6E6.4030201@fedoraproject.org> <1199287344.6022.33.camel@beck.corsepiu.local> Message-ID: <477BAC28.20408@fedoraproject.org> Ralf Corsepius wrote: > On Wed, 2008-01-02 at 20:29 +0530, Rahul Sundaram wrote: >> Tom "spot" Callaway wrote: >>> >>> For the Fedora Board to say "all spec files are under the BSD license, >>> unless otherwise specified", it would directly conflict with the CLA. >> Red Hat as the copyright holder > Red Hat is not the copyright holder - period. The CLA which all contributors have signed certainly does indicate otherwise. http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Legal/Licenses/CLA "2. Contributor Grant of License. You hereby grant to Red Hat, Inc., on behalf of the Project, and to recipients of software distributed by the Project: * (a) a perpetual, non-exclusive, worldwide, fully paid-up, royalty free, irrevocable copyright license to reproduce, prepare derivative works of, publicly display, publicly perform, sublicense, and distribute your Contribution and such derivative works; and, " Rahul From tcallawa at redhat.com Wed Jan 2 15:33:05 2008 From: tcallawa at redhat.com (Tom "spot" Callaway) Date: Wed, 02 Jan 2008 10:33:05 -0500 Subject: permission to use spec files in other projects In-Reply-To: <477BA6E6.4030201@fedoraproject.org> References: <477B9D2B.9020708@leemhuis.info> <1199284951.3610.8.camel@localhost.localdomain> <477BA6E6.4030201@fedoraproject.org> Message-ID: <1199287985.6207.13.camel@localhost.localdomain> On Wed, 2008-01-02 at 20:29 +0530, Rahul Sundaram wrote: > Red Hat as the copyright holder can do this however IIUC which then can > choose to declare the license of the specs under a permissive license > via a header on the spec files. Wouldn't that solve this issue? Well, let me be more clear (and verbose) about this: What the CLA says: 2. Contributor Grant of License. You hereby grant to Red Hat, Inc., on behalf of the Project, and to recipients of software distributed by the Project: * (a) a perpetual, non-exclusive, worldwide, fully paid-up, royalty free, irrevocable copyright license to reproduce, prepare derivative works of, publicly display, publicly perform, sublicense, and distribute your Contribution and such derivative works; and, * (b) a perpetual, non-exclusive, worldwide, fully paid-up, royalty free, irrevocable (subject to Section 3) patent license to make, have made, use, offer to sell, sell, import, and otherwise transfer your Contribution and derivative works thereof, where such license applies only to those patent claims licensable by you that are necessarily infringed by your Contribution alone or by combination of your Contribution with the work to which you submitted the Contribution. Except for the license granted in this section, you reserve all right, title and interest in and to your Contributions. What this means: You're not assigning copyright to Red Hat, you're merely giving them a copyright license that enables them to "reproduce, prepare derivative works of, publicly display, publicly perform, sublicense, and distribute your Contribution and such derivative works". You're also giving these same rights to every recipient of your contribution. Now, Red Hat can sublicense the spec files, but the previously granted rights are still granted. So really, what we'd be able to do is say: /*** The license of all otherwise unlicensed Contributions to Fedora from Fedora Contributors (under the Fedora CLA) is as follows: 1. Recipients of this software have: * (a) a perpetual, non-exclusive, worldwide, fully paid-up, royalty free, irrevocable copyright license to reproduce, prepare derivative works of, publicly display, publicly perform, sublicense, and distribute this Contribution and such derivative works; and, * (b) a perpetual, non-exclusive, worldwide, fully paid-up, royalty free, irrevocable (subject to Section 2) patent license to make, have made, use, offer to sell, sell, import, and otherwise transfer this Contribution and derivative works thereof, where such license applies only to those patent claims licensable by the original Contributor that are necessarily infringed by this Contribution alone or by combination of this Contribution with the work to which the Contributor submitted the Contribution. 2. Reciprocity. As of the date any such litigation is filed, this patent grant shall immediately terminate with respect to any party that institutes patent litigation against the Contributor (including a cross-claim or counterclaim in a lawsuit) alleging that this Contribution, or the work to which the Contributor has contributed, constitutes direct or contributory patent infringement. ***/ Why? Because that's what the CLA says. And we can't take that away by default without invalidating the CLA. As I said before, Red Hat (or anyone receiving a copy) could sublicense the spec file, but anyone wishing to could simply choose to ignore that sublicense and instead use the grants given by the CLA to the work. ~spot From foss.mailinglists at gmail.com Wed Jan 2 15:47:20 2008 From: foss.mailinglists at gmail.com (Sankarshan Mukhopadhyay) Date: Wed, 02 Jan 2008 21:17:20 +0530 Subject: dormant bugs and our perception In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <477BB208.3020001@gmail.com> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Greg DeKoenigsberg wrote: > Cross-posting to the Fedora advisory board list. Our inability to > create and nurture a bug triage community continues to be painful, and > our current QA resources within Red Hat continue to be (necessarily) > technically focused rather than community focused. This is a problem we > need to solve. A QA/BugTriage community or lack thereof is a situation for a large number of FOSS Projects. Which is kind of strange since it provides a relatively practical means to learn about the internals as well as earn developer respect. Perhaps projects along the line of GHOP (not that specifically, but like that) which allow putting such building blocks of knowledge as means to contribute would help. Presentations/workshops specifically don't - Rahul / mether has been doing them on and off but without much uptake ~sankarshan - -- http://www.gutenberg.net - Fine literature digitally re-published http://www.plos.org - Public Library of Science http://www.creativecommons.org - Flexible copyright for creative work -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.7 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Fedora - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFHe7IIXQZpNTcrCzMRAoawAJ42rFXGwHkL8WwCBEvcb9JP1vNlnQCeNK6i hT+jFHeIXNzUSjgOs5wFUrY= =VSkN -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From tburke at redhat.com Wed Jan 2 15:56:37 2008 From: tburke at redhat.com (Tim Burke) Date: Wed, 02 Jan 2008 10:56:37 -0500 Subject: dormant bugs and our perception In-Reply-To: <477BB208.3020001@gmail.com> References: <477BB208.3020001@gmail.com> Message-ID: <477BB435.3050006@redhat.com> Sankarshan Mukhopadhyay wrote: > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > Hash: SHA1 > > Greg DeKoenigsberg wrote: > > >> Cross-posting to the Fedora advisory board list. Our inability to >> create and nurture a bug triage community continues to be painful, and >> our current QA resources within Red Hat continue to be (necessarily) >> technically focused rather than community focused. This is a problem we >> need to solve. >> > > A QA/BugTriage community or lack thereof is a situation for a large > number of FOSS Projects. Which is kind of strange since it provides a > relatively practical means to learn about the internals as well as earn > developer respect. Perhaps projects along the line of GHOP (not that > specifically, but like that) which allow putting such building blocks of > knowledge as means to contribute would help. Presentations/workshops > specifically don't - Rahul / mether has been doing them on and off but > without much uptake > > Is some form of reward or point-based recognition likely to have much impact? From inode0 at gmail.com Wed Jan 2 16:00:47 2008 From: inode0 at gmail.com (inode0) Date: Wed, 2 Jan 2008 10:00:47 -0600 Subject: dormant bugs and our perception In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Jan 2, 2008 9:23 AM, Greg DeKoenigsberg wrote: > On Mon, 31 Dec 2007, Jon Stanley wrote: > > > I was triaging old bugs in the FC6 kernel, and got this back form a > > reporter. While I agree that a lack of response can be frustrating > > to a reporter, I'm not entirely sure what (if anything) we can do > > about it.- I'm sending this to marketing-list since it seems to be a > > problem for us rather than QA - though probably both, and I'm sure > > alot of us are on both. > > Handling this exact kind of problem is why bug triagers are worth their > weight in gold. > > Because here's the thing: people don't expect all of their bugs to be > magically fixed. (Well, some do, but it doesn't make good business sense > or good community sense to cater to unreasonable people.) > > What they *do* expect is for someone to say, "gee, thanks for posting this > bug, we'll set the priority accordingly and maybe poke a developer." And > we fail pretty miserably at that. > > Cross-posting to the Fedora advisory board list. Our inability to create > and nurture a bug triage community continues to be painful, and our > current QA resources within Red Hat continue to be (necessarily) > technically focused rather than community focused. This is a problem we > need to solve. I know ideas are a dime a dozen but here is one idea anyway ... We've been discussing how universities can take a more active role in helping students find suitable open source projects to participate in and ways they can find a fit between their skills and the needs of open source projects elsewhere. I think it would be immensely helpful to those of us at universities who don't have a lot of direct access to students to have one marketing tool available to us ... an eye-catching poster that we could scatter around campus ... perhaps containing a short list of fedora needs that don't require a lot of technical skill and an empty spot where we might add some mentor contact information for anyone interested. John From skvidal at fedoraproject.org Wed Jan 2 16:00:51 2008 From: skvidal at fedoraproject.org (seth vidal) Date: Wed, 02 Jan 2008 11:00:51 -0500 Subject: dormant bugs and our perception In-Reply-To: <477BB435.3050006@redhat.com> References: <477BB208.3020001@gmail.com> <477BB435.3050006@redhat.com> Message-ID: <1199289651.3921.14.camel@cutter> On Wed, 2008-01-02 at 10:56 -0500, Tim Burke wrote: > Sankarshan Mukhopadhyay wrote: > > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > > Hash: SHA1 > > > > Greg DeKoenigsberg wrote: > > > > > >> Cross-posting to the Fedora advisory board list. Our inability to > >> create and nurture a bug triage community continues to be painful, and > >> our current QA resources within Red Hat continue to be (necessarily) > >> technically focused rather than community focused. This is a problem we > >> need to solve. > >> > > > > A QA/BugTriage community or lack thereof is a situation for a large > > number of FOSS Projects. Which is kind of strange since it provides a > > relatively practical means to learn about the internals as well as earn > > developer respect. Perhaps projects along the line of GHOP (not that > > specifically, but like that) which allow putting such building blocks of > > knowledge as means to contribute would help. Presentations/workshops > > specifically don't - Rahul / mether has been doing them on and off but > > without much uptake > > > > > Is some form of reward or point-based recognition likely to have much > impact? > Can we get enough olpc's to give away as rewards? B/c if so we could probably get people coming out of the woodwork. :) -sv From jwboyer at gmail.com Wed Jan 2 16:02:46 2008 From: jwboyer at gmail.com (Josh Boyer) Date: Wed, 2 Jan 2008 10:02:46 -0600 Subject: permission to use spec files in other projects In-Reply-To: <477BAC28.20408@fedoraproject.org> References: <477B9D2B.9020708@leemhuis.info> <1199284951.3610.8.camel@localhost.localdomain> <477BA6E6.4030201@fedoraproject.org> <1199287344.6022.33.camel@beck.corsepiu.local> <477BAC28.20408@fedoraproject.org> Message-ID: <20080102100246.545be530@hansolo.jdub.homelinux.org> On Wed, 02 Jan 2008 20:52:16 +0530 Rahul Sundaram wrote: > Ralf Corsepius wrote: > > On Wed, 2008-01-02 at 20:29 +0530, Rahul Sundaram wrote: > >> Tom "spot" Callaway wrote: > >>> > >>> For the Fedora Board to say "all spec files are under the BSD license, > >>> unless otherwise specified", it would directly conflict with the CLA. > >> Red Hat as the copyright holder > > Red Hat is not the copyright holder - period. > > The CLA which all contributors have signed certainly does indicate > otherwise. No it doesn't. As spot already pointed out, it's giving Red Hat a copyright license. It is not assigning the copyright of the original work to Red Hat. josh From gdk at redhat.com Wed Jan 2 16:04:12 2008 From: gdk at redhat.com (Greg DeKoenigsberg) Date: Wed, 2 Jan 2008 11:04:12 -0500 (EST) Subject: dormant bugs and our perception In-Reply-To: <477BB208.3020001@gmail.com> References: <477BB208.3020001@gmail.com> Message-ID: On Wed, 2 Jan 2008, Sankarshan Mukhopadhyay wrote: > A QA/BugTriage community or lack thereof is a situation for a large > number of FOSS Projects. Which is kind of strange since it provides a > relatively practical means to learn about the internals as well as earn > developer respect. Perhaps projects along the line of GHOP (not that > specifically, but like that) which allow putting such building blocks of > knowledge as means to contribute would help. Presentations/workshops > specifically don't - Rahul / mether has been doing them on and off but > without much uptake Honestly, it's pretty thankless work. What we need is a leader. Someone who wants to step up and say "we will have Fedora bug days every Friday (or whatever) from this time to this time, and I will be in #fedora-qa doing it myself, and teaching everyone else who wants to learn." I would do it, but, um, I'm washing my hair on Fridays. ;) --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 gdk at redhat.com Wed Jan 2 16:07:12 2008 From: gdk at redhat.com (Greg DeKoenigsberg) Date: Wed, 2 Jan 2008 11:07:12 -0500 (EST) Subject: dormant bugs and our perception In-Reply-To: <477BB435.3050006@redhat.com> References: <477BB208.3020001@gmail.com> <477BB435.3050006@redhat.com> Message-ID: On Wed, 2 Jan 2008, Tim Burke wrote: > Is some form of reward or point-based recognition likely to have much > impact? Maybe. GNOME certainly tries this, as does Ubuntu. But Ubuntu's triage situation isn't much better than ours, from what I can tell. First, though, there needs to be someone who says "I Am The Bugmaster For Fedora." If the right leader emerges, the rest would probably follow quite naturally from that, I think. --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 jkeating at redhat.com Wed Jan 2 16:09:52 2008 From: jkeating at redhat.com (Jesse Keating) Date: Wed, 2 Jan 2008 11:09:52 -0500 Subject: dormant bugs and our perception In-Reply-To: References: <477BB208.3020001@gmail.com> Message-ID: <20080102110952.571d82c9@redhat.com> On Wed, 2 Jan 2008 11:04:12 -0500 (EST) Greg DeKoenigsberg wrote: > Honestly, it's pretty thankless work. > > What we need is a leader. Someone who wants to step up and say "we > will have Fedora bug days every Friday (or whatever) from this time > to this time, and I will be in #fedora-qa doing it myself, and > teaching everyone else who wants to learn." > > I would do it, but, um, I'm washing my hair on Fridays. ;) It needs a fulltime person who does nothing but bugzilla. No working on new tools, no testing the releases, none of those other 4 jobs that Will is doing. We need a full time bug person to A) triage and B) coordinate other triaging. -- 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 foss.mailinglists at gmail.com Wed Jan 2 16:09:10 2008 From: foss.mailinglists at gmail.com (Sankarshan Mukhopadhyay) Date: Wed, 02 Jan 2008 21:39:10 +0530 Subject: dormant bugs and our perception In-Reply-To: <1199289651.3921.14.camel@cutter> References: <477BB208.3020001@gmail.com> <477BB435.3050006@redhat.com> <1199289651.3921.14.camel@cutter> Message-ID: <477BB726.9090907@gmail.com> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 seth vidal wrote: > Can we get enough olpc's to give away as rewards? B/c if so we could > probably get people coming out of the woodwork. :) The thing I was planning to write :) ~sankarshan - -- http://www.gutenberg.net - Fine literature digitally re-published http://www.plos.org - Public Library of Science http://www.creativecommons.org - Flexible copyright for creative work -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.7 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Fedora - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFHe7cmXQZpNTcrCzMRAvQyAJ9zYgyzjdwVmnrjyAxybMBwz0ghtgCcDD2u +Ffam1TY2yVeKSUgBZX76lY= =GWKW -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From tibbs at math.uh.edu Wed Jan 2 16:14:48 2008 From: tibbs at math.uh.edu (Jason L Tibbitts III) Date: 02 Jan 2008 10:14:48 -0600 Subject: dormant bugs and our perception In-Reply-To: References: <477BB208.3020001@gmail.com> Message-ID: >>>>> "GD" == Greg DeKoenigsberg writes: GD> I would do it, but, um, I'm washing my hair on Fridays. ;) This is one of the things I wanted to get into once we got the package review queue back down to size after the initial merge review explosion. But the review queue is actually growing these days, so.... - J< From foss.mailinglists at gmail.com Wed Jan 2 16:11:01 2008 From: foss.mailinglists at gmail.com (Sankarshan Mukhopadhyay) Date: Wed, 02 Jan 2008 21:41:01 +0530 Subject: dormant bugs and our perception In-Reply-To: References: <477BB208.3020001@gmail.com> Message-ID: <477BB795.5080508@gmail.com> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Greg DeKoenigsberg wrote: > Honestly, it's pretty thankless work. True. > What we need is a leader. Someone who wants to step up and say "we will > have Fedora bug days every Friday (or whatever) from this time to this > time, and I will be in #fedora-qa doing it myself, and teaching everyone > else who wants to learn." That is a full time job :) and that would perhaps be an uphill task ~sankarshan - -- http://www.gutenberg.net - Fine literature digitally re-published http://www.plos.org - Public Library of Science http://www.creativecommons.org - Flexible copyright for creative work -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.7 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Fedora - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFHe7eVXQZpNTcrCzMRAlyCAJ9p9/7OTkOtPX4/uGnaZwYe6n9okACdHn4z +IHlOGuvQ4R7ltpVa3Aw3Pc= =l855 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From fedora at leemhuis.info Wed Jan 2 16:18:24 2008 From: fedora at leemhuis.info (Thorsten Leemhuis) Date: Wed, 02 Jan 2008 17:18:24 +0100 Subject: permission to use spec files in other projects In-Reply-To: <20080102143407.GA446@domsch.com> References: <477B9D2B.9020708@leemhuis.info> <20080102143407.GA446@domsch.com> Message-ID: <477BB950.9070507@leemhuis.info> On 02.01.2008 15:34, Matt Domsch wrote: > On Wed, Jan 02, 2008 at 03:18:19PM +0100, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote: >> The topic "permission to use Fedora spec files in other projects" is >> still on the EPEL agenda, as that's the area where the topic came up. >> @Board, @FESCo: Any progress on this? The last update on the topic and >> the discussion didn't solve the problem afaik. What's needed is afaics a >> official statement like "Spec files from Fedora are licensed as if >> not otherwise specified in the header of the spec file" from the Board >> in a official place. > The Board discussed this, and decided that the spec files need to be > licensed in one of two ways: > > 1) preferred - with the same license as the source code it builds. > This is the default unless the spec file specifies otherwise. As > every Fedora-acceptable license allows for derivative works, this > should satisfy people's needs and obeys the principle of least > surprise. > > 2) less preferred - with a license that is extremely permissive, such > as MIT/X11, specified in the spec file itself. Okay, but was that written down somewhere in a official place so people can look it up and put in save place when they pick up a spec file from Fedora? Otherwise the decision is of no value. Cu knurd From jrb at redhat.com Wed Jan 2 16:19:32 2008 From: jrb at redhat.com (Jonathan Blandford) Date: Wed, 02 Jan 2008 11:19:32 -0500 Subject: dormant bugs and our perception In-Reply-To: <477BB435.3050006@redhat.com> References: <477BB208.3020001@gmail.com> <477BB435.3050006@redhat.com> Message-ID: <1199290772.2732.12.camel@localhost.localdomain> On Wed, 2008-01-02 at 10:56 -0500, Tim Burke wrote: > Is some form of reward or point-based recognition likely to have much > impact? It seems to have helped the GNOME triaging situation a lot, though that is helped more by having strong community leadership. Thanks, -Jonathan From fedora at leemhuis.info Wed Jan 2 16:23:18 2008 From: fedora at leemhuis.info (Thorsten Leemhuis) Date: Wed, 02 Jan 2008 17:23:18 +0100 Subject: permission to use spec files in other projects In-Reply-To: <477BA0FF.4000505@math.unl.edu> References: <477B9D2B.9020708@leemhuis.info> <477BA0FF.4000505@math.unl.edu> Message-ID: <477BBA76.20206@leemhuis.info> On 02.01.2008 15:34, Rex Dieter wrote: > Thorsten Leemhuis wrote: >> The topic "permission to use Fedora spec files in other projects" is >> still on the EPEL agenda, as that's the area where the topic came up. >> @Board, @FESCo: Any progress on this? > Pardon my ignorance and/or naivety, but isn't this covered by the CLA, > clause 2: > [...] > yada yada, basically says (to my own non-lawyer interpretation) that > folks can take these fedora-contributed materials and do pretty much > whatever. The CLA is signed between contributers and the Fedora Project/Red Hat. it has no meaning for a third party. It's like company A and company B having a contract that all work done by company A which gets submitted to B is bound to that contract. But that has no meaning for a company C that might want to pick up the work from company B. CU knurd From gdk at redhat.com Wed Jan 2 16:29:23 2008 From: gdk at redhat.com (Greg DeKoenigsberg) Date: Wed, 2 Jan 2008 11:29:23 -0500 (EST) Subject: dormant bugs and our perception In-Reply-To: <1199290772.2732.12.camel@localhost.localdomain> References: <477BB208.3020001@gmail.com> <477BB435.3050006@redhat.com> <1199290772.2732.12.camel@localhost.localdomain> Message-ID: On Wed, 2 Jan 2008, Jonathan Blandford wrote: > On Wed, 2008-01-02 at 10:56 -0500, Tim Burke wrote: > >> Is some form of reward or point-based recognition likely to have much >> impact? > > It seems to have helped the GNOME triaging situation a lot, though that > is helped more by having strong community leadership. And since Luis was adamant about going back to law school, instead of taking the prestigious Fedora bugmastering job... :) --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 tcallawa at redhat.com Wed Jan 2 16:28:17 2008 From: tcallawa at redhat.com (Tom "spot" Callaway) Date: Wed, 02 Jan 2008 11:28:17 -0500 Subject: permission to use spec files in other projects In-Reply-To: <477BBA76.20206@leemhuis.info> References: <477B9D2B.9020708@leemhuis.info> <477BA0FF.4000505@math.unl.edu> <477BBA76.20206@leemhuis.info> Message-ID: <477BBBA1.3020405@redhat.com> Thorsten Leemhuis wrote: > On 02.01.2008 15:34, Rex Dieter wrote: > >> Thorsten Leemhuis wrote: >> >>> The topic "permission to use Fedora spec files in other projects" is >>> still on the EPEL agenda, as that's the area where the topic came up. >>> @Board, @FESCo: Any progress on this? >>> >> Pardon my ignorance and/or naivety, but isn't this covered by the CLA, >> clause 2: >> [...] >> yada yada, basically says (to my own non-lawyer interpretation) that >> folks can take these fedora-contributed materials and do pretty much >> whatever. >> > > The CLA is signed between contributers and the Fedora Project/Red Hat. > it has no meaning for a third party. > Except, the CLA explicitly defines the license for Fedora contributions, for Red Hat and all recipients of Fedora. In that context, it has meaning for third parties. ~spot From fedora at leemhuis.info Wed Jan 2 16:39:01 2008 From: fedora at leemhuis.info (Thorsten Leemhuis) Date: Wed, 02 Jan 2008 17:39:01 +0100 Subject: permission to use spec files in other projects In-Reply-To: <1199287985.6207.13.camel@localhost.localdomain> References: <477B9D2B.9020708@leemhuis.info> <1199284951.3610.8.camel@localhost.localdomain> <477BA6E6.4030201@fedoraproject.org> <1199287985.6207.13.camel@localhost.localdomain> Message-ID: <477BBE25.4040906@leemhuis.info> On 02.01.2008 16:33, Tom "spot" Callaway wrote: > On Wed, 2008-01-02 at 20:29 +0530, Rahul Sundaram wrote: > >> Red Hat as the copyright holder can do this however IIUC which then can >> choose to declare the license of the specs under a permissive license >> via a header on the spec files. Wouldn't that solve this issue? > > Well, let me be more clear (and verbose) about this: > What the CLA says: > [...] > Now, Red Hat can sublicense the spec files, but the previously granted > rights are still granted. So really, what we'd be able to do is say: > > /*** > > The license of all otherwise unlicensed Contributions to Fedora from > Fedora Contributors (under the Fedora CLA) is as follows: > [...] > ***/ > > Why? Because that's what the CLA says. And we can't take that away by > default without invalidating the CLA. +1 -- And alternative would be: ask the Fedora contributers to specify the license of their spec file. > As I said before, Red Hat (or > anyone receiving a copy) could sublicense the spec file, but anyone > wishing to could simply choose to ignore that sublicense and instead use > the grants given by the CLA to the work. Correct me if I'm wrong, but the CLA doesn't give 3rd partys that get Software from Fedora any rights as the CLA is a contract between Contributers and Fedora/Red Hat. Thus if my neighbor gets spec files from Fedora then he can't know if what he got is bound to the CLA. Further: Is there a single CLA? Beside cla_fedora there are other groups in the accounts system -- cla_dell, cla_ibm and cla_redhat. Outsiders or I don't know how the CLA looks that members of that groups signed. What really confuses me: Our own package review guidelines say: "SHOULD: If the source package does not include license text(s) as a separate file from upstream, the packager SHOULD query upstream to include it.". Why don't we obey out own rules and clearly specify what the code (spec files in this case) we release is licensed as (that is the reasons for that rule afaics). CU knurd From fedora at leemhuis.info Wed Jan 2 16:46:56 2008 From: fedora at leemhuis.info (Thorsten Leemhuis) Date: Wed, 02 Jan 2008 17:46:56 +0100 Subject: permission to use spec files in other projects In-Reply-To: <477BBBA1.3020405@redhat.com> References: <477B9D2B.9020708@leemhuis.info> <477BA0FF.4000505@math.unl.edu> <477BBA76.20206@leemhuis.info> <477BBBA1.3020405@redhat.com> Message-ID: <477BC000.10103@leemhuis.info> On 02.01.2008 17:28, Tom "spot" Callaway wrote: > Thorsten Leemhuis wrote: >> On 02.01.2008 15:34, Rex Dieter wrote: >>> Thorsten Leemhuis wrote: >>>> The topic "permission to use Fedora spec files in other projects" is >>>> still on the EPEL agenda, as that's the area where the topic came up. >>>> @Board, @FESCo: Any progress on this? >>> Pardon my ignorance and/or naivety, but isn't this covered by the CLA, >>> clause 2: >>> [...] >>> yada yada, basically says (to my own non-lawyer interpretation) that >>> folks can take these fedora-contributed materials and do pretty much >>> whatever. >> The CLA is signed between contributers and the Fedora Project/Red Hat. >> it has no meaning for a third party. > Except, the CLA explicitly defines the license for Fedora contributions, > for Red Hat and all recipients of Fedora. How should a 3rd party know that and be sure about it? Is that written down somewhere? Cu knurd From tcallawa at redhat.com Wed Jan 2 16:48:56 2008 From: tcallawa at redhat.com (Tom "spot" Callaway) Date: Wed, 02 Jan 2008 11:48:56 -0500 Subject: permission to use spec files in other projects In-Reply-To: <477BC000.10103@leemhuis.info> References: <477B9D2B.9020708@leemhuis.info> <477BA0FF.4000505@math.unl.edu> <477BBA76.20206@leemhuis.info> <477BBBA1.3020405@redhat.com> <477BC000.10103@leemhuis.info> Message-ID: <477BC078.7080200@redhat.com> Thorsten Leemhuis wrote: > On 02.01.2008 17:28, Tom "spot" Callaway wrote: >> Thorsten Leemhuis wrote: >>> On 02.01.2008 15:34, Rex Dieter wrote: >>>> Thorsten Leemhuis wrote: >>>>> The topic "permission to use Fedora spec files in other projects" is >>>>> still on the EPEL agenda, as that's the area where the topic came up. >>>>> @Board, @FESCo: Any progress on this? >>>> Pardon my ignorance and/or naivety, but isn't this covered by the CLA, >>>> clause 2: >>>> [...] >>>> yada yada, basically says (to my own non-lawyer interpretation) that >>>> folks can take these fedora-contributed materials and do pretty much >>>> whatever. >>> The CLA is signed between contributers and the Fedora Project/Red Hat. >>> it has no meaning for a third party. >> Except, the CLA explicitly defines the license for Fedora contributions, >> for Red Hat and all recipients of Fedora. > > How should a 3rd party know that and be sure about it? Is that written > down somewhere? Only in the CLA, which is admittedly, less than ideal. The best case (at least, from a legal perspective), is to have the CLA license grant included in every otherwise unlicensed spec file. The next best thing is a reference URL to the CLA license grant included in every otherwise unlicensed spec file. The third best thing is simply having a mention to the CLA license grant on the wiki (seems like a good fit for an addendum to the Licensing page). ~spot From tcallawa at redhat.com Wed Jan 2 16:51:19 2008 From: tcallawa at redhat.com (Tom "spot" Callaway) Date: Wed, 02 Jan 2008 11:51:19 -0500 Subject: permission to use spec files in other projects In-Reply-To: <477BBE25.4040906@leemhuis.info> References: <477B9D2B.9020708@leemhuis.info> <1199284951.3610.8.camel@localhost.localdomain> <477BA6E6.4030201@fedoraproject.org> <1199287985.6207.13.camel@localhost.localdomain> <477BBE25.4040906@leemhuis.info> Message-ID: <477BC107.3070006@redhat.com> Thorsten Leemhuis wrote: > Correct me if I'm wrong, but the CLA doesn't give 3rd partys that get > Software from Fedora any rights as the CLA is a contract between > Contributers and Fedora/Red Hat. Thus if my neighbor gets spec files > from Fedora then he can't know if what he got is bound to the CLA. You're wrong. :) Even though the CLA is a contract between contributors and Fedora, it explicitly grants rights to Red Hat _and_ all recipients of the Contributed works (aka Fedora). To me, this seems like more of a documentation issue, and less of a "the license on spec files is now FOO" issue, since the CLA already has that covered. ~spot From fedora at leemhuis.info Wed Jan 2 17:09:24 2008 From: fedora at leemhuis.info (Thorsten Leemhuis) Date: Wed, 02 Jan 2008 18:09:24 +0100 Subject: permission to use spec files in other projects In-Reply-To: <477BC107.3070006@redhat.com> References: <477B9D2B.9020708@leemhuis.info> <1199284951.3610.8.camel@localhost.localdomain> <477BA6E6.4030201@fedoraproject.org> <1199287985.6207.13.camel@localhost.localdomain> <477BBE25.4040906@leemhuis.info> <477BC107.3070006@redhat.com> Message-ID: <477BC544.6050300@leemhuis.info> On 02.01.2008 17:51, Tom "spot" Callaway wrote: > Thorsten Leemhuis wrote: > >> Correct me if I'm wrong, but the CLA doesn't give 3rd partys that get >> Software from Fedora any rights as the CLA is a contract between >> Contributers and Fedora/Red Hat. Thus if my neighbor gets spec files >> from Fedora then he can't know if what he got is bound to the CLA. > You're wrong. :) I think you still didn't get my point ;) > Even though the CLA is a contract between contributors and Fedora, it > explicitly grants rights to Red Hat _and_ all recipients of the > Contributed works (aka Fedora). Sure, but I can't know if the all work I get from Fedora was submitted by someone that signed the CLA. For you that might be obvious, but for outsiders it's not, thus they can't rely on it. > To me, this seems like more of a documentation issue, [...] +1 Cu knurd From jspaleta at gmail.com Wed Jan 2 17:46:43 2008 From: jspaleta at gmail.com (Jeff Spaleta) Date: Wed, 2 Jan 2008 08:46:43 -0900 Subject: dormant bugs and our perception In-Reply-To: References: <477BB208.3020001@gmail.com> <477BB435.3050006@redhat.com> <1199290772.2732.12.camel@localhost.localdomain> Message-ID: <604aa7910801020946yfadc802hd5a2b8545424a558@mail.gmail.com> On Jan 2, 2008 7:29 AM, Greg DeKoenigsberg wrote: > And since Luis was adamant about going back to law school, instead of > taking the prestigious Fedora bugmastering job... :) So... how..where.. do we advertise and recruit for a volunteer leadership position that we all agree we need (and one that none of the usual suspects wants to do?) What completely unrealistic promises do I need to make to get someone to do this position for 6 months? If I promised them a one of a kind t-shirt would that help? Sort of like the Tour De France Gold Jersey? We hand out a gold bugmaster t-shirt every 6 months to someone brave enough to take the lead in that area for that period of time? Can we commit to giving the bug master significant billing in the release notes for the release coming out at the end of his/her 6 month tenure? -jef"Don't look at me I tried to do that job back during FC1,2 and like all good middle management I've succeeded by failing upward"spaleta From kwade at redhat.com Wed Jan 2 17:48:21 2008 From: kwade at redhat.com (Karsten Wade) Date: Wed, 02 Jan 2008 09:48:21 -0800 Subject: permission to use spec files in other projects In-Reply-To: <1199284951.3610.8.camel@localhost.localdomain> References: <477B9D2B.9020708@leemhuis.info> <1199284951.3610.8.camel@localhost.localdomain> Message-ID: <1199296101.8565.26.camel@erato.phig.org> On Wed, 2008-01-02 at 09:42 -0500, Tom "spot" Callaway wrote: > I don't think that the Fedora Board (or FESCo) can supercede the CLA, > which states that original contributions without prior license are > covered under the CLA. This is because the CLA is a signed agreement > explicitly to cover this case. +1 Since the topic under question is clearly covered by the CLA, any other statement that stands alone or interprets the CLA for the general public would be like the Board/FESCo giving legal advice. If someone doesn't feel that the CLA covers their spec file needs, they need to hire their own attorney for legal advice. What we could consider is making the CLA much more prominent, pointing to it as the mortar that holds Fedora together. Let people then go figure out for themselves how that CLA applies to their own legal and contributory questions. After last year's FUDCon, I took the task of writing an interpretation of the CLA in plainer language. When I took it to Legal, the reply was clear -- we do not need to provide a second, duplicate document that covers the same content as the CLA. It would be like providing legal interpretation for the world. If we want to make the CLA more clear, let's request changes to the document itself, not create a special interpretive document. - Karsten -- Karsten Wade, Developer Community Mgr. Dev Fu : http://developer.redhatmagazine.com Fedora : http://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 gdk at redhat.com Wed Jan 2 17:53:38 2008 From: gdk at redhat.com (Greg DeKoenigsberg) Date: Wed, 2 Jan 2008 12:53:38 -0500 (EST) Subject: dormant bugs and our perception In-Reply-To: <604aa7910801020946yfadc802hd5a2b8545424a558@mail.gmail.com> References: <477BB208.3020001@gmail.com> <477BB435.3050006@redhat.com> <1199290772.2732.12.camel@localhost.localdomain> <604aa7910801020946yfadc802hd5a2b8545424a558@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: On Wed, 2 Jan 2008, Jeff Spaleta wrote: > On Jan 2, 2008 7:29 AM, Greg DeKoenigsberg wrote: >> And since Luis was adamant about going back to law school, instead of >> taking the prestigious Fedora bugmastering job... :) > > So... how..where.. do we advertise and recruit for a volunteer > leadership position that we all agree we need (and one that none of the > usual suspects wants to do?) > > What completely unrealistic promises do I need to make to get someone > to do this position for 6 months? Well, here's the truth, as I see it. This may or may not be an inducement, and may need to be wordsmithed, but I think it's correct: Some positions at Red Hat don't materialize until the community proves their value -- and then the chief deliverer of said value says "I'll stop delivering all this value if you don't hire me." Bugmastery is probably the *perfect* example of this kind of position. > If I promised them a one of a kind t-shirt would that help? Sort of > like the Tour De France Gold Jersey? We hand out a gold bugmaster > t-shirt every 6 months to someone brave enough to take the lead in > that area for that period of time? See the world. A free trip to every FUDCon worldwide to speak and recruit. > Can we commit to giving the bug master significant billing in the > release notes for the release coming out at the end of his/her 6 month > tenure? Sure. --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 sopwith at gmail.com Wed Jan 2 20:25:14 2008 From: sopwith at gmail.com (Elliot Lee) Date: Wed, 2 Jan 2008 12:25:14 -0800 Subject: dormant bugs and our perception In-Reply-To: References: <477BB208.3020001@gmail.com> Message-ID: On Jan 2, 2008 8:04 AM, Greg DeKoenigsberg wrote: > Honestly, it's pretty thankless work. > > What we need is a leader. Someone who wants to step up and say "we will > have Fedora bug days every Friday (or whatever) from this time to this > time, and I will be in #fedora-qa doing it myself, and teaching everyone > else who wants to learn." > > I would do it, but, um, I'm washing my hair on Fridays. ;) I think this is the heart of the problem (not the washing hair, the thankless work bit...) The only person I can recall who was ever a Rock Star Bug Triager was Kjartan Maraas for GNOME, and I think he did it out of dedication rather than sheer enjoyment, because he had the talent to work on a lot of other stuff as well. So there's a situation where some valuable work needs to be done, but it's a big task, and nobody really enjoys doing it. Here are some ideas: . Make sure that it's only a lack of motivation that is keeping people from contributing, and not a perceived lack of opportunity, resources, or knowledge. . Fix incentives. Maybe it means point system for rewarding people, maybe it means free FUDcon trips, maybe it means improved recognition, maybe it means hiring someone. . Figure out what part of triaging /is/ enjoyable, and articulate it well in a call for contributors. . Divide & conquer. Maybe you can't get five people working steadily on bug triaging, but you might be able to get fifty Fedora contributors triaging one bug per person per week. If you could write a piece of infrastructure that decided which bugs needed triaging, it'd be easy enough to have that infrastructure send an e-mail out once a week to those fifty people ("Greg, Please triage bug #45678") and track who was actually doing their part. You may want to wash your hair on Fridays, but don't tell me you wouldn't be willing to triage one bug a week...? Hope this helps, -- Elliot From gdk at redhat.com Wed Jan 2 20:39:01 2008 From: gdk at redhat.com (Greg DeKoenigsberg) Date: Wed, 2 Jan 2008 15:39:01 -0500 (EST) Subject: dormant bugs and our perception In-Reply-To: References: <477BB208.3020001@gmail.com> Message-ID: On Wed, 2 Jan 2008, Elliot Lee wrote: > . Divide & conquer. Maybe you can't get five people working steadily on > bug triaging, but you might be able to get fifty Fedora contributors > triaging one bug per person per week. If you could write a piece of > infrastructure that decided which bugs needed triaging, it'd be easy > enough to have that infrastructure send an e-mail out once a week to > those fifty people ("Greg, Please triage bug #45678") and track who was > actually doing their part. You may want to wash your hair on Fridays, > but don't tell me you wouldn't be willing to triage one bug a week...? You have no idea how important my hair is to me, dude. --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 katzj at redhat.com Wed Jan 2 21:07:00 2008 From: katzj at redhat.com (Jeremy Katz) Date: Wed, 02 Jan 2008 16:07:00 -0500 Subject: dormant bugs and our perception In-Reply-To: References: <477BB208.3020001@gmail.com> Message-ID: <1199308020.26788.3.camel@erebor.boston.redhat.com> On Wed, 2008-01-02 at 12:25 -0800, Elliot Lee wrote: > . Divide & conquer. Maybe you can't get five people working steadily > on bug triaging, but you might be able to get fifty Fedora > contributors triaging one bug per person per week. If you could write > a piece of infrastructure that decided which bugs needed triaging, > it'd be easy enough to have that infrastructure send an e-mail out > once a week to those fifty people ("Greg, Please triage bug #45678") > and track who was actually doing their part. You may want to wash your > hair on Fridays, but don't tell me you wouldn't be willing to triage > one bug a week...? One problem with this is that there tend to be a fair number of duplicate bugs filed. So fifty people triaging one bug a piece means that they don't catch those duplicates and treat them as such. Instead, they seem them as fifty separate bug reports. One big and important part of triaging is looking at the patterns which appear when you look at larger numbers of bugs. Both from the point of view of effectively handling issues as well as from the perspective of being able to provide information to developers as to what areas need work Jeremy From gdk at redhat.com Wed Jan 2 21:11:56 2008 From: gdk at redhat.com (Greg DeKoenigsberg) Date: Wed, 2 Jan 2008 16:11:56 -0500 (EST) Subject: dormant bugs and our perception In-Reply-To: <1199308020.26788.3.camel@erebor.boston.redhat.com> References: <477BB208.3020001@gmail.com> <1199308020.26788.3.camel@erebor.boston.redhat.com> Message-ID: On Wed, 2 Jan 2008, Jeremy Katz wrote: > One problem with this is that there tend to be a fair number of > duplicate bugs filed. So fifty people triaging one bug a piece means > that they don't catch those duplicates and treat them as such. Instead, > they seem them as fifty separate bug reports. > > One big and important part of triaging is looking at the patterns which > appear when you look at larger numbers of bugs. Both from the point of > view of effectively handling issues as well as from the perspective of > being able to provide information to developers as to what areas need > work Yep. I agree with the divide-and-conquer sentiment, but see more value in dividing and conquering components. Like, say, have a person or a group who handle triaging NetworkManager bugs. Establish areas of strength, and then expand from there. --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 Wed Jan 2 21:18:17 2008 From: skvidal at fedoraproject.org (seth vidal) Date: Wed, 02 Jan 2008 16:18:17 -0500 Subject: dormant bugs and our perception In-Reply-To: References: <477BB208.3020001@gmail.com> <1199308020.26788.3.camel@erebor.boston.redhat.com> Message-ID: <1199308697.3921.36.camel@cutter> On Wed, 2008-01-02 at 16:11 -0500, Greg DeKoenigsberg wrote: > On Wed, 2 Jan 2008, Jeremy Katz wrote: > > > One problem with this is that there tend to be a fair number of > > duplicate bugs filed. So fifty people triaging one bug a piece means > > that they don't catch those duplicates and treat them as such. Instead, > > they seem them as fifty separate bug reports. > > > > One big and important part of triaging is looking at the patterns which > > appear when you look at larger numbers of bugs. Both from the point of > > view of effectively handling issues as well as from the perspective of > > being able to provide information to developers as to what areas need > > work > > Yep. I agree with the divide-and-conquer sentiment, but see more value in > dividing and conquering components. Like, say, have a person or a group > who handle triaging NetworkManager bugs. Establish areas of strength, and > then expand from there. also worth noting for future reference - while bugzilla is a fine interface (sort of) this is really easy for looking at bugs which are /new/needinfo/etc: http://bugz.fedoraproject.org/[name-of-package] -sv From jonstanley at gmail.com Wed Jan 2 21:32:04 2008 From: jonstanley at gmail.com (Jon Stanley) Date: Wed, 2 Jan 2008 15:32:04 -0600 Subject: dormant bugs and our perception In-Reply-To: <1199308020.26788.3.camel@erebor.boston.redhat.com> References: <477BB208.3020001@gmail.com> <1199308020.26788.3.camel@erebor.boston.redhat.com> Message-ID: On Jan 2, 2008 3:07 PM, Jeremy Katz wrote: > One problem with this is that there tend to be a fair number of > duplicate bugs filed. So fifty people triaging one bug a piece means > that they don't catch those duplicates and treat them as such. Instead, > they seem them as fifty separate bug reports. I've seen you do this on pirut bugs. I'm starting to get a handle on interpreting those tracebacks for ya and dup'ing as necessary :). I've been meaning to contact you about that. since pirut bugs seems to be commonly filed and mostly duplicates (or not pirut and some underlying yum/yum plugin issue). > > One big and important part of triaging is looking at the patterns which > appear when you look at larger numbers of bugs. Both from the point of > view of effectively handling issues as well as from the perspective of > being able to provide information to developers as to what areas need > work Agreed. From jonstanley at gmail.com Wed Jan 2 21:37:03 2008 From: jonstanley at gmail.com (Jon Stanley) Date: Wed, 2 Jan 2008 15:37:03 -0600 Subject: dormant bugs and our perception In-Reply-To: <1199308697.3921.36.camel@cutter> References: <477BB208.3020001@gmail.com> <1199308020.26788.3.camel@erebor.boston.redhat.com> <1199308697.3921.36.camel@cutter> Message-ID: On Jan 2, 2008 3:18 PM, seth vidal wrote: > also worth noting for future reference - while bugzilla is a fine > interface (sort of) this is really easy for looking at bugs which > are /new/needinfo/etc: > > http://bugz.fedoraproject.org/[name-of-package] I had no idea. This isn't documented anywhere on the triage page, so I've got my own HTML form to do pretty much the same thing. I'll throw this up there. From smooge at gmail.com Wed Jan 2 21:45:11 2008 From: smooge at gmail.com (Stephen John Smoogen) Date: Wed, 2 Jan 2008 14:45:11 -0700 Subject: permission to use spec files in other projects In-Reply-To: <1199296101.8565.26.camel@erato.phig.org> References: <477B9D2B.9020708@leemhuis.info> <1199284951.3610.8.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1199296101.8565.26.camel@erato.phig.org> Message-ID: <80d7e4090801021345v31ce124fs2951366daaef85a6@mail.gmail.com> On Jan 2, 2008 10:48 AM, Karsten Wade wrote: > On Wed, 2008-01-02 at 09:42 -0500, Tom "spot" Callaway wrote: > > > I don't think that the Fedora Board (or FESCo) can supercede the CLA, > > which states that original contributions without prior license are > > covered under the CLA. This is because the CLA is a signed agreement > > explicitly to cover this case. > > +1 > > Since the topic under question is clearly covered by the CLA, any other > statement that stands alone or interprets the CLA for the general public > would be like the Board/FESCo giving legal advice. > > If someone doesn't feel that the CLA covers their spec file needs, they > need to hire their own attorney for legal advice. > > What we could consider is making the CLA much more prominent, pointing > to it as the mortar that holds Fedora together. Let people then go > figure out for themselves how that CLA applies to their own legal and > contributory questions. > > After last year's FUDCon, I took the task of writing an interpretation > of the CLA in plainer language. When I took it to Legal, the reply was > clear -- we do not need to provide a second, duplicate document that > covers the same content as the CLA. It would be like providing legal > interpretation for the world. If we want to make the CLA more clear, > let's request changes to the document itself, not create a special > interpretive document. > Agree. I think that any clarifications should try to make the core document clearer. The goal should be readability and clarity. The one thing that should be asked from Legal is if the license needs to be listed in part or in whole in the SPEC file. From my point of view, the SPEC file is not much different from a Python script or Makefile to create a finished package. Who owns the copyright of the SPEC file, and what is the usage license of that 'code' is important for some people. Requiring that this is clear inside the SPEC would be useful. Should this go to the main advisory board or the FESCO? -- Stephen J Smoogen. -- CSIRT/Linux System Administrator How far that little candle throws his beams! So shines a good deed in a naughty world. = Shakespeare. "The Merchant of Venice" From jonstanley at gmail.com Wed Jan 2 21:54:18 2008 From: jonstanley at gmail.com (Jon Stanley) Date: Wed, 2 Jan 2008 15:54:18 -0600 Subject: dormant bugs and our perception In-Reply-To: References: <477BB208.3020001@gmail.com> Message-ID: On Jan 2, 2008 2:25 PM, Elliot Lee wrote: > > What we need is a leader. Someone who wants to step up and say "we will > > have Fedora bug days every Friday (or whatever) from this time to this > > time, and I will be in #fedora-qa doing it myself, and teaching everyone > > else who wants to learn." Joined fedora-advisory-board late (after this was cross-posted from fedora-marketing where I started the thread), so I'm not sure who originally wrote this, but this is what I'm volunteering myself to do. Fedora is not $DAYJOB for me, and I can't spend much time on it (depending on workload). In the evenings and on weekends however, sign me up! I'll teach anyone who wants to know what I know, and hope that others will do the same. > I hink this is the heart of the problem (not the washing hair, the > thankless work bit...) The only person I can recall who was ever a > Rock Star Bug Triager was Kjartan Maraas for GNOME, and I think he did > it out of dedication rather than sheer enjoyment, because he had the > talent to work on a lot of other stuff as well. Well, I'm not much of a developer (unless you count shell script-fu - then I'm a ninja), however I think that I've got what it takes to triage - an interest in doing it, time, and not really caring that it's a thankless job - most of what we do is, but it does have an impact. > . Fix incentives. Maybe it means point system for rewarding people, > maybe it means free FUDcon trips, maybe it means improved recognition, > maybe it means hiring someone. If it would help I was thinking of trying to make my way to FUDcon Raleigh to further this cause - I think it may be premature, though. I live in NYC, so airfare is cheap still. > . Figure out what part of triaging /is/ enjoyable, and articulate it > well in a call for contributors. Hmm, good question - the good feeling that you're making a difference? :P > . Divide & conquer. Maybe you can't get five people working steadily > on bug triaging, but you might be able to get fifty Fedora > contributors triaging one bug per person per week. If you could write > a piece of infrastructure that decided which bugs needed triaging, > it'd be easy enough to have that infrastructure send an e-mail out > once a week to those fifty people ("Greg, Please triage bug #45678") > and track who was actually doing their part. You may want to wash your > hair on Fridays, but don't tell me you wouldn't be willing to triage > one bug a week...? I think we can use bugzilla here. All bugs begin life in the NEW state. Perhaps if we just set them to ASSIGNED after triaging, and alter the definition of that state, or maybe add a new state like UNCONFIRMED like mozilla.org has. Other suggestions welcome. From poelstra at redhat.com Wed Jan 2 22:14:23 2008 From: poelstra at redhat.com (John Poelstra) Date: Wed, 02 Jan 2008 14:14:23 -0800 Subject: dormant bugs and our perception In-Reply-To: References: <477BB208.3020001@gmail.com> Message-ID: <477C0CBF.8010800@redhat.com> Jon Stanley said the following on 01/02/2008 01:54 PM Pacific Time: > If it would help I was thinking of trying to make my way to FUDcon > Raleigh to further this cause - I think it may be premature, though. > I live in NYC, so airfare is cheap still. > Yes! Please come to FUDCon. I am planning on being there and have been ruminating for a while on how to make this area work better. I am also working on a proposal[1] for a bugzilla process flow and policy to cover how the Fedora project triages and resolves open bugs for: 1) unsupported releases--Fedora(Core) <= 6 2) supported releases--Fedora 7 & 8 3) releases under development--rawhide/Fedora 9 Unlike others that have posted here, I am less optimistic that we can viably review and address all 13,000+ open bugs. We need to do something drastic to clear the deck and start a process that insures that we don't end up in this hole again. I think this huge backlog is one of the biggest psychological de-motivators we have! In other words, we need to create a solid plan with input from lots of people and then execute it. FUDCon would be a great place to get started.... not sure if this is a hackfest or barcamp topic. John [1] I'll post to the wiki and announce once I have something of substance. Most likely not until next week. From jspaleta at gmail.com Wed Jan 2 22:24:49 2008 From: jspaleta at gmail.com (Jeff Spaleta) Date: Wed, 2 Jan 2008 13:24:49 -0900 Subject: dormant bugs and our perception In-Reply-To: <477C0CBF.8010800@redhat.com> References: <477BB208.3020001@gmail.com> <477C0CBF.8010800@redhat.com> Message-ID: <604aa7910801021424q7f3f9921m91921e5f1d32a405@mail.gmail.com> On Jan 2, 2008 1:14 PM, John Poelstra wrote: > Unlike others that have posted here, I am less optimistic that we can > viably review and address all 13,000+ open bugs. We need to do > something drastic to clear the deck and start a process that insures > that we don't end up in this hole again. I think this huge backlog is > one of the biggest psychological de-motivators we have! I think you are right about clearing the deck as part of a re-launch for a triaging inititive. I also think that now that we have bodhi and the bugs interfaces to compliment what we have in bugzilla we have more to work with in terms of workflow flexibility for different groups of people (users,developers,triagers). Is there a way to possibly group bugs by SIG? So we can have specific triagers associated with SIGs. triagers as a group are a team, but then they also act as a liaison to each SIG which controls the packaging and development of related of packages. That way SIGs might advertise their triager role to new contributors as a starting point, but make a commitment to mentoring those people so that in 6 months those people move on to handling more advanced roles in the SIG such as package maintainer, and new triagers are found for the entry level position. -jef From smooge at gmail.com Wed Jan 2 23:02:05 2008 From: smooge at gmail.com (Stephen John Smoogen) Date: Wed, 2 Jan 2008 16:02:05 -0700 Subject: dormant bugs and our perception In-Reply-To: <477C0CBF.8010800@redhat.com> References: <477BB208.3020001@gmail.com> <477C0CBF.8010800@redhat.com> Message-ID: <80d7e4090801021502n3ba69272secabf7176a2be6d9@mail.gmail.com> On Jan 2, 2008 3:14 PM, John Poelstra wrote: > Jon Stanley said the following on 01/02/2008 01:54 PM Pacific Time: > > If it would help I was thinking of trying to make my way to FUDcon > > Raleigh to further this cause - I think it may be premature, though. > > I live in NYC, so airfare is cheap still. > > > > Yes! Please come to FUDCon. I am planning on being there and have been > ruminating for a while on how to make this area work better. I am also > working on a proposal[1] for a bugzilla process flow and policy to cover > how the Fedora project triages and resolves open bugs for: > 1) unsupported releases--Fedora(Core) <= 6 > 2) supported releases--Fedora 7 & 8 > 3) releases under development--rawhide/Fedora 9 > > Unlike others that have posted here, I am less optimistic that we can > viably review and address all 13,000+ open bugs. We need to do > something drastic to clear the deck and start a process that insures > that we don't end up in this hole again. I think this huge backlog is > one of the biggest psychological de-motivators we have! > Well from seeing multiple clearing of the decks.. they don't really help long enough because they will rapidly show up again. QA is a big job with needing 2x as many QA people as developers. The problem is that its not sexy as being a developer and doesn't get the perks. It is also a full time job because you have to do 3 things 1) Get in the head of the bug-reporter. What were they doing? How did the bug occur? How do I get that person to send me more info to get this cleared up. 2) Get in the head of the developer. Why did they code it this way? How do I get that developer to fix the code.. 3) Be able to do this cleanly, precisely and repeatably. You want QA people, you need to get a community with definate rewards for triaging and helping to fix code, you need someone charismatic (I'm out .. I am as charismatic as 9 day old pea soup... actually I think the mold on top would get more people to work than me) to help kick start it, and you need full time people not a person. And you need to be able to train people how to triage and fix bugs... because most of us who have done or do QA have really only learned from the school of hardknocks and only when we were paid to listen to angry/tired/cranky users, and angry/tired/divorced-from-reality developers. QA work is probably the most important work involved in keeping a distro together long term. It is also some of the hardest work and the least rewarded because well who sees it? I wish I could get to FUDcon but its way out of the way so beyond some sort of VOIP.. I can only come via IRC/email. > In other words, we need to create a solid plan with input from lots of > people and then execute it. FUDCon would be a great place to get > started.... not sure if this is a hackfest or barcamp topic. > > John > > [1] I'll post to the wiki and announce once I have something of > substance. Most likely not until next week. > > > _______________________________________________ > fedora-advisory-board mailing list > fedora-advisory-board at redhat.com > http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-advisory-board > -- Stephen J Smoogen. -- CSIRT/Linux System Administrator How far that little candle throws his beams! So shines a good deed in a naughty world. = Shakespeare. "The Merchant of Venice" From jspaleta at gmail.com Wed Jan 2 23:52:31 2008 From: jspaleta at gmail.com (Jeff Spaleta) Date: Wed, 2 Jan 2008 14:52:31 -0900 Subject: dormant bugs and our perception In-Reply-To: <80d7e4090801021502n3ba69272secabf7176a2be6d9@mail.gmail.com> References: <477BB208.3020001@gmail.com> <477C0CBF.8010800@redhat.com> <80d7e4090801021502n3ba69272secabf7176a2be6d9@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <604aa7910801021552l797b80bfjc1d798b73bb9191e@mail.gmail.com> On Jan 2, 2008 2:02 PM, Stephen John Smoogen wrote: > I wish I could get to FUDcon but its way out of the way so beyond some > sort of VOIP.. I can only come via IRC/email. Let's assume the FUDCon discussion happens where there is reasonable wireless access. If I had my T60 laptop present would it be possible for me to setup ekiga such that you could at least get worthwhile two-way audio going so you could yell at people? -jef From lmacken at redhat.com Thu Jan 3 02:25:03 2008 From: lmacken at redhat.com (Luke Macken) Date: Wed, 2 Jan 2008 21:25:03 -0500 Subject: dormant bugs and our perception In-Reply-To: <604aa7910801021424q7f3f9921m91921e5f1d32a405@mail.gmail.com> References: <477BB208.3020001@gmail.com> <477C0CBF.8010800@redhat.com> <604aa7910801021424q7f3f9921m91921e5f1d32a405@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <20080103022503.GH20620@crow.redhat.com> On Wed, Jan 02, 2008 at 01:24:49PM -0900, Jeff Spaleta wrote: > On Jan 2, 2008 1:14 PM, John Poelstra wrote: > > Unlike others that have posted here, I am less optimistic that we can > > viably review and address all 13,000+ open bugs. We need to do > > something drastic to clear the deck and start a process that insures > > that we don't end up in this hole again. I think this huge backlog is > > one of the biggest psychological de-motivators we have! > > I think you are right about clearing the deck as part of a re-launch > for a triaging inititive. > > I also think that now that we have bodhi and the bugs interfaces to > compliment what we have in bugzilla we have more to work with in terms > of workflow flexibility for different groups of people > (users,developers,triagers). > > Is there a way to possibly group bugs by SIG? So we can have specific > triagers associated with SIGs. triagers as a group are a team, but > then they also act as a liaison to each SIG which controls the > packaging and development of related of packages. That way SIGs might > advertise their triager role to new contributors as a starting point, > but make a commitment to mentoring those people so that in 6 months > those people move on to handling more advanced roles in the SIG such > as package maintainer, and new triagers are found for the entry level > position. For those who haven't realized it yet: Fedora development does not scale. This won't change until we move away from our 1-to-1/1-to-many package maintainership model. IMO, we need groups of people maintaining groups of packages. SIGs are a nice idea in theory, but have yet to be fully wielded. A great example of this concept in action can be found within the gentoo community[0] AFAIK, we have a few groups of maintainers that handle bugs, ie: {anaconda,kernel,gecko}-maint, but I'm unaware of any policy/procedures behind them. Having these groups per-SIG would definitely help get more eyes on our bugs, especially if we can allow for these sub-communities to thrive. It also sounds like Will's QA Beats[1] have the same general idea behind it. Instead of encapsulating people at the bugzilla/QA level, why not form these groups at the distro-level, to allow for team-based: packaging, bug triaging, QA, docs, etc.. ? Thoughts? luke [0]: http://www.gentoo.org/proj/en/metastructure/herds/ [1]: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA/Beats -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: not available URL: From jonstanley at gmail.com Thu Jan 3 03:11:35 2008 From: jonstanley at gmail.com (Jon Stanley) Date: Wed, 2 Jan 2008 22:11:35 -0500 Subject: dormant bugs and our perception In-Reply-To: <477C0CBF.8010800@redhat.com> References: <477BB208.3020001@gmail.com> <477C0CBF.8010800@redhat.com> Message-ID: On Jan 2, 2008 5:14 PM, John Poelstra wrote: > In other words, we need to create a solid plan with input from lots of > people and then execute it. FUDCon would be a great place to get > started.... not sure if this is a hackfest or barcamp topic. I didn't reply to all on this, just to John - sorry! Probably both. A barcamp topic to come up with a policy, and a hackfest topic to begin execution. I just 'reserved' a flight, for the whole of $139, I just need to make sure that $BOSS is cool with me taking next Friday off (or a half-day, since my flight is 4:40 - I figured no point in being there for the Friday hackfest since we wouldn't have made up our minds yet :) ). Minor logistical problem - I'm from NYC and don't have a driver's license. A cab from the airport to the hotel is cool, but what about transportation from the hotel to RH? Is there a shuttle or something? From caillon at redhat.com Thu Jan 3 03:49:22 2008 From: caillon at redhat.com (Christopher Aillon) Date: Thu, 03 Jan 2008 04:49:22 +0100 Subject: dormant bugs and our perception In-Reply-To: <477BB435.3050006@redhat.com> References: <477BB208.3020001@gmail.com> <477BB435.3050006@redhat.com> Message-ID: <477C5B42.5010205@redhat.com> On 01/02/2008 04:56 PM, Tim Burke wrote: > Is some form of reward or point-based recognition likely to have much > impact? Yes. One of the big reasons Mozilla has a big triage base is in part the reward, IMO. They pick out new people to the project who are doing great work with triaging or whatever and send them a shirt. It makes people feel warm fuzzies, and gives them an incentive to continue working. Plus, they will probably tell friends about how cool we are. From caillon at redhat.com Thu Jan 3 03:52:25 2008 From: caillon at redhat.com (Christopher Aillon) Date: Thu, 03 Jan 2008 04:52:25 +0100 Subject: dormant bugs and our perception In-Reply-To: <604aa7910801020946yfadc802hd5a2b8545424a558@mail.gmail.com> References: <477BB208.3020001@gmail.com> <477BB435.3050006@redhat.com> <1199290772.2732.12.camel@localhost.localdomain> <604aa7910801020946yfadc802hd5a2b8545424a558@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <477C5BF9.9050109@redhat.com> On 01/02/2008 06:46 PM, Jeff Spaleta wrote: > On Jan 2, 2008 7:29 AM, Greg DeKoenigsberg wrote: >> And since Luis was adamant about going back to law school, instead of >> taking the prestigious Fedora bugmastering job... :) > > So... how..where.. do we advertise and recruit for a volunteer > leadership position that we all agree we need (and one that none of > the usual suspects wants to do?) > > What completely unrealistic promises do I need to make to get someone > to do this position for 6 months? I'm not sure we need to find one person to do the job for any length of time. We just need to find several people willing to do it at all. Someone will emerge out of it. Mozilla and Asa Dotzler is probably a great case study here. From caillon at redhat.com Thu Jan 3 03:54:29 2008 From: caillon at redhat.com (Christopher Aillon) Date: Thu, 03 Jan 2008 04:54:29 +0100 Subject: dormant bugs and our perception In-Reply-To: <20080102110952.571d82c9@redhat.com> References: <477BB208.3020001@gmail.com> <20080102110952.571d82c9@redhat.com> Message-ID: <477C5C75.7050302@redhat.com> On 01/02/2008 05:09 PM, Jesse Keating wrote: > It needs a fulltime person who does nothing but bugzilla. No working > on new tools, no testing the releases, none of those other 4 jobs that > Will is doing. We need a full time bug person to A) triage and B) > coordinate other triaging. And we will probably need to pay them. Either after we identify someone from the community after trying to foster things properly, or by just putting out an advert now, and hoping we find someone good. From caillon at redhat.com Thu Jan 3 03:58:01 2008 From: caillon at redhat.com (Christopher Aillon) Date: Thu, 03 Jan 2008 04:58:01 +0100 Subject: dormant bugs and our perception In-Reply-To: <1199308020.26788.3.camel@erebor.boston.redhat.com> References: <477BB208.3020001@gmail.com> <1199308020.26788.3.camel@erebor.boston.redhat.com> Message-ID: <477C5D49.1070408@redhat.com> On 01/02/2008 10:07 PM, Jeremy Katz wrote: > One problem with this is that there tend to be a fair number of > duplicate bugs filed. So fifty people triaging one bug a piece means > that they don't catch those duplicates and treat them as such. Instead, > they seem them as fifty separate bug reports. > Part of being a triager is knowing how to search for dupes. If we need to train or write better docs, so be it. Bugs in the Moz community are typically duped within minutes of filing by one of their many triagers, or confirmed and they move on. If several people do end up looking at a bug, no big deal, as they now know of an issue that people are having and can easily refer back to it. From caillon at redhat.com Thu Jan 3 03:59:29 2008 From: caillon at redhat.com (Christopher Aillon) Date: Thu, 03 Jan 2008 04:59:29 +0100 Subject: dormant bugs and our perception In-Reply-To: <1199308697.3921.36.camel@cutter> References: <477BB208.3020001@gmail.com> <1199308020.26788.3.camel@erebor.boston.redhat.com> <1199308697.3921.36.camel@cutter> Message-ID: <477C5DA1.5020602@redhat.com> On 01/02/2008 10:18 PM, seth vidal wrote: > http://bugz.fedoraproject.org/[name-of-package] Awesome. This probably deserves a (re-?)blog. From caillon at redhat.com Thu Jan 3 04:02:19 2008 From: caillon at redhat.com (Christopher Aillon) Date: Thu, 03 Jan 2008 05:02:19 +0100 Subject: dormant bugs and our perception In-Reply-To: References: <477BB208.3020001@gmail.com> Message-ID: <477C5E4B.6060707@redhat.com> On 01/02/2008 10:54 PM, Jon Stanley wrote: > Well, I'm not much of a developer (unless you count shell script-fu - > then I'm a ninja), however I think that I've got what it takes to > triage - an interest in doing it, time, and not really caring that > it's a thankless job - most of what we do is, but it does have an > impact. If you're serious, then that's totally awesome. I hope to bugzilla-daemon mentioning you lots :-) From caillon at redhat.com Thu Jan 3 04:05:04 2008 From: caillon at redhat.com (Christopher Aillon) Date: Thu, 03 Jan 2008 05:05:04 +0100 Subject: dormant bugs and our perception In-Reply-To: <604aa7910801021424q7f3f9921m91921e5f1d32a405@mail.gmail.com> References: <477BB208.3020001@gmail.com> <477C0CBF.8010800@redhat.com> <604aa7910801021424q7f3f9921m91921e5f1d32a405@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <477C5EF0.2020003@redhat.com> On 01/02/2008 11:24 PM, Jeff Spaleta wrote: > On Jan 2, 2008 1:14 PM, John Poelstra wrote: >> Unlike others that have posted here, I am less optimistic that we can >> viably review and address all 13,000+ open bugs. We need to do >> something drastic to clear the deck and start a process that insures >> that we don't end up in this hole again. I think this huge backlog is >> one of the biggest psychological de-motivators we have! > > I think you are right about clearing the deck as part of a re-launch > for a triaging inititive. How about setting up a bugzilla.fedoraproject.org? From jonstanley at gmail.com Thu Jan 3 04:12:39 2008 From: jonstanley at gmail.com (Jon Stanley) Date: Wed, 2 Jan 2008 23:12:39 -0500 Subject: dormant bugs and our perception In-Reply-To: <477C5E4B.6060707@redhat.com> References: <477BB208.3020001@gmail.com> <477C5E4B.6060707@redhat.com> Message-ID: On 1/2/08, Christopher Aillon wrote: > If you're serious, then that's totally awesome. I hope to > bugzilla-daemon mentioning you lots :-) I'm quite serious. I have no experience in this sort of thing, but we're all here to learn, right? My background is actually in architecture design and sysadmin type stuff. However, I'm more than willing to do this - I've been using Linux for over 10 years off and on, and professionally for the past 5 or so. I've just need to clear with my boss taking part of next Friday off, and I'll be at FUDcon next weekend, and we can start hashing this out. I've already put a session on teh wiki about it, and figure that we can use the Sunday hackfest to actually start doing. I'm entirely willing to step up to this job - not the most glamarous one in the world, but certaintly high-impact. Note that I'll not be able to devote an FTE's worth of time to it, there is $DAYJOB still. However my free time (note I'm single and have no pets, etc :) ) can be devoted to this. Gives me a good cause to work on. From caillon at redhat.com Thu Jan 3 04:16:42 2008 From: caillon at redhat.com (Christopher Aillon) Date: Thu, 03 Jan 2008 05:16:42 +0100 Subject: dormant bugs and our perception In-Reply-To: References: <477BB208.3020001@gmail.com> <477C5E4B.6060707@redhat.com> Message-ID: <477C61AA.8060902@redhat.com> On 01/03/2008 05:12 AM, Jon Stanley wrote: > On 1/2/08, Christopher Aillon wrote: > >> If you're serious, then that's totally awesome. I hope to >> bugzilla-daemon mentioning you lots :-) > > I'm quite serious. I have no experience in this sort of thing, but > we're all here to learn, right? My background is actually in > architecture design and sysadmin type stuff. However, I'm more than > willing to do this - I've been using Linux for over 10 years off and > on, and professionally for the past 5 or so. > > I've just need to clear with my boss taking part of next Friday off, > and I'll be at FUDcon next weekend, and we can start hashing this out. > I've already put a session on teh wiki about it, and figure that we > can use the Sunday hackfest to actually start doing. > > I'm entirely willing to step up to this job - not the most glamarous > one in the world, but certaintly high-impact. Note that I'll not be > able to devote an FTE's worth of time to it, there is $DAYJOB still. > However my free time (note I'm single and have no pets, etc :) ) can > be devoted to this. Gives me a good cause to work on. If you need any help or what not, feel free to hop on IRC and ping me or anyone else then. May also wish to talk to Matej Cepl, who is doing the triaging thing for some of the desktoppy things though he could use some help. It could at least be a good starting point. From jonstanley at gmail.com Thu Jan 3 04:33:37 2008 From: jonstanley at gmail.com (Jon Stanley) Date: Wed, 2 Jan 2008 23:33:37 -0500 Subject: dormant bugs and our perception In-Reply-To: <477C61AA.8060902@redhat.com> References: <477BB208.3020001@gmail.com> <477C5E4B.6060707@redhat.com> <477C61AA.8060902@redhat.com> Message-ID: On Jan 2, 2008 11:16 PM, Christopher Aillon wrote: > If you need any help or what not, feel free to hop on IRC and ping me or > anyone else then. May also wish to talk to Matej Cepl, who is doing the Forgot to mention your nick. I'm jds2001 :) From poelstra at redhat.com Thu Jan 3 04:34:05 2008 From: poelstra at redhat.com (John Poelstra) Date: Wed, 02 Jan 2008 20:34:05 -0800 Subject: dormant bugs and our perception In-Reply-To: <477C5EF0.2020003@redhat.com> References: <477BB208.3020001@gmail.com> <477C0CBF.8010800@redhat.com> <604aa7910801021424q7f3f9921m91921e5f1d32a405@mail.gmail.com> <477C5EF0.2020003@redhat.com> Message-ID: <477C65BD.2050607@redhat.com> Christopher Aillon said the following on 01/02/2008 08:05 PM Pacific Time: > On 01/02/2008 11:24 PM, Jeff Spaleta wrote: >> On Jan 2, 2008 1:14 PM, John Poelstra wrote: >>> Unlike others that have posted here, I am less optimistic that we can >>> viably review and address all 13,000+ open bugs. We need to do >>> something drastic to clear the deck and start a process that insures >>> that we don't end up in this hole again. I think this huge backlog is >>> one of the biggest psychological de-motivators we have! >> >> I think you are right about clearing the deck as part of a re-launch >> for a triaging inititive. > > How about setting up a bugzilla.fedoraproject.org? > What would it be for? John From inode0 at gmail.com Thu Jan 3 04:35:20 2008 From: inode0 at gmail.com (inode0) Date: Wed, 2 Jan 2008 22:35:20 -0600 Subject: dormant bugs and our perception In-Reply-To: <477C61AA.8060902@redhat.com> References: <477BB208.3020001@gmail.com> <477C5E4B.6060707@redhat.com> <477C61AA.8060902@redhat.com> Message-ID: On Jan 2, 2008 10:16 PM, Christopher Aillon wrote: > On 01/03/2008 05:12 AM, Jon Stanley wrote: > > I'm entirely willing to step up to this job - not the most glamarous > > one in the world, but certaintly high-impact. Note that I'll not be > > able to devote an FTE's worth of time to it, there is $DAYJOB still. > > However my free time (note I'm single and have no pets, etc :) ) can > > be devoted to this. Gives me a good cause to work on. > > If you need any help or what not, feel free to hop on IRC and ping me or > anyone else then. May also wish to talk to Matej Cepl, who is doing the > triaging thing for some of the desktoppy things though he could use some > help. It could at least be a good starting point. For those of you who don't know Jon well yet, my advice is give him a helping hand and let him run with this. I am confident you'll be happy with the result. John From caillon at redhat.com Thu Jan 3 04:37:10 2008 From: caillon at redhat.com (Christopher Aillon) Date: Thu, 03 Jan 2008 05:37:10 +0100 Subject: dormant bugs and our perception In-Reply-To: <477C65BD.2050607@redhat.com> References: <477BB208.3020001@gmail.com> <477C0CBF.8010800@redhat.com> <604aa7910801021424q7f3f9921m91921e5f1d32a405@mail.gmail.com> <477C5EF0.2020003@redhat.com> <477C65BD.2050607@redhat.com> Message-ID: <477C6676.4090400@redhat.com> On 01/03/2008 05:34 AM, John Poelstra wrote: >>> I think you are right about clearing the deck as part of a re-launch >>> for a triaging inititive. >> >> How about setting up a bugzilla.fedoraproject.org? >> > > What would it be for? > A way to clear the deck. A way to keep RH bugs separate from Fedora bugs A way to further the idea that Fedora is different from RH From caillon at redhat.com Thu Jan 3 04:37:47 2008 From: caillon at redhat.com (Christopher Aillon) Date: Thu, 03 Jan 2008 05:37:47 +0100 Subject: dormant bugs and our perception In-Reply-To: References: <477BB208.3020001@gmail.com> <477C5E4B.6060707@redhat.com> <477C61AA.8060902@redhat.com> Message-ID: <477C669B.8080707@redhat.com> On 01/03/2008 05:33 AM, Jon Stanley wrote: > On Jan 2, 2008 11:16 PM, Christopher Aillon wrote: > >> If you need any help or what not, feel free to hop on IRC and ping me or >> anyone else then. May also wish to talk to Matej Cepl, who is doing the > > Forgot to mention your nick. I'm jds2001 :) > caillon. And Matej is mcepl. From poelstra at redhat.com Thu Jan 3 05:17:08 2008 From: poelstra at redhat.com (John Poelstra) Date: Wed, 02 Jan 2008 21:17:08 -0800 Subject: dormant bugs and our perception In-Reply-To: <477C6676.4090400@redhat.com> References: <477BB208.3020001@gmail.com> <477C0CBF.8010800@redhat.com> <604aa7910801021424q7f3f9921m91921e5f1d32a405@mail.gmail.com> <477C5EF0.2020003@redhat.com> <477C65BD.2050607@redhat.com> <477C6676.4090400@redhat.com> Message-ID: <477C6FD4.2080509@redhat.com> Christopher Aillon said the following on 01/02/2008 08:37 PM Pacific Time: > On 01/03/2008 05:34 AM, John Poelstra wrote: >>>> I think you are right about clearing the deck as part of a re-launch >>>> for a triaging inititive. >>> >>> How about setting up a bugzilla.fedoraproject.org? >>> >> >> What would it be for? >> > > A way to clear the deck. > A way to keep RH bugs separate from Fedora bugs > A way to further the idea that Fedora is different from RH Oh, a separate bugzilla instance... then we would have to juggle both instances for a while? That doesn't address the problem at hand and I think creates more problems then we want to deal with now. It also affects integration with RHEL. http://poelcat.wordpress.com/2007/09/06/a-separate-fedora-bugzilla-instance/ Maybe someday that will be a good idea, but considering we cannot coordinate bug triage well right now I think it is a bad idea to complicate the situation by a factor of 10. John From skvidal at fedoraproject.org Thu Jan 3 05:21:16 2008 From: skvidal at fedoraproject.org (seth vidal) Date: Thu, 03 Jan 2008 00:21:16 -0500 Subject: dormant bugs and our perception In-Reply-To: <477C5DA1.5020602@redhat.com> References: <477BB208.3020001@gmail.com> <1199308020.26788.3.camel@erebor.boston.redhat.com> <1199308697.3921.36.camel@cutter> <477C5DA1.5020602@redhat.com> Message-ID: <1199337676.3921.59.camel@cutter> On Thu, 2008-01-03 at 04:59 +0100, Christopher Aillon wrote: > On 01/02/2008 10:18 PM, seth vidal wrote: > > http://bugz.fedoraproject.org/[name-of-package] > > Awesome. This probably deserves a (re-?)blog. > done. :) -sv From sundaram at fedoraproject.org Thu Jan 3 15:27:15 2008 From: sundaram at fedoraproject.org (Rahul Sundaram) Date: Thu, 03 Jan 2008 20:57:15 +0530 Subject: dormant bugs and our perception In-Reply-To: <477C6676.4090400@redhat.com> References: <477BB208.3020001@gmail.com> <477C0CBF.8010800@redhat.com> <604aa7910801021424q7f3f9921m91921e5f1d32a405@mail.gmail.com> <477C5EF0.2020003@redhat.com> <477C65BD.2050607@redhat.com> <477C6676.4090400@redhat.com> Message-ID: <477CFED3.7070706@fedoraproject.org> Christopher Aillon wrote: > On 01/03/2008 05:34 AM, John Poelstra wrote: >>>> I think you are right about clearing the deck as part of a re-launch >>>> for a triaging inititive. >>> >>> How about setting up a bugzilla.fedoraproject.org? >>> >> >> What would it be for? >> > > A way to clear the deck. > A way to keep RH bugs separate from Fedora bugs > A way to further the idea that Fedora is different from RH The fact that bugz.fp.o is separate instead of being part of bugzilla to me, indicates that we have a problem. Rahul From tibbs at math.uh.edu Thu Jan 3 15:40:15 2008 From: tibbs at math.uh.edu (Jason L Tibbitts III) Date: 03 Jan 2008 09:40:15 -0600 Subject: dormant bugs and our perception In-Reply-To: <477CFED3.7070706@fedoraproject.org> References: <477BB208.3020001@gmail.com> <477C0CBF.8010800@redhat.com> <604aa7910801021424q7f3f9921m91921e5f1d32a405@mail.gmail.com> <477C5EF0.2020003@redhat.com> <477C65BD.2050607@redhat.com> <477C6676.4090400@redhat.com> <477CFED3.7070706@fedoraproject.org> Message-ID: >>>>> "RS" == Rahul Sundaram writes: RS> The fact that bugz.fp.o is separate instead of being part of RS> bugzilla to me, indicates that we have a problem. I'm having trouble understanding how a quick interface to a few set queries is a problem. Surely it's a good thing that bugzilla lets us do this. - J< From sundaram at fedoraproject.org Thu Jan 3 15:35:40 2008 From: sundaram at fedoraproject.org (Rahul Sundaram) Date: Thu, 03 Jan 2008 21:05:40 +0530 Subject: dormant bugs and our perception In-Reply-To: References: <477BB208.3020001@gmail.com> <477C0CBF.8010800@redhat.com> <604aa7910801021424q7f3f9921m91921e5f1d32a405@mail.gmail.com> <477C5EF0.2020003@redhat.com> <477C65BD.2050607@redhat.com> <477C6676.4090400@redhat.com> <477CFED3.7070706@fedoraproject.org> Message-ID: <477D00CC.70206@fedoraproject.org> Jason L Tibbitts III wrote: >>>>>> "RS" == Rahul Sundaram writes: > > RS> The fact that bugz.fp.o is separate instead of being part of > RS> bugzilla to me, indicates that we have a problem. > > I'm having trouble understanding how a quick interface to a few set > queries is a problem. Surely it's a good thing that bugzilla lets us > do this. Enhancements like this should be part of bugzilla and not a separate interface. http://bugzilla.redhat.com/rpm can be modified to do this. The reason why we don't it is because pretty much nobody in Fedora has access to that bugzilla instance to make improvements that benefit Fedora. Rahul From foss.mailinglists at gmail.com Thu Jan 3 15:48:47 2008 From: foss.mailinglists at gmail.com (Sankarshan Mukhopadhyay) Date: Thu, 03 Jan 2008 21:18:47 +0530 Subject: dormant bugs and our perception In-Reply-To: <477D00CC.70206@fedoraproject.org> References: <477BB208.3020001@gmail.com> <477C0CBF.8010800@redhat.com> <604aa7910801021424q7f3f9921m91921e5f1d32a405@mail.gmail.com> <477C5EF0.2020003@redhat.com> <477C65BD.2050607@redhat.com> <477C6676.4090400@redhat.com> <477CFED3.7070706@fedoraproject.org> <477D00CC.70206@fedoraproject.org> Message-ID: <477D03DF.2050603@gmail.com> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Rahul Sundaram wrote: > Enhancements like this should be part of bugzilla and not a separate > interface. http://bugzilla.redhat.com/rpm can be modified to do this. > The reason why we don't it is because pretty much nobody in Fedora has > access to that bugzilla instance to make improvements that benefit Fedora. Can this be spun-off into a separate thread ? We seem to be discussing two distinct but equally pertinent things here: [i] the lack of a community around Bug Triage and [ii] the extent to which Fedora/Fedora Infrastructure can tinker with Bugzilla to empower and enhance the culture of collaboration ~sankarshan - -- http://www.gutenberg.net - Fine literature digitally re-published http://www.plos.org - Public Library of Science http://www.creativecommons.org - Flexible copyright for creative work -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.7 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Fedora - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFHfQPfXQZpNTcrCzMRAo4EAKDIqcS/ZdzQvb3EemeOrF2OIWo56wCfeori q5Wyks/c3UN/4rGiJwbaGxw= =gh9J -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From jwboyer at gmail.com Thu Jan 3 16:11:41 2008 From: jwboyer at gmail.com (Josh Boyer) Date: Thu, 3 Jan 2008 10:11:41 -0600 Subject: dormant bugs and our perception In-Reply-To: <477D00CC.70206@fedoraproject.org> References: <477BB208.3020001@gmail.com> <477C0CBF.8010800@redhat.com> <604aa7910801021424q7f3f9921m91921e5f1d32a405@mail.gmail.com> <477C5EF0.2020003@redhat.com> <477C65BD.2050607@redhat.com> <477C6676.4090400@redhat.com> <477CFED3.7070706@fedoraproject.org> <477D00CC.70206@fedoraproject.org> Message-ID: <20080103101141.3f8c166b@vader.jdub.homelinux.org> On Thu, 03 Jan 2008 21:05:40 +0530 Rahul Sundaram wrote: > Jason L Tibbitts III wrote: > >>>>>> "RS" == Rahul Sundaram writes: > > > > RS> The fact that bugz.fp.o is separate instead of being part of > > RS> bugzilla to me, indicates that we have a problem. > > > > I'm having trouble understanding how a quick interface to a few set > > queries is a problem. Surely it's a good thing that bugzilla lets us > > do this. > > Enhancements like this should be part of bugzilla and not a separate > interface. http://bugzilla.redhat.com/rpm can be modified to do this. > The reason why we don't it is because pretty much nobody in Fedora has > access to that bugzilla instance to make improvements that benefit Fedora. That's not specific to bugzilla and generally will not change unless Fedora does not use Red Hat IS. Frankly, I don't see a problem. It's an enhancement that Fedora can control, while still reaping the benefits of using the Red Hat bugzilla instance. josh From poelstra at redhat.com Thu Jan 3 16:25:45 2008 From: poelstra at redhat.com (John Poelstra) Date: Thu, 03 Jan 2008 08:25:45 -0800 Subject: Fedora Bugzilla Instance (was dormant bugs and our perception) Message-ID: <477D0C89.3030708@redhat.com> Rahul Sundaram said the following on 01/03/2008 07:35 AM Pacific Time: > Jason L Tibbitts III wrote: >>>>>>> "RS" == Rahul Sundaram writes: >> >> RS> The fact that bugz.fp.o is separate instead of being part of >> RS> bugzilla to me, indicates that we have a problem. >> >> I'm having trouble understanding how a quick interface to a few set >> queries is a problem. Surely it's a good thing that bugzilla lets us >> do this. > > Enhancements like this should be part of bugzilla and not a separate > interface. http://bugzilla.redhat.com/rpm can be modified to do this. > The reason why we don't it is because pretty much nobody in Fedora has > access to that bugzilla instance to make improvements that benefit Fedora. > > Rahul First someone needs to come up with a *compelling* business case for *why* a separate bugzilla instance would truly make things better for Fedora. This is way more complicated than creating a new bugzilla instance so it can be customized by the community. While that might be one "benefit" I don't think it outweighs all the factors that would go into performing the migration and then maintaining it--I think people underestimate how time consuming that would be. And, if you skipped the data migration, would it really be more efficient to work in two bugzilla instances for a year or more until all of the supported releases were EOL? Not that this couldn't be done in the future, but I don't think it makes sense any time soon. If creating addons is an area of interest why couldn't they be proposed as a patch to Red Hat's bugzilla? Internally a project team has been collecting requirements for the next update of bugzilla to be based on bugzilla 3.0. When I asked Will Woods if there were any special requirements needed by Fedora he said there were not. If there are special changes needed for Fedora someone should start a discussion on fedora-devel or get a wiki page going to collect the requirements. John From sundaram at fedoraproject.org Thu Jan 3 16:19:15 2008 From: sundaram at fedoraproject.org (Rahul Sundaram) Date: Thu, 03 Jan 2008 21:49:15 +0530 Subject: dormant bugs and our perception In-Reply-To: <20080103101141.3f8c166b@vader.jdub.homelinux.org> References: <477BB208.3020001@gmail.com> <477C0CBF.8010800@redhat.com> <604aa7910801021424q7f3f9921m91921e5f1d32a405@mail.gmail.com> <477C5EF0.2020003@redhat.com> <477C65BD.2050607@redhat.com> <477C6676.4090400@redhat.com> <477CFED3.7070706@fedoraproject.org> <477D00CC.70206@fedoraproject.org> <20080103101141.3f8c166b@vader.jdub.homelinux.org> Message-ID: <477D0B03.9070804@fedoraproject.org> Josh Boyer wrote: > That's not specific to bugzilla and generally will not change unless > Fedora does not use Red Hat IS. It probably shouldn't then unless we can find a way to have community members get access to make any improvements necessary. > Frankly, I don't see a problem. It's an enhancement that Fedora can > control, while still reaping the benefits of using the Red Hat bugzilla > instance. You can't continue to work around this in many cases though. For example, having a GNOME bugzilla like points system or several other similar things which benefit triaging should be made to the bugzilla instance directly and if those requirements clash with other Red Hat products listed in bugzilla, they are likely to just not get done. Rahul From sundaram at fedoraproject.org Thu Jan 3 16:47:13 2008 From: sundaram at fedoraproject.org (Rahul Sundaram) Date: Thu, 03 Jan 2008 22:17:13 +0530 Subject: Fedora Bugzilla Instance (was dormant bugs and our perception) In-Reply-To: <477D0C89.3030708@redhat.com> References: <477D0C89.3030708@redhat.com> Message-ID: <477D1191.4090107@fedoraproject.org> John Poelstra wrote: > First someone needs to come up with a *compelling* business case for > *why* a separate bugzilla instance would truly make things better for > Fedora. This is way more complicated than creating a new bugzilla > instance so it can be customized by the community. While that might be > one "benefit" I don't think it outweighs all the factors that would go > into performing the migration and then maintaining it--I think people > underestimate how time consuming that would be. I believe, as a matter of principle, that all of the Fedora infrastructure should be accessible to people outside of Red Hat. > If there are special changes needed for Fedora someone should start a > discussion on fedora-devel or get a wiki page going to collect the > requirements. Something similar was actually tried a long time back with no results but I would try doing it again if it is going to be of any use since there is some movement happening in Bugzilla instance in Red Hat recently. Rahul From caillon at redhat.com Thu Jan 3 16:59:55 2008 From: caillon at redhat.com (Christopher Aillon) Date: Thu, 03 Jan 2008 17:59:55 +0100 Subject: Fedora Bugzilla Instance (was dormant bugs and our perception) In-Reply-To: <477D0C89.3030708@redhat.com> References: <477D0C89.3030708@redhat.com> Message-ID: <477D148B.9070704@redhat.com> On 01/03/2008 05:25 PM, John Poelstra wrote: > First someone needs to come up with a *compelling* business case for > *why* a separate bugzilla instance would truly make things better for > Fedora. *Business* case? > This is way more complicated than creating a new bugzilla > instance so it can be customized by the community. While that might be > one "benefit" I don't think it outweighs all the factors that would go > into performing the migration and then maintaining it--I think people > underestimate how time consuming that would be. As a former upstream bugzilla developer, and co-maintainer of various bug instances, it really isn't that much work unless you make it much more work. Forking bugzilla without getting patches upstream (because many of RH's changes don't make sense for upstream), like Red Hat's is a good way of making it take more work. I'm not saying that Red Hat's bugzilla team is doing needless work, because I know they don't and the types of changes they need to do, but it is more work for them to write and then to move to bugzilla 3.0, it's a _lot_ of porting work that we wouldn't need to do. > And, if you skipped the data migration, would it really be more > efficient to work in two bugzilla instances for a year or more until all > of the supported releases were EOL? The point is when we migrate, there would be no Fedora bugs in Red Hat bugzilla. Zarro Boogs, even. We'd close them all out and say "if you still experience this, please move it to $new_instance". So for Fedora, there would only be one bug instance. RHT employees will of course need to continue to use RHT bugzilla. But that's not of any concern here. > Not that this couldn't be done in the future, but I don't think it makes > sense any time soon. > > If creating addons is an area of interest why couldn't they be proposed > as a patch to Red Hat's bugzilla? Can't patch without the source code! > Internally a project team has been > collecting requirements for the next update of bugzilla to be based on > bugzilla 3.0. When I asked Will Woods if there were any special > requirements needed by Fedora he said there were not. > If there are special changes needed for Fedora someone should start a > discussion on fedora-devel or get a wiki page going to collect the > requirements. The thing is... there aren't any special Fedora requirements one way or another. We can use upstream vanilla bugzilla just fine. Or we can use RH's instance. Or fd.o's instance or gnome's or whatever. The problem is that sharing with Red Hat makes the Fedora part of it worse. Like when you have to scroll down past all the myriad of Red Hat stuff just to be able to file a bug against Fedora. Or when Fedora bugs get duped to bugs that are marked private, or set as Blocker/Dependent on the bug. Or when bugs get filed against Fedora, moved to RHEL, and then marked WONTFIX in RHEL, or get fixed in RHEL but not in Fedora or whatnot. Or when Red Hat's modifications make loading a single show_bug.cgi page over 1MB in download size (which has since been fixed, thankfully).... From foss.mailinglists at gmail.com Thu Jan 3 17:11:33 2008 From: foss.mailinglists at gmail.com (Sankarshan Mukhopadhyay) Date: Thu, 03 Jan 2008 22:41:33 +0530 Subject: Fedora Bugzilla Instance (was dormant bugs and our perception) In-Reply-To: <477D148B.9070704@redhat.com> References: <477D0C89.3030708@redhat.com> <477D148B.9070704@redhat.com> Message-ID: <477D1745.2010504@gmail.com> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Christopher Aillon wrote: The problem > is that sharing with Red Hat makes the Fedora part of it worse. Like > when you have to scroll down past all the myriad of Red Hat stuff just > to be able to file a bug against Fedora. Or when Fedora bugs get duped > to bugs that are marked private, or set as Blocker/Dependent on the bug. > Or when bugs get filed against Fedora, moved to RHEL, and then marked > WONTFIX in RHEL, or get fixed in RHEL but not in Fedora or whatnot. Isn't this more of a reason to fix how RHT does things and less of a reason to fork out ? All the above are valid reasons, and having experienced them in various quanta I do agree with them ~sankarshan - -- http://www.gutenberg.net - Fine literature digitally re-published http://www.plos.org - Public Library of Science http://www.creativecommons.org - Flexible copyright for creative work -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.7 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Fedora - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFHfRdFXQZpNTcrCzMRAksxAKCj9CC0mZYCVaaBLG6HofU3k+JZ8wCgpIcD Y4sSu7pS8WkdkRfM8R8Roug= =anhZ -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From mcepl at redhat.com Thu Jan 3 18:15:07 2008 From: mcepl at redhat.com (Matej Cepl) Date: Thu, 3 Jan 2008 19:15:07 +0100 Subject: dormant bugs and our perception In-Reply-To: Message-ID: <20080103181507.GA22714@hubmaier.ceplovi.cz> On 2008-01-02, 16:07 GMT, Greg DeKoenigsberg wrote: > Maybe. GNOME certainly tries this, as does Ubuntu. But > Ubuntu's triage situation isn't much better than ours, from > what I can tell. > > First, though, there needs to be someone who says "I Am The > Bugmaster For Fedora." If the right leader emerges, the rest > would probably follow quite naturally from that, I think. I am not the one, I can only say that I am *a* bugmaster for the Red Hat desktop team (employed by Red Hat). I can clearly see that there is a huge need for bug triaging team on our bugzilla, but let me add couple of notes here (actually is is getting pretty long): * I have no clue how to create the team -- it should be probably done by somebody how would be more skilled in actual team-building and stuff like that, than somebody able to plow through bugzilla. * There is a need to create a lot of documentation -- the stuff which is available inside our Bugzilla is mostly obsolete and/or misleading. Some stuff is available on gnome.org, but their problems are slightly different than ours, about which later. We tried inside of the desktop team to build some Bug Triaging policy. It is not finished yet (and it has desktop bias), so just as an information about what we are thinking about it is available at http://mcepl.fedorapeople.org/docs/bug-triaging-guide.xhtml Comments are more than welcome. * Gnome.org and their bug triaging is often used as an example how to do it. Certainly, Luis did a lot of great work, but when we were talking about it in summer (when he was interning in the Red Hat legal department), we came to the conclusion that the situation in our bugzilla is quite different. The biggest concern of their bug triaging is to deal with the flood of bug-buddy generated thousands of duplicates for crashes in Gnome programs. On the one hand the flood is intense, on the other hand, it is quite easily possible to diagnose and massage these bugs with some scripts (see http://live.gnome.org/Bugsquad/TriageGuide/FindingDuplicates and related pages). Our bugs are all hand-written and very diverse in their formats, so there is probably not much any script can do. We have fewer duplicates than them, but each of them have to be really opened by humans, analyzed, and decided upon. That means that many strategies and ideas, they developed, is not directly applicable to us. * If I can judge by my almost-a-year-long experience with desktop (and especially xorg), it seems to me that the one of the biggest problems is lack of the bug retention policy. If our bugzilla is supposed to be a tool for developers, we must get keep cleaning our BZ for all bugs which will most likely be never dealt with and keep all remaining active bugs fresh all the time. See the above draft of the bug triaging policy for some ideas I have on this. * Other issue (which doesn't happen in Gnome bugzilla at all) is upstreaming -- what bugs should go upstream, and how to deal with them in our BZ. Again, although some improvement can be made by developing of some tools for doing the work, there is plenty of work which could be done by bug triagers -- if we just don't want to dump our trash over the fence to a neighbor's garden, we have to search upstream bugzillas (or other bug databases) for the upstream bugs, and to maintain the link between the state of them and our bug. Concerning the dealing with them in our BZ -- when we close them as UPSTREAM, it is kind of hypocritical situation. We just don't want to see them anymore. However, IMHO the proper solution would be to deal with the upstream bugzilla as a kind of developer -- the bug should be (kind of) ASSIGNED to it, and when the upstream generates a patch (or new release containing the fix) we should apply it and QA it (at least by asking reporter to test the new package) * And there is no magical solution -- ?drastic measures? will IMHO not provide long term solution to our problems, and will (if they will make any change at all) just hide them and delay the proper solution. That's probably all what goes through my head just now. Any reactions? Matej From gdk at redhat.com Thu Jan 3 18:32:42 2008 From: gdk at redhat.com (Greg DeKoenigsberg) Date: Thu, 3 Jan 2008 13:32:42 -0500 (EST) Subject: dormant bugs and our perception In-Reply-To: <20080103181507.GA22714@hubmaier.ceplovi.cz> References: <20080103181507.GA22714@hubmaier.ceplovi.cz> Message-ID: On Thu, 3 Jan 2008, Matej Cepl wrote: > That's probably all what goes through my head just now. > > Any reactions? My reaction: generating a team of devoted folks is not as hard as people think. Basically: find all of the people who have knowledge and a desire to help, find a time when everyone can meet on IRC, and have a meeting. Identify some critical path work items, have people volunteer, track the status (very simply) on the wiki, and then have another meeting. Even if it's only three or four people, three or four committed people can do a hell of a lot of good work -- and more importantly, can provide a great foundation for other people to do work. The leader is basically the person who has the guts to call the meeting, chases down people when they don't attend or don't do what they promised, thanks people profusely who do awesome stuff, and takes all the credit when all the other people do kick-ass stuff. :) --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 gdk at redhat.com Thu Jan 3 19:34:22 2008 From: gdk at redhat.com (Greg DeKoenigsberg) Date: Thu, 3 Jan 2008 14:34:22 -0500 (EST) Subject: Fedora Bugzilla Instance (was dormant bugs and our perception) In-Reply-To: <477D1745.2010504@gmail.com> References: <477D0C89.3030708@redhat.com> <477D148B.9070704@redhat.com> <477D1745.2010504@gmail.com> Message-ID: On Thu, 3 Jan 2008, Sankarshan Mukhopadhyay wrote: >> The problem is that sharing with Red Hat makes the Fedora part of it >> worse. Like when you have to scroll down past all the myriad of Red >> Hat stuff just to be able to file a bug against Fedora. Or when Fedora >> bugs get duped to bugs that are marked private, or set as >> Blocker/Dependent on the bug. Or when bugs get filed against Fedora, >> moved to RHEL, and then marked WONTFIX in RHEL, or get fixed in RHEL >> but not in Fedora or whatnot. > > Isn't this more of a reason to fix how RHT does things and less of a > reason to fork out ? All the above are valid reasons, and having > experienced them in various quanta I do agree with them There's a dedicated team working on bz.rh.com to fix a lot of this stuff. It might benefit us to get Dave Lawrence to keep us updated on what changes are happening in bz, and how those changes might benefit Fedora. --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 gdk at redhat.com Thu Jan 3 19:39:34 2008 From: gdk at redhat.com (Greg DeKoenigsberg) Date: Thu, 3 Jan 2008 14:39:34 -0500 (EST) Subject: Fedora Bugzilla Instance (was dormant bugs and our perception) In-Reply-To: References: <477D0C89.3030708@redhat.com> <477D148B.9070704@redhat.com> <477D1745.2010504@gmail.com> Message-ID: On Thu, 3 Jan 2008, Greg DeKoenigsberg wrote: > There's a dedicated team working on bz.rh.com to fix a lot of this stuff. It > might benefit us to get Dave Lawrence to keep us updated on what changes are > happening in bz, and how those changes might benefit Fedora. In fact... ...Dave, any chance you can follow this thread and maybe tell us if the new changes are addressing any of these concerns? https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-advisory-board/2008-January/msg00072.html --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 smooge at gmail.com Thu Jan 3 20:47:32 2008 From: smooge at gmail.com (Stephen John Smoogen) Date: Thu, 3 Jan 2008 13:47:32 -0700 Subject: dormant bugs and our perception In-Reply-To: <477D00CC.70206@fedoraproject.org> References: <477C0CBF.8010800@redhat.com> <604aa7910801021424q7f3f9921m91921e5f1d32a405@mail.gmail.com> <477C5EF0.2020003@redhat.com> <477C65BD.2050607@redhat.com> <477C6676.4090400@redhat.com> <477CFED3.7070706@fedoraproject.org> <477D00CC.70206@fedoraproject.org> Message-ID: <80d7e4090801031247t76cdf8f3s4e44419417b491ac@mail.gmail.com> On Jan 3, 2008 8:35 AM, Rahul Sundaram wrote: > Jason L Tibbitts III wrote: > >>>>>> "RS" == Rahul Sundaram writes: > > > > RS> The fact that bugz.fp.o is separate instead of being part of > > RS> bugzilla to me, indicates that we have a problem. > > > > I'm having trouble understanding how a quick interface to a few set > > queries is a problem. Surely it's a good thing that bugzilla lets us > > do this. > > Enhancements like this should be part of bugzilla and not a separate > interface. http://bugzilla.redhat.com/rpm can be modified to do this. > The reason why we don't it is because pretty much nobody in Fedora has > access to that bugzilla instance to make improvements that benefit Fedora. > Uhm only if the changes don't break the accounting and other legal processes that might be in Bugzilla because of SOX legal requirements and such. You cant just hack around with bugzilla.redhat.com as it is part of the company that makes money to pay for the rest of the toys. > Rahul > > > _______________________________________________ > fedora-advisory-board mailing list > fedora-advisory-board at redhat.com > http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-advisory-board > -- Stephen J Smoogen. -- CSIRT/Linux System Administrator How far that little candle throws his beams! So shines a good deed in a naughty world. = Shakespeare. "The Merchant of Venice" From poelstra at redhat.com Thu Jan 3 20:58:32 2008 From: poelstra at redhat.com (John Poelstra) Date: Thu, 03 Jan 2008 12:58:32 -0800 Subject: dormant bugs and our perception In-Reply-To: <80d7e4090801031247t76cdf8f3s4e44419417b491ac@mail.gmail.com> References: <477C0CBF.8010800@redhat.com> <604aa7910801021424q7f3f9921m91921e5f1d32a405@mail.gmail.com> <477C5EF0.2020003@redhat.com> <477C65BD.2050607@redhat.com> <477C6676.4090400@redhat.com> <477CFED3.7070706@fedoraproject.org> <477D00CC.70206@fedoraproject.org> <80d7e4090801031247t76cdf8f3s4e44419417b491ac@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <477D4C78.1000304@redhat.com> Stephen John Smoogen said the following on 01/03/2008 12:47 PM Pacific Time: > On Jan 3, 2008 8:35 AM, Rahul Sundaram wrote: >> Jason L Tibbitts III wrote: >>>>>>>> "RS" == Rahul Sundaram writes: >>> RS> The fact that bugz.fp.o is separate instead of being part of >>> RS> bugzilla to me, indicates that we have a problem. >>> >>> I'm having trouble understanding how a quick interface to a few set >>> queries is a problem. Surely it's a good thing that bugzilla lets us >>> do this. >> Enhancements like this should be part of bugzilla and not a separate >> interface. http://bugzilla.redhat.com/rpm can be modified to do this. >> The reason why we don't it is because pretty much nobody in Fedora has >> access to that bugzilla instance to make improvements that benefit Fedora. >> > > Uhm only if the changes don't break the accounting and other legal > processes that might be in Bugzilla because of SOX legal requirements > and such. You cant just hack around with bugzilla.redhat.com as it is > part of the company that makes money to pay for the rest of the toys. > > SOX and Bugzilla??? There are accounting and legal processes in bugzilla? Please send a link to the SOX reg where this is outlined. Maybe I should go back to being a CPA :) John From smooge at gmail.com Thu Jan 3 21:01:26 2008 From: smooge at gmail.com (Stephen John Smoogen) Date: Thu, 3 Jan 2008 14:01:26 -0700 Subject: Fedora Bugzilla Instance (was dormant bugs and our perception) In-Reply-To: <477D148B.9070704@redhat.com> References: <477D0C89.3030708@redhat.com> <477D148B.9070704@redhat.com> Message-ID: <80d7e4090801031301s5ea5b92bve4a594c79f313ed@mail.gmail.com> On Jan 3, 2008 9:59 AM, Christopher Aillon wrote: > On 01/03/2008 05:25 PM, John Poelstra wrote: > > First someone needs to come up with a *compelling* business case for > > *why* a separate bugzilla instance would truly make things better for > > Fedora. > > *Business* case? > The business case is simple: 1) The two projects have competing interests due to NDA's etc for what bugs might or might not be public. Seperating the data completely should be a safer position than trying to manage it in one data set. 2) The ability to 'hack' the bug system to meet Fedora needs is limited because it may break Red Hat issues that are covered under various laws and regulations they must follow. Seperating them makes a better business case. 3) Less headaches for Red Hat IS when they have enough on their plate. Now I don't know what the timeline for Bugzilla 3.0 or if that one will have the pump and flow mechanism of being able to link bugs from one bugzilla instance to another (gnome to fedora, fedora to gnome, etc etc) so that duplicates can be handled better... I know that isn't formal business case language.. but would have been good enough in the old days (dag-nabbit) to get a project on the list to be green/red lighted -- Stephen J Smoogen. -- CSIRT/Linux System Administrator How far that little candle throws his beams! So shines a good deed in a naughty world. = Shakespeare. "The Merchant of Venice" From smooge at gmail.com Thu Jan 3 21:04:10 2008 From: smooge at gmail.com (Stephen John Smoogen) Date: Thu, 3 Jan 2008 14:04:10 -0700 Subject: dormant bugs and our perception In-Reply-To: <477D4C78.1000304@redhat.com> References: <604aa7910801021424q7f3f9921m91921e5f1d32a405@mail.gmail.com> <477C5EF0.2020003@redhat.com> <477C65BD.2050607@redhat.com> <477C6676.4090400@redhat.com> <477CFED3.7070706@fedoraproject.org> <477D00CC.70206@fedoraproject.org> <80d7e4090801031247t76cdf8f3s4e44419417b491ac@mail.gmail.com> <477D4C78.1000304@redhat.com> Message-ID: <80d7e4090801031304x7f40e9cavbadc7cdde9cf784@mail.gmail.com> On Jan 3, 2008 1:58 PM, John Poelstra wrote: > Stephen John Smoogen said the following on 01/03/2008 12:47 PM Pacific Time: > > On Jan 3, 2008 8:35 AM, Rahul Sundaram wrote: > >> Jason L Tibbitts III wrote: > >>>>>>>> "RS" == Rahul Sundaram writes: > >>> RS> The fact that bugz.fp.o is separate instead of being part of > >>> RS> bugzilla to me, indicates that we have a problem. > >>> > >>> I'm having trouble understanding how a quick interface to a few set > >>> queries is a problem. Surely it's a good thing that bugzilla lets us > >>> do this. > >> Enhancements like this should be part of bugzilla and not a separate > >> interface. http://bugzilla.redhat.com/rpm can be modified to do this. > >> The reason why we don't it is because pretty much nobody in Fedora has > >> access to that bugzilla instance to make improvements that benefit Fedora. > >> > > > > Uhm only if the changes don't break the accounting and other legal > > processes that might be in Bugzilla because of SOX legal requirements > > and such. You cant just hack around with bugzilla.redhat.com as it is > > part of the company that makes money to pay for the rest of the toys. > > > > > > SOX and Bugzilla??? There are accounting and legal processes in bugzilla? > > Please send a link to the SOX reg where this is outlined. > > Maybe I should go back to being a CPA :) > I do not know if there are not in Bugzilla.. sorry about not saying 'maybe'. I do remember that when SOX was getting rolled out, there had to be a lot of changes into the entire Red Hat build system to meet various tracking changes through the life of it etc. I thought someone mentioned that covered bugzilla too.. but hey I am getting my info via virtual beers that come due the next time I am in NC. -- Stephen J Smoogen. -- CSIRT/Linux System Administrator How far that little candle throws his beams! So shines a good deed in a naughty world. = Shakespeare. "The Merchant of Venice" From caillon at redhat.com Thu Jan 3 23:08:08 2008 From: caillon at redhat.com (Christopher Aillon) Date: Fri, 04 Jan 2008 00:08:08 +0100 Subject: Fedora Bugzilla Instance (was dormant bugs and our perception) In-Reply-To: <80d7e4090801031301s5ea5b92bve4a594c79f313ed@mail.gmail.com> References: <477D0C89.3030708@redhat.com> <477D148B.9070704@redhat.com> <80d7e4090801031301s5ea5b92bve4a594c79f313ed@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <477D6AD8.5070300@redhat.com> On 01/03/2008 10:01 PM, Stephen John Smoogen wrote: > Now I don't know what the timeline for Bugzilla 3.0 or if that one > will have the pump and flow mechanism of being able to link bugs from > one bugzilla instance to another (gnome to fedora, fedora to gnome, > etc etc) so that duplicates can be handled better... But it's dependent on when Red Hat gets their changes forward ported. Whereas Fedora could already be using Bugzilla 3.0 if it made things much better to use (which it does based on the numerous improvements seen on bugzilla.mozilla.org). And MOVED bugs has always been supported, AFAIK. It just needs to be set up by both the sending and receiving bugzilla admins. http://wiki.mozilla.org/Bugzilla:How_to_setup_the_Bug_Moving_feature From smooge at gmail.com Thu Jan 3 23:21:25 2008 From: smooge at gmail.com (Stephen John Smoogen) Date: Thu, 3 Jan 2008 16:21:25 -0700 Subject: Fedora Bugzilla Instance (was dormant bugs and our perception) In-Reply-To: <477D6AD8.5070300@redhat.com> References: <477D0C89.3030708@redhat.com> <477D148B.9070704@redhat.com> <80d7e4090801031301s5ea5b92bve4a594c79f313ed@mail.gmail.com> <477D6AD8.5070300@redhat.com> Message-ID: <80d7e4090801031521n452945bbvdd0695fdb9c16dd@mail.gmail.com> On Jan 3, 2008 4:08 PM, Christopher Aillon wrote: > On 01/03/2008 10:01 PM, Stephen John Smoogen wrote: > > Now I don't know what the timeline for Bugzilla 3.0 or if that one > > will have the pump and flow mechanism of being able to link bugs from > > one bugzilla instance to another (gnome to fedora, fedora to gnome, > > etc etc) so that duplicates can be handled better... > > But it's dependent on when Red Hat gets their changes forward ported. > Whereas Fedora could already be using Bugzilla 3.0 if it made things > much better to use (which it does based on the numerous improvements > seen on bugzilla.mozilla.org). And MOVED bugs has always been > supported, AFAIK. It just needs to be set up by both the sending and > receiving bugzilla admins. > http://wiki.mozilla.org/Bugzilla:How_to_setup_the_Bug_Moving_feature > Duh.. one should not open their mouth when one hasnt looked at the code for a long time. -- Stephen J Smoogen. -- CSIRT/Linux System Administrator How far that little candle throws his beams! So shines a good deed in a naughty world. = Shakespeare. "The Merchant of Venice" From herrold at owlriver.com Thu Jan 3 23:43:44 2008 From: herrold at owlriver.com (R P Herrold) Date: Thu, 3 Jan 2008 18:43:44 -0500 (EST) Subject: dormant bugs and our perception In-Reply-To: <80d7e4090801031304x7f40e9cavbadc7cdde9cf784@mail.gmail.com> References: <604aa7910801021424q7f3f9921m91921e5f1d32a405@mail.gmail.com> <477C5EF0.2020003@redhat.com> <477C65BD.2050607@redhat.com> <477C6676.4090400@redhat.com> <477CFED3.7070706@fedoraproject.org> <477D00CC.70206@fedoraproject.org> <80d7e4090801031247t76cdf8f3s4e44419417b491ac@mail.gmail.com> <477D4C78.1000304@redhat.com> <80d7e4090801031304x7f40e9cavbadc7cdde9cf784@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: On Thu, 3 Jan 2008, Stephen John Smoogen wrote: > On Jan 3, 2008 1:58 PM, John Poelstra wrote: >> SOX and Bugzilla??? There are accounting and legal processes in bugzilla? >> Please send a link to the SOX reg where this is outlined. >> Maybe I should go back to being a CPA :) > I do not know if there are not in Bugzilla.. sorry about not saying > 'maybe'. I do remember that when SOX was getting rolled out, there had > to be a lot of changes into the entire Red Hat build system to meet > various tracking changes through the life of it etc. for those coming in late, a 'quick' overview of wtf SOX is: http://www.mcgladrey.com/Resource_Center/Audit/Articles/ImplementingSOX_AnIntroduction.html from tfa: a process ... under the supervision of the principal executive ..., and effected by ... management, to provide reasonable assurance regarding the reliability of financial reporting ... for John Poelstra: As you know SOX is notoriously vague as to explicit requirements, and a cottage sub-industry in the accounting profession has grown up, 'selling indulgences' for SOX. connecting the dots: The recently retired CEO of RHT commented publicly from time to time on RHEL ship dates; the reason his comment was sought was in part so that Wall St types could handicap the financial prospects of the company; RHEL ship processes are partially affected by what is in trackers, of which one is the external bugzilla; that falls to the bottom line, and ends up in 'financial reporting' and the quarterly call which is preceded by the filings needing the SOX level assurances. -- Russ herrold From kwade at redhat.com Fri Jan 4 02:39:14 2008 From: kwade at redhat.com (Karsten Wade) Date: Thu, 03 Jan 2008 18:39:14 -0800 Subject: dormant bugs and our perception In-Reply-To: References: <477BB208.3020001@gmail.com> <477C0CBF.8010800@redhat.com> Message-ID: <1199414354.8565.159.camel@erato.phig.org> On Wed, 2008-01-02 at 22:11 -0500, Jon Stanley wrote: > Minor logistical problem - I'm from NYC and don't have a driver's > license. A cab from the airport to the hotel is cool, but what about > transportation from the hotel to RH? Is there a shuttle or something? We'll likely carpool; I know some folks are looking at renting a van or two, and I'll get a big(ger) car for the same purpose. I'll send you my cell # separately; glad to get you at the airport, direct you to where we are Friday night, or make sure you get in our carpool. - Karsten -- Karsten Wade, Developer Community Mgr. Dev Fu : http://developer.redhatmagazine.com Fedora : http://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 skvidal at fedoraproject.org Fri Jan 4 02:52:27 2008 From: skvidal at fedoraproject.org (seth vidal) Date: Thu, 03 Jan 2008 21:52:27 -0500 Subject: dormant bugs and our perception In-Reply-To: <1199414354.8565.159.camel@erato.phig.org> References: <477BB208.3020001@gmail.com> <477C0CBF.8010800@redhat.com> <1199414354.8565.159.camel@erato.phig.org> Message-ID: <1199415147.27998.10.camel@cutter> On Thu, 2008-01-03 at 18:39 -0800, Karsten Wade wrote: > On Wed, 2008-01-02 at 22:11 -0500, Jon Stanley wrote: > > > Minor logistical problem - I'm from NYC and don't have a driver's > > license. A cab from the airport to the hotel is cool, but what about > > transportation from the hotel to RH? Is there a shuttle or something? > > We'll likely carpool; I know some folks are looking at renting a van or > two, and I'll get a big(ger) car for the same purpose. I'll send you my > cell # separately; glad to get you at the airport, direct you to where > we are Friday night, or make sure you get in our carpool. Speaking of cars - how is parking going to be arranged for friday? -sv From poelstra at redhat.com Fri Jan 4 12:51:11 2008 From: poelstra at redhat.com (John Poelstra) Date: Fri, 04 Jan 2008 04:51:11 -0800 Subject: dormant bugs and our perception In-Reply-To: <20080103022503.GH20620@crow.redhat.com> References: <477BB208.3020001@gmail.com> <477C0CBF.8010800@redhat.com> <604aa7910801021424q7f3f9921m91921e5f1d32a405@mail.gmail.com> <20080103022503.GH20620@crow.redhat.com> Message-ID: <477E2BBF.5040609@redhat.com> Luke Macken said the following on 01/02/2008 06:25 PM Pacific Time: > On Wed, Jan 02, 2008 at 01:24:49PM -0900, Jeff Spaleta wrote: >> On Jan 2, 2008 1:14 PM, John Poelstra wrote: >>> Unlike others that have posted here, I am less optimistic that we can >>> viably review and address all 13,000+ open bugs. We need to do >>> something drastic to clear the deck and start a process that insures >>> that we don't end up in this hole again. I think this huge backlog is >>> one of the biggest psychological de-motivators we have! >> I think you are right about clearing the deck as part of a re-launch >> for a triaging inititive. >> >> I also think that now that we have bodhi and the bugs interfaces to >> compliment what we have in bugzilla we have more to work with in terms >> of workflow flexibility for different groups of people >> (users,developers,triagers). >> >> Is there a way to possibly group bugs by SIG? So we can have specific >> triagers associated with SIGs. triagers as a group are a team, but >> then they also act as a liaison to each SIG which controls the >> packaging and development of related of packages. That way SIGs might >> advertise their triager role to new contributors as a starting point, >> but make a commitment to mentoring those people so that in 6 months >> those people move on to handling more advanced roles in the SIG such >> as package maintainer, and new triagers are found for the entry level >> position. > > For those who haven't realized it yet: Fedora development does not scale. > This won't change until we move away from our 1-to-1/1-to-many package > maintainership model. IMO, we need groups of people maintaining groups of > packages. SIGs are a nice idea in theory, but have yet to be fully wielded. > > A great example of this concept in action can be found within the gentoo > community[0] > > AFAIK, we have a few groups of maintainers that handle bugs, ie: > {anaconda,kernel,gecko}-maint, but I'm unaware of any policy/procedures > behind them. Having these groups per-SIG would definitely help get more eyes > on our bugs, especially if we can allow for these sub-communities to thrive. > > It also sounds like Will's QA Beats[1] have the same general idea behind it. > Instead of encapsulating people at the bugzilla/QA level, why not form these > groups at the distro-level, to allow for team-based: packaging, bug triaging, > QA, docs, etc.. ? > > Thoughts? > This seems like a good idea. How successful have the "QA Beats" been? john From stickster at gmail.com Fri Jan 4 13:08:58 2008 From: stickster at gmail.com (Paul W. Frields) Date: Fri, 04 Jan 2008 08:08:58 -0500 Subject: dormant bugs and our perception In-Reply-To: References: <477BB208.3020001@gmail.com> Message-ID: <1199452138.6637.79.camel@localhost.localdomain> On Wed, 2008-01-02 at 15:54 -0600, Jon Stanley wrote: > On Jan 2, 2008 2:25 PM, Elliot Lee wrote: > > > > What we need is a leader. Someone who wants to step up and say "we will > > > have Fedora bug days every Friday (or whatever) from this time to this > > > time, and I will be in #fedora-qa doing it myself, and teaching everyone > > > else who wants to learn." > > Joined fedora-advisory-board late (after this was cross-posted from > fedora-marketing where I started the thread), so I'm not sure who > originally wrote this, but this is what I'm volunteering myself to do. > Fedora is not $DAYJOB for me, and I can't spend much time on it > (depending on workload). In the evenings and on weekends however, > sign me up! I'll teach anyone who wants to know what I know, and hope > that others will do the same. This is a leader's attitude. Way to go! > > I hink this is the heart of the problem (not the washing hair, the > > thankless work bit...) The only person I can recall who was ever a > > Rock Star Bug Triager was Kjartan Maraas for GNOME, and I think he did > > it out of dedication rather than sheer enjoyment, because he had the > > talent to work on a lot of other stuff as well. > > Well, I'm not much of a developer (unless you count shell script-fu - > then I'm a ninja), however I think that I've got what it takes to > triage - an interest in doing it, time, and not really caring that > it's a thankless job - most of what we do is, but it does have an > impact. The biggest impact of triage is that it gives the casual (or one-time) contributor the feeling that their time was not wasted filing a bug to begin with. Making sure that a bug is fixed in N timeslices is not nearly as important as making sure that the filer knows they're not being ignored. Every person who files a bug, gets completely ignored for 6-12 months, and then gets fed up and goes away is a person who carries that experience with them into their interactions with others. Word of mouth is *powerful*. > > . Fix incentives. Maybe it means point system for rewarding people, > > maybe it means free FUDcon trips, maybe it means improved recognition, > > maybe it means hiring someone. > > If it would help I was thinking of trying to make my way to FUDcon > Raleigh to further this cause - I think it may be premature, though. > I live in NYC, so airfare is cheap still. > > > . Figure out what part of triaging /is/ enjoyable, and articulate it > > well in a call for contributors. > > Hmm, good question - the good feeling that you're making a difference? :P People who can get by on just those good feelings are worth their weight in gold! It would be nice to have something else in the hopper for them, though. I like the idea of a points system that converts into something tangible if desired, such as FUDCon travel allowance or other goodies. > > . Divide & conquer. Maybe you can't get five people working steadily > > on bug triaging, but you might be able to get fifty Fedora > > contributors triaging one bug per person per week. If you could write > > a piece of infrastructure that decided which bugs needed triaging, > > it'd be easy enough to have that infrastructure send an e-mail out > > once a week to those fifty people ("Greg, Please triage bug #45678") > > and track who was actually doing their part. You may want to wash your > > hair on Fridays, but don't tell me you wouldn't be willing to triage > > one bug a week...? > > I think we can use bugzilla here. All bugs begin life in the NEW > state. Perhaps if we just set them to ASSIGNED after triaging, and > alter the definition of that state, or maybe add a new state like > UNCONFIRMED like mozilla.org has. Other suggestions welcome. After reading Matej's draft, it seems to me that ASSIGNED means a solid developer commitment. Committing developers without their knowledge is not good, but maybe a "triage+" flag would be. -- Paul W. Frields, RHCE http://paul.frields.org/ gpg fingerprint: 3DA6 A0AC 6D58 FEC4 0233 5906 ACDB C937 BD11 3717 Fedora Project: http://pfrields.fedorapeople.org/ 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 poelstra at redhat.com Fri Jan 4 13:20:54 2008 From: poelstra at redhat.com (John Poelstra) Date: Fri, 04 Jan 2008 05:20:54 -0800 Subject: Fedora Bugzilla Instance (was dormant bugs and our perception) In-Reply-To: <477D148B.9070704@redhat.com> References: <477D0C89.3030708@redhat.com> <477D148B.9070704@redhat.com> Message-ID: <477E32B6.50307@redhat.com> Christopher Aillon said the following on 01/03/2008 08:59 AM Pacific Time: > On 01/03/2008 05:25 PM, John Poelstra wrote: >> First someone needs to come up with a *compelling* business case for >> *why* a separate bugzilla instance would truly make things better for >> Fedora. > > *Business* case? Okay, maybe that is too "corporate speak" :) Up until now the rationale I've seen has mostly been "we should do this because Fedora should do all of its own stuff" or "if we had a separate instance everything would be better". So far I haven't found any of these arguments to be compelling enough in the face of the disruption it would cause to Fedora and Red Hat. Would we be creating more new problems than we are solving? Reading the rest of what you posted (which is one of the best explanations I've seen on this topic so far) it sounds like we disagree on the impact of changing. John From kwade at redhat.com Fri Jan 4 16:06:13 2008 From: kwade at redhat.com (Karsten Wade) Date: Fri, 04 Jan 2008 08:06:13 -0800 Subject: FUDCon transport (was Re: dormant bugs and our perception) In-Reply-To: <1199415147.27998.10.camel@cutter> References: <477BB208.3020001@gmail.com> <477C0CBF.8010800@redhat.com> <1199414354.8565.159.camel@erato.phig.org> <1199415147.27998.10.camel@cutter> Message-ID: <1199462773.8565.234.camel@erato.phig.org> On Thu, 2008-01-03 at 21:52 -0500, seth vidal wrote: > Speaking of cars - how is parking going to be arranged for friday? IIRC, there is plenty of parking. However, it may not include room for bicycles, sorry old boy. After all, you know, eight bicycles takes up the same space in parking as a Ford F-150. If everyone rode bicycles, where would the F-150s park? Or does this not answer your question? - Karsten, "Spare the spokes and save the trucks!" -- Karsten Wade, Developer Community Mgr. Dev Fu : http://developer.redhatmagazine.com Fedora : http://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 skvidal at fedoraproject.org Fri Jan 4 16:12:21 2008 From: skvidal at fedoraproject.org (seth vidal) Date: Fri, 04 Jan 2008 11:12:21 -0500 Subject: FUDCon transport (was Re: dormant bugs and our perception) In-Reply-To: <1199462773.8565.234.camel@erato.phig.org> References: <477BB208.3020001@gmail.com> <477C0CBF.8010800@redhat.com> <1199414354.8565.159.camel@erato.phig.org> <1199415147.27998.10.camel@cutter> <1199462773.8565.234.camel@erato.phig.org> Message-ID: <1199463141.27998.12.camel@cutter> On Fri, 2008-01-04 at 08:06 -0800, Karsten Wade wrote: > On Thu, 2008-01-03 at 21:52 -0500, seth vidal wrote: > > > Speaking of cars - how is parking going to be arranged for friday? > > IIRC, there is plenty of parking. However, it may not include room for > bicycles, sorry old boy. After all, you know, eight bicycles takes up > the same space in parking as a Ford F-150. If everyone rode bicycles, > where would the F-150s park? > > Or does this not answer your question? > Well, I was going to borrow my partner's car to get down there and be able to take people around who cannot otherwise get anywhere. It's just a honda fit but she likes it. :) -sv From jonstanley at gmail.com Fri Jan 4 18:45:16 2008 From: jonstanley at gmail.com (Jon Stanley) Date: Fri, 4 Jan 2008 13:45:16 -0500 Subject: closing out old bugs of unmaintained releases Message-ID: I can put some time this weekend into closing out old bugs, however, before doing so, I wanted to make sure that our messaging is crystal clear. What I had been doing for kernel bugs is placing them in NEEDINFO_REPORTER and asking if the problem still existed, etc after manually reviewing the bugs (some I changed to a current release because it was mentioned in comments, but not in the version metadata). However, this won't scale - there's no way that I or anybody else can reasonably review 3600 bugs for ones that are incorrectly tagged. This leaves us with ~9000 bugs (F7, F8, and rawhide) to deal with (still a monumental task). I propose doing something similar with rawhide bugs that haven't been touched in ~6 months, not sure of the number of those, haven't looked yet. Here's the proposed comment to WONTFIX these. I want to get the most input possible before doing this: Hello, Thank you for taking the time to report this bug. Unfortunately, this version of Fedora has reach end-of-life and is no longer maintained. Please refer to http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/LifeCycle for an explanation of the Fedora lifecycle policy. We therefore regret the necessity of closing this bug report WONTFIX. Please upgrade to a currently maintained release of Fedora, currently either Fedora 7 or Fedora 8, and attempt to reproduce this bug. If the bug still exists, feel free to re-open this bug report, changing the version accordingly, or file a new bug report (you can use the 'Clone as Bug' link at the top of this bug report in order to preserve the content of this bug in the new one). We regret any inconvenience that this may cause you, and thank you for your continued support of Fedora! I propose starting with FC6, since that recently reached EOL and people would be understanding about it (hopefully). Comments/thoughts/suggestions/flames welcome. From fedora at leemhuis.info Fri Jan 4 19:47:09 2008 From: fedora at leemhuis.info (Thorsten Leemhuis) Date: Fri, 04 Jan 2008 20:47:09 +0100 Subject: closing out old bugs of unmaintained releases In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <477E8D3D.70704@leemhuis.info> On 04.01.2008 19:45, Jon Stanley wrote: > I can put some time this weekend into closing out old bugs, however, > before doing so, I wanted to make sure that our messaging is crystal > clear. [...] Just FYI: Similar mass-closures for bugs in EOL releases were done in the Fedora-past two or three times already (or more often -- can't remember); that was decided and guided by FESCo iirc. If you ask on fedora-devel-list you might get some experiences from people that did the job back then and blessing from FESCo now. Cu knurd From poelstra at redhat.com Fri Jan 4 20:00:56 2008 From: poelstra at redhat.com (John Poelstra) Date: Fri, 04 Jan 2008 12:00:56 -0800 Subject: closing out old bugs of unmaintained releases In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <477E9078.7020907@redhat.com> Jon Stanley said the following on 01/04/2008 10:45 AM Pacific Time: > I can put some time this weekend into closing out old bugs, however, > before doing so, I wanted to make sure that our messaging is crystal > clear. What I had been doing for kernel bugs is placing them in > NEEDINFO_REPORTER and asking if the problem still existed, etc after > manually reviewing the bugs (some I changed to a current release > because it was mentioned in comments, but not in the version > metadata). However, this won't scale - there's no way that I or > anybody else can reasonably review 3600 bugs for ones that are > incorrectly tagged. This leaves us with ~9000 bugs (F7, F8, and > rawhide) to deal with (still a monumental task). I propose doing > something similar with rawhide bugs that haven't been touched in ~6 > months, not sure of the number of those, haven't looked yet. Here's > the proposed comment to WONTFIX these. I want to get the most input > possible before doing this: > > > Hello, > > Thank you for taking the time to report this bug. Unfortunately, this > version of Fedora has reach end-of-life and is no longer maintained. > Please refer to http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/LifeCycle for an > explanation of the Fedora lifecycle policy. > > We therefore regret the necessity of closing this bug report WONTFIX. > Please upgrade to a currently maintained release of Fedora, currently > either Fedora 7 or Fedora 8, and attempt to reproduce this bug. If > the bug still exists, feel free to re-open this bug report, changing > the version accordingly, or file a new bug report (you can use the > 'Clone as Bug' link at the top of this bug report in order to preserve > the content of this bug in the new one). > > We regret any inconvenience that this may cause you, and thank you for > your continued support of Fedora! > > > I propose starting with FC6, since that recently reached EOL and > people would be understanding about it (hopefully). > Comments/thoughts/suggestions/flames welcome. > I think this is good! Probably best to roll this into an overall proposal that we could review at FUDCon and in the meantime float it by fedora-devel list and fedora-test-list to get some community feedback and buyin. John From smooge at gmail.com Fri Jan 4 20:02:37 2008 From: smooge at gmail.com (Stephen John Smoogen) Date: Fri, 4 Jan 2008 13:02:37 -0700 Subject: Fedora Bugzilla Instance (was dormant bugs and our perception) In-Reply-To: <477E32B6.50307@redhat.com> References: <477D0C89.3030708@redhat.com> <477D148B.9070704@redhat.com> <477E32B6.50307@redhat.com> Message-ID: <80d7e4090801041202t1aafb458s3f48099b5af9f461@mail.gmail.com> On Jan 4, 2008 6:20 AM, John Poelstra wrote: > Christopher Aillon said the following on 01/03/2008 08:59 AM Pacific Time: > > On 01/03/2008 05:25 PM, John Poelstra wrote: > >> First someone needs to come up with a *compelling* business case for > >> *why* a separate bugzilla instance would truly make things better for > >> Fedora. > > > > *Business* case? > > Okay, maybe that is too "corporate speak" :) > > Up until now the rationale I've seen has mostly been "we should do this > because Fedora should do all of its own stuff" or "if we had a separate > instance everything would be better". So far I haven't found any of > these arguments to be compelling enough in the face of the disruption it > would cause to Fedora and Red Hat. > > Would we be creating more new problems than we are solving? > > Reading the rest of what you posted (which is one of the best > explanations I've seen on this topic so far) it sounds like we disagree > on the impact of changing. > To be honest, I think the business case would have to show that there is lowering of cost of doing business in Fedora, and/or lowering the cost of doing business in Red Hat. The bonuses I see for another bugzilla is that it would allow for better/faster integration with other organizations bugzilla's. The amount of making sure that this doesn't break Red Hat business continuity can grind things into low gear for a project that likes to have things up in a beta form by end of the week, and ready for production by the end of the month. The lower cost to Red Hat would be less needs on a team that needs to focus on paying products versus what time they have for something. -- Stephen J Smoogen. -- CSIRT/Linux System Administrator How far that little candle throws his beams! So shines a good deed in a naughty world. = Shakespeare. "The Merchant of Venice" From stickster at gmail.com Fri Jan 4 20:08:36 2008 From: stickster at gmail.com (Paul W. Frields) Date: Fri, 04 Jan 2008 15:08:36 -0500 Subject: closing out old bugs of unmaintained releases In-Reply-To: <477E8D3D.70704@leemhuis.info> References: <477E8D3D.70704@leemhuis.info> Message-ID: <1199477316.3652.9.camel@localhost.localdomain> On Fri, 2008-01-04 at 20:47 +0100, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote: > On 04.01.2008 19:45, Jon Stanley wrote: > > I can put some time this weekend into closing out old bugs, however, > > before doing so, I wanted to make sure that our messaging is crystal > > clear. [...] > > Just FYI: Similar mass-closures for bugs in EOL releases were done in > the Fedora-past two or three times already (or more often -- can't > remember); that was decided and guided by FESCo iirc. If you ask on > fedora-devel-list you might get some experiences from people that did > the job back then and blessing from FESCo now. I'd recommend bending over backward with a mass closing comment so that people aren't put off -- some will, inevitably, but we should do what we can to salve hurt feelings. How about adding: "The Fedora Project is undergoing a revitalization of its bug triage program, staffed for the main part by volunteers. We are committed to addressing bugs in a timely and courteous fashion, and we thank you for the time you have taken to file bugs. Please be assured your Fedora experience matters to us, and we hope you will enjoy all the innovations, features, and improvements we have provided in the latest release." Seems a little sycophantic, but let's keep in mind the old adage about flies and honey. -- Paul W. ("silver-tongued devil") Frields http://paul.frields.org/ gpg fingerprint: 3DA6 A0AC 6D58 FEC4 0233 5906 ACDB C937 BD11 3717 Fedora Project: http://pfrields.fedorapeople.org/ 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 caillon at redhat.com Fri Jan 4 20:18:38 2008 From: caillon at redhat.com (Christopher Aillon) Date: Fri, 04 Jan 2008 21:18:38 +0100 Subject: closing out old bugs of unmaintained releases In-Reply-To: <1199477316.3652.9.camel@localhost.localdomain> References: <477E8D3D.70704@leemhuis.info> <1199477316.3652.9.camel@localhost.localdomain> Message-ID: <477E949E.5030506@redhat.com> On 01/04/2008 09:08 PM, Paul W. Frields wrote: > Seems a little sycophantic, but let's keep in mind the old adage about > flies and honey. LIES! http://xkcd.com/357/ :-) From mcepl at redhat.com Fri Jan 4 21:08:42 2008 From: mcepl at redhat.com (Matej Cepl) Date: Fri, 04 Jan 2008 22:08:42 +0100 Subject: closing out old bugs of unmaintained releases In-Reply-To: <477E8D3D.70704@leemhuis.info> References: <477E8D3D.70704@leemhuis.info> Message-ID: <1199480922.14042.6.camel@viklef> Thorsten Leemhuis p??e v P? 04. 01. 2008 v 20:47 +0100: > Just FYI: Similar mass-closures for bugs in EOL releases were done in > the Fedora-past two or three times already (or more often -- can't > remember); that was decided and guided by FESCo iirc. If you ask on > fedora-devel-list you might get some experiences from people that did > the job back then and blessing from FESCo now. See my yesterday's message -- we do it now for desktop bugs as a matter of policy. Mat?j -- http://www.ceplovi.cz/matej/blog/, Jabber: ceplmajabber.cz GPG Finger: 89EF 4BC6 288A BF43 1BAB 25C3 E09F EF25 D964 84AC If it dies, it's biology. If it blows up, it's chemistry, and if it doesn't work, it's physics. -- University bathroom graffito -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: Toto je digit?ln? podepsan? ??st zpr?vy URL: From mcepl at redhat.com Fri Jan 4 22:10:45 2008 From: mcepl at redhat.com (mcepl at redhat.com) Date: Fri, 4 Jan 2008 23:10:45 +0100 Subject: dormant bugs and our perception In-Reply-To: References: <477BB208.3020001@gmail.com> <477C5E4B.6060707@redhat.com> Message-ID: <20080104221045.GA9788@hubmaier.ceplovi.cz> On 2008-01-03, 04:12 GMT, Jon Stanley wrote: > I'm quite serious. I have no experience in this sort of thing, > but we're all here to learn, right? My background is actually > in architecture design and sysadmin type stuff. However, I'm > more than willing to do this - I've been using Linux for over > 10 years off and on, and professionally for the past 5 or so. Welcom on board!!! Don't worry about your education, experience is what matters -- I am a lawyer by education (I have not been in practice for years) with unfinished PhD in criminology ;-). > I've just need to clear with my boss taking part of next Friday > off, and I'll be at FUDcon next weekend, and we can start > hashing this out. I've already put a session on teh wiki about > it, and figure that we can use the Sunday hackfest to actually > start doing. I am really sorry, I won't be at FUDcon at all -- I haven't had enough time to even begin working on tickets etc. (I live in Prague, Czech republic). > I'm entirely willing to step up to this job - not the most > glamarous one in the world, but certaintly high-impact. Note > that I'll not be able to devote an FTE's worth of time to it, > there is $DAYJOB still. However my free time (note I'm single > and have no pets, etc :) ) can be devoted to this. Gives me > a good cause to work on. Once more -- welcome on board. If I may give you advice, pick some packages which you are using daily and you are interested in -- a) you need to be able to help users with workarounds, diagnosing etc., so you need to understand it, b) you will spend many hours with them, and it is not worthy to spend your time with something you hate (thanks God, I am not bugmastering iscsi-initiator-utils -- I would be bored to death). Best, Mat?j From stickster at gmail.com Sat Jan 5 00:35:28 2008 From: stickster at gmail.com (Paul W. Frields) Date: Fri, 04 Jan 2008 19:35:28 -0500 Subject: closing out old bugs of unmaintained releases In-Reply-To: <477E949E.5030506@redhat.com> References: <477E8D3D.70704@leemhuis.info> <1199477316.3652.9.camel@localhost.localdomain> <477E949E.5030506@redhat.com> Message-ID: <1199493328.3652.37.camel@localhost.localdomain> On Fri, 2008-01-04 at 21:18 +0100, Christopher Aillon wrote: > On 01/04/2008 09:08 PM, Paul W. Frields wrote: > > Seems a little sycophantic, but let's keep in mind the old adage about > > flies and honey. > > LIES! http://xkcd.com/357/ > > :-) Now, I *KNOW* you di'n't go dissin' my Moms. :-D -- Paul W. ("sweater++, cold--") Frields http://paul.frields.org/ gpg fingerprint: 3DA6 A0AC 6D58 FEC4 0233 5906 ACDB C937 BD11 3717 Fedora Project: http://pfrields.fedorapeople.org/ 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 dwmw2 at infradead.org Sat Jan 5 12:04:37 2008 From: dwmw2 at infradead.org (David Woodhouse) Date: Sat, 05 Jan 2008 12:04:37 +0000 Subject: closing out old bugs of unmaintained releases In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <1199534677.4111.210.camel@shinybook.infradead.org> On Fri, 2008-01-04 at 13:45 -0500, Jon Stanley wrote: > I can put some time this weekend into closing out old bugs, however, > before doing so, I wanted to make sure that our messaging is crystal > clear. I've got a better idea. Let's just close _all_ the non-packaging bugs, even current ones, with a message such as the following: This is a bug in the software, not the packaging. This needs to be reported to the $PACKAGE author, not to me, the Fedora packager. Wouldn't that be a great thing for Fedora? We could reduce the bug count to almost zero overnight! -- dwmw2 From fedora at leemhuis.info Sat Jan 5 12:28:32 2008 From: fedora at leemhuis.info (Thorsten Leemhuis) Date: Sat, 05 Jan 2008 13:28:32 +0100 Subject: closing out old bugs of unmaintained releases In-Reply-To: <1199534677.4111.210.camel@shinybook.infradead.org> References: <1199534677.4111.210.camel@shinybook.infradead.org> Message-ID: <477F77F0.3060706@leemhuis.info> On 05.01.2008 13:04, David Woodhouse wrote: > On Fri, 2008-01-04 at 13:45 -0500, Jon Stanley wrote: >> I can put some time this weekend into closing out old bugs, however, >> before doing so, I wanted to make sure that our messaging is crystal >> clear. > > I've got a better idea. Let's just close _all_ the non-packaging bugs, > even current ones, with a message such as the following: > This is a bug in the software, not the packaging. This needs to > be reported to the $PACKAGE author, not to me, the Fedora > packager. > Wouldn't that be a great thing for Fedora? We could reduce the bug count > to almost zero overnight! A +0.66 from me In fact, something like the above is what I always do and did for my packages (and had to do, as I'm a package-monkey and no developer). IOW: if it's not a packaging bug or otherwise specific to Fedora I asked the reported to report the bug upstream, as the bug gets fixed for everyone then -- that includes other distributions and thus is the best for everyone and avoid double work in our current world with fivehundred-and-more distributions. If the reported didn't forward the bug upstream I did it if the bug looked worth forwarding. But only +0,66 and not +1 here, because we ship some packages with quite a lot of patches -- kernel and part from the Xorg-stack for example afaics. For those packages Fedora's bugzilla likely needs to remain the first point for a report as long as we ship intrusive patches. Just my 2 cent. Cu knurd From jkeating at redhat.com Sat Jan 5 12:47:32 2008 From: jkeating at redhat.com (Jesse Keating) Date: Sat, 5 Jan 2008 07:47:32 -0500 Subject: closing out old bugs of unmaintained releases In-Reply-To: <477F77F0.3060706@leemhuis.info> References: <1199534677.4111.210.camel@shinybook.infradead.org> <477F77F0.3060706@leemhuis.info> Message-ID: <20080105074732.4a7466bd@redhat.com> On Sat, 05 Jan 2008 13:28:32 +0100 Thorsten Leemhuis wrote: > In fact, something like the above is what I always do and did for my > packages (and had to do, as I'm a package-monkey and no developer). > > IOW: if it's not a packaging bug or otherwise specific to Fedora I > asked the reported to report the bug upstream, as the bug gets fixed > for everyone then -- that includes other distributions and thus is > the best for everyone and avoid double work in our current world with > fivehundred-and-more distributions. If the reported didn't forward the > bug upstream I did it if the bug looked worth forwarding. Except that as a maintainer it's one of your responsibilities to do some of the upstream filing/tracking. -- 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 dwmw2 at infradead.org Sat Jan 5 13:04:32 2008 From: dwmw2 at infradead.org (David Woodhouse) Date: Sat, 05 Jan 2008 13:04:32 +0000 Subject: closing out old bugs of unmaintained releases In-Reply-To: <20080105074732.4a7466bd@redhat.com> References: <1199534677.4111.210.camel@shinybook.infradead.org> <477F77F0.3060706@leemhuis.info> <20080105074732.4a7466bd@redhat.com> Message-ID: <1199538272.2928.12.camel@pmac.infradead.org> On Sat, 2008-01-05 at 07:47 -0500, Jesse Keating wrote: > On Sat, 05 Jan 2008 13:28:32 +0100 > Thorsten Leemhuis wrote: > > > In fact, something like the above is what I always do and did for my > > packages (and had to do, as I'm a package-monkey and no developer). > > > > IOW: if it's not a packaging bug or otherwise specific to Fedora I > > asked the reported to report the bug upstream, as the bug gets fixed > > for everyone then -- that includes other distributions and thus is > > the best for everyone and avoid double work in our current world with > > fivehundred-and-more distributions. If the reported didn't forward the > > bug upstream I did it if the bug looked worth forwarding. > > Except that as a maintainer it's one of your responsibilities to do > some of the upstream filing/tracking. And also to help the user debug, and to provide a fix where possible. Where would Fedora be if at least the majority of packagers didn't do that, and didn't actually work on the upstream codebase? I'll tell you where -- we'd be just another one of the second-rate distributions, packaging the software which other people work on, rather than setting our own goals and innovating. -- dwmw2 From notting at redhat.com Mon Jan 7 19:11:04 2008 From: notting at redhat.com (Bill Nottingham) Date: Mon, 7 Jan 2008 14:11:04 -0500 Subject: Fedora Bugzilla Instance (was dormant bugs and our perception) In-Reply-To: <477E32B6.50307@redhat.com> References: <477D0C89.3030708@redhat.com> <477D148B.9070704@redhat.com> <477E32B6.50307@redhat.com> Message-ID: <20080107191104.GD19651@nostromo.devel.redhat.com> John Poelstra (poelstra at redhat.com) said: > Okay, maybe that is too "corporate speak" :) > > Up until now the rationale I've seen has mostly been "we should do this > because Fedora should do all of its own stuff" or "if we had a separate > instance everything would be better". So far I haven't found any of these > arguments to be compelling enough in the face of the disruption it would > cause to Fedora and Red Hat. > > Would we be creating more new problems than we are solving? Benefits: - ease of incorporating new upstream versions - with those versions, easier to move bugs and link them to other upstream bug trackers - able to wipe out old bugs - removal of various non-upstream 'features' that RH uses that Fedora doesn't need Demerits: - RH developers no longer have one-stop shopping - would need RH changes to support moving bugs to RH bugzilla - would need to run our own instance - would wipe out old bugs That's my 10-second view. Bill From mmcgrath at redhat.com Mon Jan 7 19:26:39 2008 From: mmcgrath at redhat.com (Mike McGrath) Date: Mon, 7 Jan 2008 13:26:39 -0600 (CST) Subject: Fedora Bugzilla Instance (was dormant bugs and our perception) In-Reply-To: <20080107191104.GD19651@nostromo.devel.redhat.com> References: <477D0C89.3030708@redhat.com> <477D148B.9070704@redhat.com> <477E32B6.50307@redhat.com> <20080107191104.GD19651@nostromo.devel.redhat.com> Message-ID: On Mon, 7 Jan 2008, Bill Nottingham wrote: > John Poelstra (poelstra at redhat.com) said: > > Okay, maybe that is too "corporate speak" :) > > > > Up until now the rationale I've seen has mostly been "we should do this > > because Fedora should do all of its own stuff" or "if we had a separate > > instance everything would be better". So far I haven't found any of these > > arguments to be compelling enough in the face of the disruption it would > > cause to Fedora and Red Hat. > > > > Would we be creating more new problems than we are solving? > > Benefits: > > - ease of incorporating new upstream versions > - with those versions, easier to move bugs and link them to other > upstream bug trackers > - able to wipe out old bugs > - removal of various non-upstream 'features' that RH uses that Fedora > doesn't need > > Demerits: > > - RH developers no longer have one-stop shopping > - would need RH changes to support moving bugs to RH bugzilla > - would need to run our own instance > - would wipe out old bugs > > That's my 10-second view. Just so I know (and feel free to contact me off list) but does anyone here know exactly how far off RH's bugzilla is from upstream and why the patches have not been accpeted by upstream? -Mike From luis at tieguy.org Mon Jan 7 19:31:48 2008 From: luis at tieguy.org (Luis Villa) Date: Mon, 7 Jan 2008 14:31:48 -0500 Subject: Fedora Bugzilla Instance (was dormant bugs and our perception) In-Reply-To: <20080107191104.GD19651@nostromo.devel.redhat.com> References: <477D0C89.3030708@redhat.com> <477D148B.9070704@redhat.com> <477E32B6.50307@redhat.com> <20080107191104.GD19651@nostromo.devel.redhat.com> Message-ID: <2cb10c440801071131g6a132b61rc81e94dd15bb2c40@mail.gmail.com> On Jan 7, 2008 2:11 PM, Bill Nottingham wrote: > John Poelstra (poelstra at redhat.com) said: > > Okay, maybe that is too "corporate speak" :) > > > > Up until now the rationale I've seen has mostly been "we should do this > > because Fedora should do all of its own stuff" or "if we had a separate > > instance everything would be better". So far I haven't found any of these > > arguments to be compelling enough in the face of the disruption it would > > cause to Fedora and Red Hat. > > > > Would we be creating more new problems than we are solving? > > Benefits: > > - ease of incorporating new upstream versions > - with those versions, easier to move bugs and link them to other > upstream bug trackers > - able to wipe out old bugs RH bugzilla needs to do all these things too, even if RHEL Engineering doesn't realize it yet. I'd suggest that convincing RH of this, instead of just breaking away, is one of those ways that Fedora can help ensure (or ideally increase) RH's continued investment in Fedora. > - removal of various non-upstream 'features' that RH uses that Fedora > doesn't need I agree that it would be hard to get this without splitting, and that Bugzilla is cluttered enough as-is, but given the other benefits of staying upstream, I'd suggest that greasemonkey or a server-side 'fedora view' which hide these extra features are better ways to solve this. > Demerits: > > - RH developers no longer have one-stop shopping > - would need RH changes to support moving bugs to RH bugzilla > - would need to run our own instance - RHEL should view Fedora as an integral part of the RHEL development and QA process. Fedora should be doing everything it can to encourage that belief, so that more RHEL QA happens in Fedora, rather than in RHEL. Going in the opposite direction by making this harder is cutting off your nose to spite your face. > - would wipe out old bugs Wiping out old bugs is a good thing; on balance, unless you have *bazillions* of testers, most old bugs cost more time to regularly test/recheck/update/etc. than they are worth. Luis From skvidal at fedoraproject.org Mon Jan 7 19:48:43 2008 From: skvidal at fedoraproject.org (seth vidal) Date: Mon, 07 Jan 2008 14:48:43 -0500 Subject: Fedora Bugzilla Instance (was dormant bugs and our perception) In-Reply-To: <2cb10c440801071131g6a132b61rc81e94dd15bb2c40@mail.gmail.com> References: <477D0C89.3030708@redhat.com> <477D148B.9070704@redhat.com> <477E32B6.50307@redhat.com> <20080107191104.GD19651@nostromo.devel.redhat.com> <2cb10c440801071131g6a132b61rc81e94dd15bb2c40@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <1199735323.2790.16.camel@cutter> On Mon, 2008-01-07 at 14:31 -0500, Luis Villa wrote: > I agree that it would be hard to get this without splitting, and that > Bugzilla is cluttered enough as-is, but given the other benefits of > staying upstream, I'd suggest that greasemonkey or a server-side > 'fedora view' which hide these extra features are better ways to solve > this. > It might be worthwhile to split if we could ensure one feature worked from rh-bz to fedora bz: report migration. It'd be great if fedora bz could have an 'add this to rh bz'. That would make interaction easier and, hopefully, make the transition easier for rh employees. it should be do-able, I think. -sv From matt at domsch.com Mon Jan 7 19:57:03 2008 From: matt at domsch.com (Matt Domsch) Date: Mon, 7 Jan 2008 13:57:03 -0600 Subject: Fedora Bugzilla Instance (was dormant bugs and our perception) In-Reply-To: <1199735323.2790.16.camel@cutter> References: <477D0C89.3030708@redhat.com> <477D148B.9070704@redhat.com> <477E32B6.50307@redhat.com> <20080107191104.GD19651@nostromo.devel.redhat.com> <2cb10c440801071131g6a132b61rc81e94dd15bb2c40@mail.gmail.com> <1199735323.2790.16.camel@cutter> Message-ID: <20080107195701.GA30419@domsch.com> On Mon, Jan 07, 2008 at 02:48:43PM -0500, seth vidal wrote: > > On Mon, 2008-01-07 at 14:31 -0500, Luis Villa wrote: > > > I agree that it would be hard to get this without splitting, and that > > Bugzilla is cluttered enough as-is, but given the other benefits of > > staying upstream, I'd suggest that greasemonkey or a server-side > > 'fedora view' which hide these extra features are better ways to solve > > this. > > > > It might be worthwhile to split if we could ensure one feature worked > from rh-bz to fedora bz: report migration. It'd be great if fedora bz > could have an 'add this to rh bz'. That would make interaction easier > and, hopefully, make the transition easier for rh employees. 'add this to rh bz for product version $foo' would be even nicer. I routinely have to dupe bugs several times, once for each affected RHEL version, and once for each other impacted product. Not that I like Launchpad being proprietary (and that's clearly a showstopper here), but it has this concept of integrating with other bug trackers in this manner (and keeping track that you did so), which is very convenient. From notting at redhat.com Mon Jan 7 19:58:27 2008 From: notting at redhat.com (Bill Nottingham) Date: Mon, 7 Jan 2008 14:58:27 -0500 Subject: Fedora Bugzilla Instance (was dormant bugs and our perception) In-Reply-To: <1199735323.2790.16.camel@cutter> References: <477D0C89.3030708@redhat.com> <477D148B.9070704@redhat.com> <477E32B6.50307@redhat.com> <20080107191104.GD19651@nostromo.devel.redhat.com> <2cb10c440801071131g6a132b61rc81e94dd15bb2c40@mail.gmail.com> <1199735323.2790.16.camel@cutter> Message-ID: <20080107195826.GK19651@nostromo.devel.redhat.com> seth vidal (skvidal at fedoraproject.org) said: > > On Mon, 2008-01-07 at 14:31 -0500, Luis Villa wrote: > > > I agree that it would be hard to get this without splitting, and that > > Bugzilla is cluttered enough as-is, but given the other benefits of > > staying upstream, I'd suggest that greasemonkey or a server-side > > 'fedora view' which hide these extra features are better ways to solve > > this. > > It might be worthwhile to split if we could ensure one feature worked > from rh-bz to fedora bz: report migration. It'd be great if fedora bz > could have an 'add this to rh bz'. That would make interaction easier > and, hopefully, make the transition easier for rh employees. > > it should be do-able, I think. I don't see why this would require a split, though. Bill From luis at tieguy.org Mon Jan 7 19:59:49 2008 From: luis at tieguy.org (Luis Villa) Date: Mon, 7 Jan 2008 14:59:49 -0500 Subject: dormant bugs and our perception In-Reply-To: References: <477BB208.3020001@gmail.com> <1199308020.26788.3.camel@erebor.boston.redhat.com> <1199308697.3921.36.camel@cutter> Message-ID: <2cb10c440801071159i5ad787e9naa8f0226ae634a8c@mail.gmail.com> On Jan 2, 2008 4:37 PM, Jon Stanley wrote: > On Jan 2, 2008 3:18 PM, seth vidal wrote: > > > also worth noting for future reference - while bugzilla is a fine > > interface (sort of) this is really easy for looking at bugs which > > are /new/needinfo/etc: > > > > http://bugz.fedoraproject.org/[name-of-package] > > I had no idea. This isn't documented anywhere on the triage page, so > I've got my own HTML form to do pretty much the same thing. I'll > throw this up there. May also want to look at (and take ideas from) http://bugzilla.gnome.org/browse.cgi?product=pessulus From notting at redhat.com Mon Jan 7 20:00:24 2008 From: notting at redhat.com (Bill Nottingham) Date: Mon, 7 Jan 2008 15:00:24 -0500 Subject: Fedora Bugzilla Instance (was dormant bugs and our perception) In-Reply-To: <2cb10c440801071131g6a132b61rc81e94dd15bb2c40@mail.gmail.com> References: <477D0C89.3030708@redhat.com> <477D148B.9070704@redhat.com> <477E32B6.50307@redhat.com> <20080107191104.GD19651@nostromo.devel.redhat.com> <2cb10c440801071131g6a132b61rc81e94dd15bb2c40@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <20080107200024.GL19651@nostromo.devel.redhat.com> Luis Villa (luis at tieguy.org) said: > RH bugzilla needs to do all these things too, even if RHEL Engineering > doesn't realize it yet. I'd suggest that convincing RH of this, > instead of just breaking away, is one of those ways that Fedora can > help ensure (or ideally increase) RH's continued investment in Fedora. ... > - RHEL should view Fedora as an integral part of the RHEL development > and QA process. Fedora should be doing everything it can to encourage > that belief, so that more RHEL QA happens in Fedora, rather than in > RHEL. Going in the opposite direction by making this harder is cutting > off your nose to spite your face. I don't disagree with you. Bill From skvidal at fedoraproject.org Mon Jan 7 20:02:07 2008 From: skvidal at fedoraproject.org (seth vidal) Date: Mon, 07 Jan 2008 15:02:07 -0500 Subject: Fedora Bugzilla Instance (was dormant bugs and our perception) In-Reply-To: <20080107195701.GA30419@domsch.com> References: <477D0C89.3030708@redhat.com> <477D148B.9070704@redhat.com> <477E32B6.50307@redhat.com> <20080107191104.GD19651@nostromo.devel.redhat.com> <2cb10c440801071131g6a132b61rc81e94dd15bb2c40@mail.gmail.com> <1199735323.2790.16.camel@cutter> <20080107195701.GA30419@domsch.com> Message-ID: <1199736127.2790.21.camel@cutter> On Mon, 2008-01-07 at 13:57 -0600, Matt Domsch wrote: > On Mon, Jan 07, 2008 at 02:48:43PM -0500, seth vidal wrote: > > > > On Mon, 2008-01-07 at 14:31 -0500, Luis Villa wrote: > > > > > I agree that it would be hard to get this without splitting, and that > > > Bugzilla is cluttered enough as-is, but given the other benefits of > > > staying upstream, I'd suggest that greasemonkey or a server-side > > > 'fedora view' which hide these extra features are better ways to solve > > > this. > > > > > > > It might be worthwhile to split if we could ensure one feature worked > > from rh-bz to fedora bz: report migration. It'd be great if fedora bz > > could have an 'add this to rh bz'. That would make interaction easier > > and, hopefully, make the transition easier for rh employees. > > 'add this to rh bz for product version $foo' would be even nicer. I > routinely have to dupe bugs several times, once for each affected RHEL > version, and once for each other impacted product. > > Not that I like Launchpad being proprietary (and that's clearly a > showstopper here), but it has this concept of integrating with other > bug trackers in this manner (and keeping track that you did so), which > is very convenient. > It seems like the only thing launchpad offers is a place to see a summary view of bug trackers. If we can get inter-bugzilla bug-migration/duplication happening then it seems to me that a summary view of projects and bug trackers is python-bugzilla + packagedb, ne? -sv From skvidal at fedoraproject.org Mon Jan 7 20:02:44 2008 From: skvidal at fedoraproject.org (seth vidal) Date: Mon, 07 Jan 2008 15:02:44 -0500 Subject: Fedora Bugzilla Instance (was dormant bugs and our perception) In-Reply-To: <20080107195826.GK19651@nostromo.devel.redhat.com> References: <477D0C89.3030708@redhat.com> <477D148B.9070704@redhat.com> <477E32B6.50307@redhat.com> <20080107191104.GD19651@nostromo.devel.redhat.com> <2cb10c440801071131g6a132b61rc81e94dd15bb2c40@mail.gmail.com> <1199735323.2790.16.camel@cutter> <20080107195826.GK19651@nostromo.devel.redhat.com> Message-ID: <1199736164.2790.23.camel@cutter> On Mon, 2008-01-07 at 14:58 -0500, Bill Nottingham wrote: > seth vidal (skvidal at fedoraproject.org) said: > > > > On Mon, 2008-01-07 at 14:31 -0500, Luis Villa wrote: > > > > > I agree that it would be hard to get this without splitting, and that > > > Bugzilla is cluttered enough as-is, but given the other benefits of > > > staying upstream, I'd suggest that greasemonkey or a server-side > > > 'fedora view' which hide these extra features are better ways to solve > > > this. > > > > It might be worthwhile to split if we could ensure one feature worked > > from rh-bz to fedora bz: report migration. It'd be great if fedora bz > > could have an 'add this to rh bz'. That would make interaction easier > > and, hopefully, make the transition easier for rh employees. > > > > it should be do-able, I think. > > I don't see why this would require a split, though. > b/c as it is, the process to change and get new features into rh's bugzilla is slow and laborious, at least afaict. -sv From poelstra at redhat.com Mon Jan 7 21:50:49 2008 From: poelstra at redhat.com (John Poelstra) Date: Mon, 07 Jan 2008 13:50:49 -0800 Subject: Fedora Bugzilla Instance (was dormant bugs and our perception) In-Reply-To: <20080107191104.GD19651@nostromo.devel.redhat.com> References: <477D0C89.3030708@redhat.com> <477D148B.9070704@redhat.com> <477E32B6.50307@redhat.com> <20080107191104.GD19651@nostromo.devel.redhat.com> Message-ID: <47829EB9.9040501@redhat.com> Bill Nottingham said the following on 01/07/2008 11:11 AM Pacific Time: > Benefits: > > - ease of incorporating new upstream versions > - with those versions, easier to move bugs and link them to other > upstream bug trackers > - able to wipe out old bugs > - removal of various non-upstream 'features' that RH uses that Fedora > doesn't need > > Demerits: > > - RH developers no longer have one-stop shopping > - would need RH changes to support moving bugs to RH bugzilla > - would need to run our own instance > - would wipe out old bugs > - one more application (a rather important one) that would need to be maintained (hosting, disaster recovery, etc.) by infrastructure From stickster at gmail.com Mon Jan 7 23:03:58 2008 From: stickster at gmail.com (Paul W. Frields) Date: Mon, 07 Jan 2008 18:03:58 -0500 Subject: Fedora Bugzilla Instance (was dormant bugs and our perception) In-Reply-To: <2cb10c440801071131g6a132b61rc81e94dd15bb2c40@mail.gmail.com> References: <477D0C89.3030708@redhat.com> <477D148B.9070704@redhat.com> <477E32B6.50307@redhat.com> <20080107191104.GD19651@nostromo.devel.redhat.com> <2cb10c440801071131g6a132b61rc81e94dd15bb2c40@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <1199747038.25114.19.camel@localhost.localdomain> On Mon, 2008-01-07 at 14:31 -0500, Luis Villa wrote: > On Jan 7, 2008 2:11 PM, Bill Nottingham wrote: > > Benefits: > > > > - ease of incorporating new upstream versions > > - with those versions, easier to move bugs and link them to other > > upstream bug trackers > > - able to wipe out old bugs > > RH bugzilla needs to do all these things too, even if RHEL Engineering > doesn't realize it yet. I'd suggest that convincing RH of this, > instead of just breaking away, is one of those ways that Fedora can > help ensure (or ideally increase) RH's continued investment in Fedora. I'm not sure they don't realize it, but as always the limited number of cycles prevails. > > - removal of various non-upstream 'features' that RH uses that Fedora > > doesn't need > > I agree that it would be hard to get this without splitting, and that > Bugzilla is cluttered enough as-is, but given the other benefits of > staying upstream, I'd suggest that greasemonkey or a server-side > 'fedora view' which hide these extra features are better ways to solve > this. Would these solutions be limited to a "read-only" scope? > > Demerits: > > > > - RH developers no longer have one-stop shopping > > - would need RH changes to support moving bugs to RH bugzilla > > - would need to run our own instance > > - RHEL should view Fedora as an integral part of the RHEL development > and QA process. Fedora should be doing everything it can to encourage > that belief, so that more RHEL QA happens in Fedora, rather than in > RHEL. Going in the opposite direction by making this harder is cutting > off your nose to spite your face. +1. Is it just me, or does the scariness of moving the build systems, etc., outside the wall seem now so much less in comparison? Scary = hard_work + deepthought is OK, but scary = unknown_pitfalls ... not so much. > > - would wipe out old bugs > > Wiping out old bugs is a good thing; on balance, unless you have > *bazillions* of testers, most old bugs cost more time to regularly > test/recheck/update/etc. than they are worth. True, but of course this should be concomitant with necessary steps to keep their reporters interested and engaged in Fedora wherever possible. -- Paul W. Frields, RHCE http://paul.frields.org/ gpg fingerprint: 3DA6 A0AC 6D58 FEC4 0233 5906 ACDB C937 BD11 3717 Fedora Project: http://pfrields.fedorapeople.org/ 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 luis at tieguy.org Tue Jan 8 01:41:44 2008 From: luis at tieguy.org (Luis Villa) Date: Mon, 7 Jan 2008 20:41:44 -0500 Subject: Fedora Bugzilla Instance (was dormant bugs and our perception) In-Reply-To: <1199747038.25114.19.camel@localhost.localdomain> References: <477D0C89.3030708@redhat.com> <477D148B.9070704@redhat.com> <477E32B6.50307@redhat.com> <20080107191104.GD19651@nostromo.devel.redhat.com> <2cb10c440801071131g6a132b61rc81e94dd15bb2c40@mail.gmail.com> <1199747038.25114.19.camel@localhost.localdomain> Message-ID: <2cb10c440801071741r4fc4c121r39ee38a757bfc03@mail.gmail.com> On Jan 7, 2008 6:03 PM, Paul W. Frields wrote: > > > - removal of various non-upstream 'features' that RH uses that Fedora > > > doesn't need > > > > I agree that it would be hard to get this without splitting, and that > > Bugzilla is cluttered enough as-is, but given the other benefits of > > staying upstream, I'd suggest that greasemonkey or a server-side > > 'fedora view' which hide these extra features are better ways to solve > > this. > > Would these solutions be limited to a "read-only" scope? Maybe 'delete-only' would be more accurate? I was just responding to the initial point, which spoke of features that need to be removed, rather than things that need to be added. > > > Demerits: > > > > > > - RH developers no longer have one-stop shopping > > > - would need RH changes to support moving bugs to RH bugzilla > > > - would need to run our own instance > > > > - RHEL should view Fedora as an integral part of the RHEL development > > and QA process. Fedora should be doing everything it can to encourage > > that belief, so that more RHEL QA happens in Fedora, rather than in > > RHEL. Going in the opposite direction by making this harder is cutting > > off your nose to spite your face. > > +1. Is it just me, or does the scariness of moving the build systems, > etc., outside the wall seem now so much less in comparison? Scary = > hard_work + deepthought is OK, but scary = unknown_pitfalls ... not so > much. It helps when the problem space is well-defined. My sense (and I may well be overlooking things here) is that currently there is a vague (and accurate) sense that Fedora bugzilla is really sub-optimal, but that no one really has a strong sense of how to fix it. I just want everyone to not underestimate the pain of hacking bugzilla (the codebase is vastly better than it was, but still grody) and particularly the > > > - would wipe out old bugs > > > > Wiping out old bugs is a good thing; on balance, unless you have > > *bazillions* of testers, most old bugs cost more time to regularly > > test/recheck/update/etc. than they are worth. > > True, but of course this should be concomitant with necessary steps to > keep their reporters interested and engaged in Fedora wherever possible. Of course. I don't regret what I did to trigger this: http://jwz.livejournal.com/154529.html but it is possible that I could have done a better job explaining why I did it. Luis From luis at tieguy.org Tue Jan 8 01:44:47 2008 From: luis at tieguy.org (Luis Villa) Date: Mon, 7 Jan 2008 20:44:47 -0500 Subject: Fedora Bugzilla Instance (was dormant bugs and our perception) In-Reply-To: <1199747038.25114.19.camel@localhost.localdomain> References: <477D0C89.3030708@redhat.com> <477D148B.9070704@redhat.com> <477E32B6.50307@redhat.com> <20080107191104.GD19651@nostromo.devel.redhat.com> <2cb10c440801071131g6a132b61rc81e94dd15bb2c40@mail.gmail.com> <1199747038.25114.19.camel@localhost.localdomain> Message-ID: <2cb10c440801071744h22b08160y461b3c23969fd277@mail.gmail.com> Oops, let me finish my thought on this one: > > > Demerits: > > > > > > - RH developers no longer have one-stop shopping > > > - would need RH changes to support moving bugs to RH bugzilla > > > - would need to run our own instance > > > > - RHEL should view Fedora as an integral part of the RHEL development > > and QA process. Fedora should be doing everything it can to encourage > > that belief, so that more RHEL QA happens in Fedora, rather than in > > RHEL. Going in the opposite direction by making this harder is cutting > > off your nose to spite your face. > > +1. Is it just me, or does the scariness of moving the build systems, > etc., outside the wall seem now so much less in comparison? Scary = > hard_work + deepthought is OK, but scary = unknown_pitfalls ... not so > much. It helps when the problem space is well-defined. My sense (and I may well be overlooking things here) is that currently there is a vague (and accurate) sense that Fedora bugzilla is really sub-optimal, but that no one really has a strong sense of how to fix it. I just want everyone to not underestimate the pain of hacking bugzilla (the codebase is vastly better than it was, but still grody) or to underestimate the benefits that could come from good practices in an integrated system, that admittedly don't happen right now, but which will never happen in a loosely-coupled system without the man-decades of work (soon to be man-century, still with no appreciably useful result) which has been put into launchpad. Luis From dimitris at glezos.com Tue Jan 8 10:54:27 2008 From: dimitris at glezos.com (Dimitris Glezos) Date: Tue, 8 Jan 2008 12:54:27 +0200 Subject: FUDCon and session filming In-Reply-To: <476A9E0D.7050501@redhat.com> References: <476A9E0D.7050501@redhat.com> Message-ID: <6d4237680801080254n5cd9d98dv3b4eadc0e5e8ccc7@mail.gmail.com> On Dec 20, 2007 6:53 PM, Mike McGrath wrote: > I seem to remember some sessions last year being recorded and made > available on the world wide interweb. Will we (more thinking Red Hat > but anyone really) have any resources to make sure more sessions are > recorded this year? Some of these sessions REALLY should be recorded [...] +1. Even raw footage from a static tripod-mounted camera is something than nothing. I was psyched last year to watch some hackergotchis springing to life and Karsten getting ecstatic about lowering the barrier for entry to new contributors. FWIW, I'll be bringing a HD camcorder and some tapes/wiring. -d > " Proposal and Demonstration of DNSSEC aware software" > "Dr. Transifex : How I > Learned to Stop Worrying and Love the Translators" > "Mass-Deploying Fedora with Cobbler" > "Running Fedora from a USB key" > > Just to name a few. Soon we'll have a fairly solid distribution medium > for this sort of media. > > -Mike -- 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 Tue Jan 8 12:36:09 2008 From: stickster at gmail.com (Paul W. Frields) Date: Tue, 08 Jan 2008 07:36:09 -0500 Subject: FUDCon and session filming In-Reply-To: <6d4237680801080254n5cd9d98dv3b4eadc0e5e8ccc7@mail.gmail.com> References: <476A9E0D.7050501@redhat.com> <6d4237680801080254n5cd9d98dv3b4eadc0e5e8ccc7@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <1199795769.3340.4.camel@localhost.localdomain> On Tue, 2008-01-08 at 12:54 +0200, Dimitris Glezos wrote: > On Dec 20, 2007 6:53 PM, Mike McGrath wrote: > > I seem to remember some sessions last year being recorded and made > > available on the world wide interweb. Will we (more thinking Red Hat > > but anyone really) have any resources to make sure more sessions are > > recorded this year? Some of these sessions REALLY should be recorded [...] > > +1. Even raw footage from a static tripod-mounted camera is something > than nothing. I was psyched last year to watch some hackergotchis > springing to life and Karsten getting ecstatic about lowering the > barrier for entry to new contributors. > > FWIW, I'll be bringing a HD camcorder and some tapes/wiring. I'll have a (SD) MiniDV camcorder and a tripod. I also have a *VERY* inexpensive but highly effective homemade "steadicam" which I can easily lend to anyone who's got time to use it. (It's far less glamorous than it sounds, but you wouldn't believe how well it works.) -- Paul W. Frields, RHCE http://paul.frields.org/ gpg fingerprint: 3DA6 A0AC 6D58 FEC4 0233 5906 ACDB C937 BD11 3717 Fedora Project: http://pfrields.fedorapeople.org/ 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 poelstra at redhat.com Tue Jan 8 17:26:15 2008 From: poelstra at redhat.com (John Poelstra) Date: Tue, 08 Jan 2008 09:26:15 -0800 Subject: closing out old bugs of unmaintained releases In-Reply-To: <20080105074732.4a7466bd@redhat.com> References: <1199534677.4111.210.camel@shinybook.infradead.org> <477F77F0.3060706@leemhuis.info> <20080105074732.4a7466bd@redhat.com> Message-ID: <4783B237.3030103@redhat.com> Jesse Keating said the following on 01/05/2008 04:47 AM Pacific Time: > On Sat, 05 Jan 2008 13:28:32 +0100 > Thorsten Leemhuis wrote: > >> In fact, something like the above is what I always do and did for my >> packages (and had to do, as I'm a package-monkey and no developer). >> >> IOW: if it's not a packaging bug or otherwise specific to Fedora I >> asked the reported to report the bug upstream, as the bug gets fixed >> for everyone then -- that includes other distributions and thus is >> the best for everyone and avoid double work in our current world with >> fivehundred-and-more distributions. If the reported didn't forward the >> bug upstream I did it if the bug looked worth forwarding. > > Except that as a maintainer it's one of your responsibilities to do > some of the upstream filing/tracking. > Agreed. And for someone where Fedora is their first experience with open source software it is disheartening and discouraging to go to the trouble to file a bug and then be told to that your effort was a waste of time because you "should have first searched for that same bug upstream and then reported a bug if you couldn't find it there." We're lucky enough that these people ran the gauntlet to get their bug in Fedora bugzilla, let alone expect them to figure where "upstream" is and how exactly to get there. This seems a little reminiscent of the old school "go read the man page" response that helps and challenges some people, while turning off a greater number. We can't grow a bigger, more vibrant community if we dis the people trying to get involved and help. John From jonstanley at gmail.com Tue Jan 8 17:43:13 2008 From: jonstanley at gmail.com (Jon Stanley) Date: Tue, 8 Jan 2008 12:43:13 -0500 Subject: closing out old bugs of unmaintained releases In-Reply-To: <4783B237.3030103@redhat.com> References: <1199534677.4111.210.camel@shinybook.infradead.org> <477F77F0.3060706@leemhuis.info> <20080105074732.4a7466bd@redhat.com> <4783B237.3030103@redhat.com> Message-ID: On Jan 8, 2008 12:26 PM, John Poelstra wrote: > let alone expect them to figure where "upstream" is and how exactly to > get there. Or even what "upstream" means. That concept would be more than a little foreign to folks who come to us from the world of proprietary software. We need to be very cognizant of that, and if we either file a bug upstream or tell the reporter to (which we shouldn't IMHO), we need to educate them on exactly what that means. Refer to the second paragraph of the original question at [1] which caught my eye a few months back and I'm happy I could find again, and this is a CS student! [1] http://ask.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=07/06/22/1526234 From stickster at gmail.com Tue Jan 8 20:06:02 2008 From: stickster at gmail.com (Paul W. Frields) Date: Tue, 08 Jan 2008 20:06:02 +0000 Subject: closing out old bugs of unmaintained releases In-Reply-To: <4783B237.3030103@redhat.com> References: <1199534677.4111.210.camel@shinybook.infradead.org> <477F77F0.3060706@leemhuis.info> <20080105074732.4a7466bd@redhat.com> <4783B237.3030103@redhat.com> Message-ID: <1199822763.3340.45.camel@localhost.localdomain> On Tue, 2008-01-08 at 09:26 -0800, John Poelstra wrote: > Jesse Keating said the following on 01/05/2008 04:47 AM Pacific Time: > > On Sat, 05 Jan 2008 13:28:32 +0100 > > Thorsten Leemhuis wrote: > > > >> In fact, something like the above is what I always do and did for my > >> packages (and had to do, as I'm a package-monkey and no developer). > >> > >> IOW: if it's not a packaging bug or otherwise specific to Fedora I > >> asked the reported to report the bug upstream, as the bug gets fixed > >> for everyone then -- that includes other distributions and thus is > >> the best for everyone and avoid double work in our current world with > >> fivehundred-and-more distributions. If the reported didn't forward the > >> bug upstream I did it if the bug looked worth forwarding. > > > > Except that as a maintainer it's one of your responsibilities to do > > some of the upstream filing/tracking. > > > > Agreed. > > And for someone where Fedora is their first experience with open source > software it is disheartening and discouraging to go to the trouble to > file a bug and then be told to that your effort was a waste of time > because you "should have first searched for that same bug upstream and > then reported a bug if you couldn't find it there." We're lucky enough > that these people ran the gauntlet to get their bug in Fedora bugzilla, > let alone expect them to figure where "upstream" is and how exactly to > get there. Couldn't have said this better myself. > This seems a little reminiscent of the old school "go read the man page" > response that helps and challenges some people, while turning off a > greater number. We can't grow a bigger, more vibrant community if we > dis the people trying to get involved and help. +1! Fedora has come a *very* long way respecting the community of developers and packagers. Now we need to get even better at welcoming a broader community of users, not the least of which are those who take the time to do that which we passionately implore of them -- "File a bug! File a bug! File a bug!" -- Paul W. Frields, RHCE http://paul.frields.org/ gpg fingerprint: 3DA6 A0AC 6D58 FEC4 0233 5906 ACDB C937 BD11 3717 Fedora Project: http://pfrields.fedorapeople.org/ 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 dwmw2 at infradead.org Tue Jan 8 21:53:23 2008 From: dwmw2 at infradead.org (David Woodhouse) Date: Tue, 08 Jan 2008 21:53:23 +0000 Subject: closing out old bugs of unmaintained releases In-Reply-To: <1199822763.3340.45.camel@localhost.localdomain> References: <1199534677.4111.210.camel@shinybook.infradead.org> <477F77F0.3060706@leemhuis.info> <20080105074732.4a7466bd@redhat.com> <4783B237.3030103@redhat.com> <1199822763.3340.45.camel@localhost.localdomain> Message-ID: <1199829204.4111.409.camel@shinybook.infradead.org> On Tue, 2008-01-08 at 20:06 +0000, Paul W. Frields wrote: > > This seems a little reminiscent of the old school "go read the man page" > > response that helps and challenges some people, while turning off a > > greater number. We can't grow a bigger, more vibrant community if we > > dis the people trying to get involved and help. > > +1! Fedora has come a *very* long way respecting the community of > developers and packagers. Now we need to get even better at welcoming a > broader community of users, not the least of which are those who take > the time to do that which we passionately implore of them -- "File a > bug! File a bug! File a bug!" I think there's more to it than that -- it's not just the PR angle. I think that if our packagers aren't willing and able to take an active r?le in ensuring the quality of the software we ship, we have a serious problem. I welcome the non-programmers who volunteer to package software, and their work is very valuable -- but it really isn't going to turn out well for Fedora if we prioritise quantity over quality to the extent that we end up shipping packages which we can't _properly_ maintain. The quote I posted earlier in this thread ("this is a bug in the software, not the packaging") is taken verbatim from bugzilla, and I find it extremely shocking. We have to do better than this, really. Either that or go back to having a clear 'second class' repository again, which I don't think we really want. Perhaps one option would be for non-programmer packagers to team up with a programmer/sponsor to take on the task of package maintenance? Where currently a package has one 'owner', there would instead be two r?les -- a 'packager' and potentially a separate 'hacker'. Those wanting to package software which they can't fully maintain for themselves would have to recruit a programmer-type to sign up for the job with them. I would certainly welcome being part of such a partnership -- I lack the wit and the attention to detail for actually packaging software, and I would like someone clever to do that bit, leaving me with the monkey-work of poking at the damn thing in gdb when it's _really_ misbehaving, which I happen to find enjoyable and which my deranged brain can actually handle. -- dwmw2 From Christian.Iseli at licr.org Tue Jan 8 22:20:27 2008 From: Christian.Iseli at licr.org (Christian Iseli) Date: Tue, 8 Jan 2008 23:20:27 +0100 Subject: closing out old bugs of unmaintained releases In-Reply-To: <1199829204.4111.409.camel@shinybook.infradead.org> References: <1199534677.4111.210.camel@shinybook.infradead.org> <477F77F0.3060706@leemhuis.info> <20080105074732.4a7466bd@redhat.com> <4783B237.3030103@redhat.com> <1199822763.3340.45.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1199829204.4111.409.camel@shinybook.infradead.org> Message-ID: <20080108232027.4e038c84@ludwig-alpha.unil.ch> On Tue, 08 Jan 2008 21:53:23 +0000, David Woodhouse wrote: > I welcome the non-programmers who volunteer to package software, and > their work is very valuable -- but it really isn't going to turn out > well for Fedora if we prioritise quantity over quality to the extent > that we end up shipping packages which we can't _properly_ maintain. > > The quote I posted earlier in this thread ("this is a bug in the > software, not the packaging") is taken verbatim from bugzilla, and I > find it extremely shocking. We have to do better than this, really. > Either that or go back to having a clear 'second class' repository > again, which I don't think we really want. Agreed. > Perhaps one option would be for non-programmer packagers to team up > with a programmer/sponsor to take on the task of package maintenance? > Where currently a package has one 'owner', there would instead be two > r?les -- a 'packager' and potentially a separate 'hacker'. Those > wanting to package software which they can't fully maintain for > themselves would have to recruit a programmer-type to sign up for the > job with them. I like this idea. And I know we have very capable programmers who already offered to help squash bugs in various source code dialects. Christian From stickster at gmail.com Tue Jan 8 23:49:15 2008 From: stickster at gmail.com (Paul W. Frields) Date: Tue, 08 Jan 2008 23:49:15 +0000 Subject: closing out old bugs of unmaintained releases In-Reply-To: <20080108232027.4e038c84@ludwig-alpha.unil.ch> References: <1199534677.4111.210.camel@shinybook.infradead.org> <477F77F0.3060706@leemhuis.info> <20080105074732.4a7466bd@redhat.com> <4783B237.3030103@redhat.com> <1199822763.3340.45.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1199829204.4111.409.camel@shinybook.infradead.org> <20080108232027.4e038c84@ludwig-alpha.unil.ch> Message-ID: <1199836155.3340.64.camel@localhost.localdomain> On Tue, 2008-01-08 at 23:20 +0100, Christian Iseli wrote: > On Tue, 08 Jan 2008 21:53:23 +0000, David Woodhouse wrote: > > I welcome the non-programmers who volunteer to package software, and > > their work is very valuable -- but it really isn't going to turn out > > well for Fedora if we prioritise quantity over quality to the extent > > that we end up shipping packages which we can't _properly_ maintain. > > > > The quote I posted earlier in this thread ("this is a bug in the > > software, not the packaging") is taken verbatim from bugzilla, and I > > find it extremely shocking. We have to do better than this, really. > > Either that or go back to having a clear 'second class' repository > > again, which I don't think we really want. > > Agreed. Concur. > > Perhaps one option would be for non-programmer packagers to team up > > with a programmer/sponsor to take on the task of package maintenance? > > Where currently a package has one 'owner', there would instead be two > > r?les -- a 'packager' and potentially a separate 'hacker'. Those > > wanting to package software which they can't fully maintain for > > themselves would have to recruit a programmer-type to sign up for the > > job with them. > > I like this idea. And I know we have very capable programmers who > already offered to help squash bugs in various source code dialects. As do I. I have the ability to fix a few easier target bugs in the software I maintain, but not harder ones. For instance, the recent changes WRT gio would only boggle me. But Matthias Clasen has been kind enough to give me some pointers to fix those problems, and that has helped, or will help in some cases, a lot. I know that I can't be the only person in that situation. -- Paul W. Frields, RHCE http://paul.frields.org/ gpg fingerprint: 3DA6 A0AC 6D58 FEC4 0233 5906 ACDB C937 BD11 3717 Fedora Project: http://pfrields.fedorapeople.org/ 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 smooge at gmail.com Wed Jan 9 00:09:24 2008 From: smooge at gmail.com (Stephen John Smoogen) Date: Tue, 8 Jan 2008 17:09:24 -0700 Subject: closing out old bugs of unmaintained releases In-Reply-To: <1199829204.4111.409.camel@shinybook.infradead.org> References: <1199534677.4111.210.camel@shinybook.infradead.org> <477F77F0.3060706@leemhuis.info> <20080105074732.4a7466bd@redhat.com> <4783B237.3030103@redhat.com> <1199822763.3340.45.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1199829204.4111.409.camel@shinybook.infradead.org> Message-ID: <80d7e4090801081609me0fddd6ye003938a2f95ec9a@mail.gmail.com> On Jan 8, 2008 2:53 PM, David Woodhouse wrote: > On Tue, 2008-01-08 at 20:06 +0000, Paul W. Frields wrote: > > > This seems a little reminiscent of the old school "go read the man page" > > > response that helps and challenges some people, while turning off a > > > greater number. We can't grow a bigger, more vibrant community if we > > > dis the people trying to get involved and help. > > > > +1! Fedora has come a *very* long way respecting the community of > > developers and packagers. Now we need to get even better at welcoming a > > broader community of users, not the least of which are those who take > > the time to do that which we passionately implore of them -- "File a > > bug! File a bug! File a bug!" > > I think there's more to it than that -- it's not just the PR angle. I > think that if our packagers aren't willing and able to take an active > r?le in ensuring the quality of the software we ship, we have a serious > problem. > > I welcome the non-programmers who volunteer to package software, and > their work is very valuable -- but it really isn't going to turn out > well for Fedora if we prioritise quantity over quality to the extent > that we end up shipping packages which we can't _properly_ maintain. > > The quote I posted earlier in this thread ("this is a bug in the > software, not the packaging") is taken verbatim from bugzilla, and I > find it extremely shocking. We have to do better than this, really. > Either that or go back to having a clear 'second class' repository > again, which I don't think we really want. > > Perhaps one option would be for non-programmer packagers to team up with > a programmer/sponsor to take on the task of package maintenance? Where > currently a package has one 'owner', there would instead be two r?les -- > a 'packager' and potentially a separate 'hacker'. Those wanting to > package software which they can't fully maintain for themselves would > have to recruit a programmer-type to sign up for the job with them. > > I would certainly welcome being part of such a partnership -- I lack the > wit and the attention to detail for actually packaging software, and I > would like someone clever to do that bit, leaving me with the > monkey-work of poking at the damn thing in gdb when it's _really_ > misbehaving, which I happen to find enjoyable and which my deranged > brain can actually handle. > > -- I think that this would be a useful item.. there are probably only 1 experienced programmer to every 10-20 packagers out there. Getting some mentorship and help would be a useful 2 way street. I think that it might be good to look at package teams. Say a package has 1-2 'lead-programmers', 2-3 packagers with some sort of schedule for whose turn it is in the barrel. This would allow for more peer programming and more train the trainer items so that the next generation of programmers can take over in 2-3 years when Dr Woodhouse has finally built his secret base on the moon and retires there with his retinue of Fembots. Again growing pains as we figure out how to make software work for our community. Also.. here is what I would like to say for triaging bugs: Lets put together a pool of money for triage work and put a contest together not for the most closed bugs, but the most tested to see if the problem is still around in FC9-alpha-alpha-1. -- Stephen J Smoogen. -- CSIRT/Linux System Administrator How far that little candle throws his beams! So shines a good deed in a naughty world. = Shakespeare. "The Merchant of Venice" From poelstra at redhat.com Wed Jan 9 01:17:06 2008 From: poelstra at redhat.com (John Poelstra) Date: Tue, 08 Jan 2008 17:17:06 -0800 Subject: FUDCon F9 Bugzilla Planning (was Re: dormant bugs and our perception) Message-ID: <47842092.5000401@redhat.com> John Poelstra said the following on 01/02/2008 02:14 PM Pacific Time: > In other words, we need to create a solid plan with input from lots of > people and then execute it. FUDCon would be a great place to get > started.... not sure if this is a hackfest or barcamp topic. > > John > > [1] I'll post to the wiki and announce once I have something of > substance. Most likely not until next week. > http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/JohnPoelstra/ImprovingBugzillaF9 During my searching I found that Jon Stanley has also put up a page of ideas which is excellent. I think he has already mentioned it in a post, but I'll give it another plug. http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/JonStanley/BugTriageIdeas My page probably overlaps in areas and is a 0.3 draft. It is definitely redundant in places and could be tightened up. Feel free to add to it--I'll be making changes to it too up until the time we meet. I think it is easier to gather proposed ideas for this on one of our wiki pages instead of continuing the mail threads so that there some central places to reference when we start discussing at FUDCon vs. trying to comb through all the mailing list threads again then. John From fedora at leemhuis.info Wed Jan 9 06:16:22 2008 From: fedora at leemhuis.info (Thorsten Leemhuis) Date: Wed, 09 Jan 2008 07:16:22 +0100 Subject: closing out old bugs of unmaintained releases In-Reply-To: <1199829204.4111.409.camel@shinybook.infradead.org> References: <1199534677.4111.210.camel@shinybook.infradead.org> <477F77F0.3060706@leemhuis.info> <20080105074732.4a7466bd@redhat.com> <4783B237.3030103@redhat.com> <1199822763.3340.45.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1199829204.4111.409.camel@shinybook.infradead.org> Message-ID: <478466B6.4060709@leemhuis.info> On 08.01.2008 22:53, David Woodhouse wrote: > Perhaps one option would be for non-programmer packagers to team up with > a programmer/sponsor to take on the task of package maintenance? Don't put more bureaucracy or hurdles in the way. That won't scale and will frustrate people and some will feel a second-class citizen (I already feel unwanted more and more in Fedora-land after this discussion because I never found time to learn proper programming -- mostly due to fact that most of my free time is already filled with Fedora-related work). We have a lot of non-hackers that maintain packages in Fedora and it worked well so far and that in parts made Fedora what it is today. What IMHO would be good instead of what you outline: groups of people (SIGs) a package-monkey can contact if he needs help to fix or improve something needs programming skills. CU knurd From Christian.Iseli at licr.org Wed Jan 9 08:32:02 2008 From: Christian.Iseli at licr.org (Christian Iseli) Date: Wed, 9 Jan 2008 09:32:02 +0100 Subject: closing out old bugs of unmaintained releases In-Reply-To: <478466B6.4060709@leemhuis.info> References: <1199534677.4111.210.camel@shinybook.infradead.org> <477F77F0.3060706@leemhuis.info> <20080105074732.4a7466bd@redhat.com> <4783B237.3030103@redhat.com> <1199822763.3340.45.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1199829204.4111.409.camel@shinybook.infradead.org> <478466B6.4060709@leemhuis.info> Message-ID: <20080109093202.1f81335d@ludwig-alpha.unil.ch> On Wed, 09 Jan 2008 07:16:22 +0100, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote: > Don't put more bureaucracy or hurdles in the way. That won't scale and > will frustrate people and some will feel a second-class citizen (I > already feel unwanted more and more in Fedora-land after this > discussion because I never found time to learn proper programming -- > mostly due to fact that most of my free time is already filled with > Fedora-related work). I do not think anyone is trying to require packagers to be able programmers. At least, that's not the spirit I'd like to see. > We have a lot of non-hackers that maintain packages in Fedora and it > worked well so far and that in parts made Fedora what it is today. > What IMHO would be good instead of what you outline: groups of people > (SIGs) a package-monkey can contact if he needs help to fix or improve > something needs programming skills. What I'd like to see is: - emergence of a group of able programmers willing to help squashing bugs in other maintainers' packages, and an easy way to alert this group of people to a list of bugs to squash - education of the non-programmers packagers that they can and *should* seek help from the above group when needed, and how to go about this process Christian From bugs.michael at gmx.net Wed Jan 9 08:39:14 2008 From: bugs.michael at gmx.net (Michael Schwendt) Date: Wed, 9 Jan 2008 09:39:14 +0100 Subject: closing out old bugs of unmaintained releases In-Reply-To: <478466B6.4060709@leemhuis.info> References: <1199534677.4111.210.camel@shinybook.infradead.org> <477F77F0.3060706@leemhuis.info> <20080105074732.4a7466bd@redhat.com> <4783B237.3030103@redhat.com> <1199822763.3340.45.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1199829204.4111.409.camel@shinybook.infradead.org> <478466B6.4060709@leemhuis.info> Message-ID: <20080109093914.0586a2de.bugs.michael@gmx.net> On Wed, 09 Jan 2008 07:16:22 +0100, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote: > On 08.01.2008 22:53, David Woodhouse wrote: > > Perhaps one option would be for non-programmer packagers to team up with > > a programmer/sponsor to take on the task of package maintenance? > > Don't put more bureaucracy or hurdles in the way. That won't scale and > will frustrate people and some will feel a second-class citizen Not just that, it is completely unrealistic to hope that there would be enough volunteers to fill the "programmer/sponsor" role. As soon as a package has found a packager for Fedora, it already becomes hard to find a second person with interest in either co-packaging it or taking it over. One can observe Fedora users building [large] software from source tarballs as soon as a package in Fedora is not the latest version or causes a problem, but they don't consider becoming Fedora Contributors to join a team that oversees the same software in packages. Becoming a packager is not attractive enough when there are many requirements (such as policies and procedures) and obligations. And those, who have the technical capabilities (in particular, knowledge of the relevant APIs and inner-workings of the packaged software itself) either are active upstream already or are occupied with other work/interests. > What > IMHO would be good instead of what you outline: groups of people (SIGs) > a package-monkey can contact if he needs help to fix or improve > something needs programming skills. Is it necessary to increase complexity of the Fedora Project's structure by adding lots of small SIGs like that? The Wiki pages are really troublesome already because it has become increasingly difficult to navigate in them and find what you are looking for. Additionally, there's still the problem of over-complex page layout, such as pseudo-menus that use tables and include files. I'd rather suggest that packagers request assistance on fedora-devel-list or via some keyword/feature in bugzilla. From fedora at leemhuis.info Wed Jan 9 08:51:28 2008 From: fedora at leemhuis.info (Thorsten Leemhuis) Date: Wed, 09 Jan 2008 09:51:28 +0100 Subject: closing out old bugs of unmaintained releases In-Reply-To: <20080109093202.1f81335d@ludwig-alpha.unil.ch> References: <1199534677.4111.210.camel@shinybook.infradead.org> <477F77F0.3060706@leemhuis.info> <20080105074732.4a7466bd@redhat.com> <4783B237.3030103@redhat.com> <1199822763.3340.45.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1199829204.4111.409.camel@shinybook.infradead.org> <478466B6.4060709@leemhuis.info> <20080109093202.1f81335d@ludwig-alpha.unil.ch> Message-ID: <47848B10.8050604@leemhuis.info> On 09.01.2008 09:32, Christian Iseli wrote: >> We have a lot of non-hackers that maintain packages in Fedora and it >> worked well so far and that in parts made Fedora what it is today. >> What IMHO would be good instead of what you outline: groups of people >> (SIGs) a package-monkey can contact if he needs help to fix or improve >> something needs programming skills. > What I'd like to see is: > - emergence of a group of able programmers willing to help squashing > bugs in other maintainers' packages, and an easy way to alert this > group of people to a list of bugs to squash > - education of the non-programmers packagers that they can and *should* > seek help from the above group when needed, and how to go about this > process That's what I meant in better words ;) CU knurd From fedora at leemhuis.info Wed Jan 9 09:09:27 2008 From: fedora at leemhuis.info (Thorsten Leemhuis) Date: Wed, 09 Jan 2008 10:09:27 +0100 Subject: closing out old bugs of unmaintained releases In-Reply-To: <20080109093914.0586a2de.bugs.michael@gmx.net> References: <1199534677.4111.210.camel@shinybook.infradead.org> <477F77F0.3060706@leemhuis.info> <20080105074732.4a7466bd@redhat.com> <4783B237.3030103@redhat.com> <1199822763.3340.45.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1199829204.4111.409.camel@shinybook.infradead.org> <478466B6.4060709@leemhuis.info> <20080109093914.0586a2de.bugs.michael@gmx.net> Message-ID: <47848F47.2070900@leemhuis.info> On 09.01.2008 09:39, Michael Schwendt wrote: > On Wed, 09 Jan 2008 07:16:22 +0100, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote: >> On 08.01.2008 22:53, David Woodhouse wrote: >>> Perhaps one option would be for non-programmer packagers to team up with >>> a programmer/sponsor to take on the task of package maintenance? >> Don't put more bureaucracy or hurdles in the way. That won't scale and >> will frustrate people and some will feel a second-class citizen > Not just that, it is completely unrealistic to hope that there would be > enough volunteers to fill the "programmer/sponsor" role. [...] +1 >> What >> IMHO would be good instead of what you outline: groups of people (SIGs) >> a package-monkey can contact if he needs help to fix or improve >> something needs programming skills. > Is it necessary to increase complexity of the Fedora Project's structure > by adding lots of small SIGs like that? The Wiki pages are really > troublesome already because it has become increasingly difficult to > navigate in them and find what you are looking for. Additionally, there's > still the problem of over-complex page layout, such as pseudo-menus that > use tables and include files. I'd rather suggest that packagers request > assistance on fedora-devel-list or via some keyword/feature in bugzilla. Hmmm. SIGs for me are not part of "Fedora Project's structure" -- they are just a loose group of people that simply do something without formal structure (they can have one if they want of course). Sure, most SIGs have a page in the Wiki for advertising and tracking, but there is iirc no rule "SIGs must have a page in the wiki". CU knurd From bugs.michael at gmx.net Wed Jan 9 10:20:54 2008 From: bugs.michael at gmx.net (Michael Schwendt) Date: Wed, 9 Jan 2008 11:20:54 +0100 Subject: closing out old bugs of unmaintained releases In-Reply-To: <47848F47.2070900@leemhuis.info> References: <1199534677.4111.210.camel@shinybook.infradead.org> <477F77F0.3060706@leemhuis.info> <20080105074732.4a7466bd@redhat.com> <4783B237.3030103@redhat.com> <1199822763.3340.45.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1199829204.4111.409.camel@shinybook.infradead.org> <478466B6.4060709@leemhuis.info> <20080109093914.0586a2de.bugs.michael@gmx.net> <47848F47.2070900@leemhuis.info> Message-ID: <20080109112054.ec7bf0c1.bugs.michael@gmx.net> On Wed, 09 Jan 2008 10:09:27 +0100, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote: > Hmmm. SIGs for me are not part of "Fedora Project's structure" -- they > are just a loose group of people that simply do something without formal > structure (they can have one if they want of course). Sure, most SIGs > have a page in the Wiki for advertising and tracking, but there is iirc > no rule "SIGs must have a page in the wiki". Okay, probably using plural {"groups of people (SIGs)"} was misleading then. I just would prefer to see the procedure (i.e. the HOW TO request help) documented somewhere instead of an inflation of SIGs. First see the demand (i.e. the number of requests for help with technical issues), then find out how the possibly small bug-fixing squad manages to deal with the load. It could likely happen that they will be flooded with a growing queue of bugzilla tickets. And, of course, upstream should not be forgotten in the process. Especially not when uptream is not Fedora-hostile (and not biased), but active, confirms problems, and works on a fix instead of reacting with a shrug of the shoulders. From dwmw2 at infradead.org Wed Jan 9 11:05:05 2008 From: dwmw2 at infradead.org (David Woodhouse) Date: Wed, 09 Jan 2008 11:05:05 +0000 Subject: closing out old bugs of unmaintained releases In-Reply-To: <478466B6.4060709@leemhuis.info> References: <1199534677.4111.210.camel@shinybook.infradead.org> <477F77F0.3060706@leemhuis.info> <20080105074732.4a7466bd@redhat.com> <4783B237.3030103@redhat.com> <1199822763.3340.45.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1199829204.4111.409.camel@shinybook.infradead.org> <478466B6.4060709@leemhuis.info> Message-ID: <1199876705.4111.442.camel@shinybook.infradead.org> On Wed, 2008-01-09 at 07:16 +0100, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote: > Don't put more bureaucracy or hurdles in the way. That's a sensible request. > That won't scale and > will frustrate people and some will feel a second-class citizen (I > already feel unwanted more and more in Fedora-land after this discussion > because I never found time to learn proper programming -- mostly due to > fact that most of my free time is already filled with Fedora-related work). I'm sorry you feel that way, and I believe that you shouldn't. They are two entirely separate skill sets, and it doesn't necessarily follow that a non-programmer packager should be 'training' to become a programmer, or vice versa. You are very good at packaging software, and not a programmer. There's no shame in that. I am... well, I manage to scrape a living by programming, but I suck at packaging things because I don't have the attention-span for it. I don't feel particularly shameful about that either. Shipping software and supporting it requires input from both of us. I'd like us to have a sensible discussion about how we handle that requirement, without anyone feeling unwanted. > We have a lot of non-hackers that maintain packages in Fedora and it > worked well so far and that in parts made Fedora what it is today. What > IMHO would be good instead of what you outline: groups of people (SIGs) > a package-monkey can contact if he needs help to fix or improve > something needs programming skills. Fundamentally, that's fairly much what I was saying. Christian phrases it slightly better, mostly IMHO because he stresses "can and *should*". But I think we are fairly much in agreement about what we'd like to happen in principle; we're just not sure on the details of how to achieve it. I'll follow up to a different mail on that topic... -- dwmw2 From dwmw2 at infradead.org Wed Jan 9 11:22:32 2008 From: dwmw2 at infradead.org (David Woodhouse) Date: Wed, 09 Jan 2008 11:22:32 +0000 Subject: closing out old bugs of unmaintained releases In-Reply-To: <47848B10.8050604@leemhuis.info> References: <1199534677.4111.210.camel@shinybook.infradead.org> <477F77F0.3060706@leemhuis.info> <20080105074732.4a7466bd@redhat.com> <4783B237.3030103@redhat.com> <1199822763.3340.45.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1199829204.4111.409.camel@shinybook.infradead.org> <478466B6.4060709@leemhuis.info> <20080109093202.1f81335d@ludwig-alpha.unil.ch> <47848B10.8050604@leemhuis.info> Message-ID: <1199877752.4111.459.camel@shinybook.infradead.org> On Wed, 2008-01-09 at 09:51 +0100, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote: > On 09.01.2008 09:32, Christian Iseli wrote: > >> We have a lot of non-hackers that maintain packages in Fedora and it > >> worked well so far and that in parts made Fedora what it is today. > >> What IMHO would be good instead of what you outline: groups of people > >> (SIGs) a package-monkey can contact if he needs help to fix or improve > >> something needs programming skills. > > What I'd like to see is: > > - emergence of a group of able programmers willing to help squashing > > bugs in other maintainers' packages, and an easy way to alert this > > group of people to a list of bugs to squash > > - education of the non-programmers packagers that they can and *should* > > seek help from the above group when needed, and how to go about this > > process > > That's what I meant in better words ;) So do we have a nebulous group of 'programmers with free time' and call upon them as an when they're needed, or do we have a programmer sign up to 'own' a package in conjunction with the 'packager'? I favour the latter, for much the same reason as we have specific package owners in the first place rather than a free-for-all?: - it sets the _expectation_ that this is the person who will step up when action is necessary (although we aren't going to turn up on your doorstep and promote an attitude of violence if you don't). - it gives some primitive level of workload control. If the programmer is and unable to keep up with the packages he/she has signed up to work on, he/she can stop taking on new packages and/or try to find others to take over some of them. - it would give the non-programmer packager a first point of contact when he/she needs help, rather than a general appeal to a mailing list where nobody feels 'ownership' of the problem at hand. - it gives the programmer 'community' the opportunity to throw their hands up in horror and say "No! This code is a steaming pile of crap and should not ever be shipped with the Fedora name on it", rather than being stuck with supporting it after the fact. I think that as part of the review process, a non-programmer packager should identify a programmer who has agreed to help look after the package. This might often be the packager's sponsor, or it could be the owner of the upstream code (some are more helpful than others), or it could be someone else who believes themselves capable of working on the code to the extent that it's likely to be necessary. But they should be identified in advance, rather than letting packagers just add arbitrary packages to the pool and expecting a 'programmer SIG' to cope with whatever's thrown at them. Or letting packagers add packages to the pool and then refuse to support them, which is sometimes happening at the moment. -- dwmw2 ? Although I do feel that the old Red Hat internal process benefited a lot by being a bit _more_ of a free-for-all than we have in Fedora. Fedora seems to have largely lost the teamwork mentality. But that's a separate issue. From caillon at redhat.com Wed Jan 9 12:14:58 2008 From: caillon at redhat.com (Christopher Aillon) Date: Wed, 09 Jan 2008 13:14:58 +0100 Subject: closing out old bugs of unmaintained releases In-Reply-To: <1199877752.4111.459.camel@shinybook.infradead.org> References: <1199534677.4111.210.camel@shinybook.infradead.org> <477F77F0.3060706@leemhuis.info> <20080105074732.4a7466bd@redhat.com> <4783B237.3030103@redhat.com> <1199822763.3340.45.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1199829204.4111.409.camel@shinybook.infradead.org> <478466B6.4060709@leemhuis.info> <20080109093202.1f81335d@ludwig-alpha.unil.ch> <47848B10.8050604@leemhuis.info> <1199877752.4111.459.camel@shinybook.infradead.org> Message-ID: <4784BAC2.30201@redhat.com> On 01/09/2008 12:22 PM, David Woodhouse wrote: > So do we have a nebulous group of 'programmers with free time' and call > upon them as an when they're needed, or do we have a programmer sign up > to 'own' a package in conjunction with the 'packager'? > > I favour the latter, for much the same reason as we have specific > package owners in the first place rather than a free-for-all?: Why not both? This way the not as popular packages may have a chance of getting fixes from someone when needed. From dwmw2 at infradead.org Wed Jan 9 12:47:57 2008 From: dwmw2 at infradead.org (David Woodhouse) Date: Wed, 09 Jan 2008 12:47:57 +0000 Subject: closing out old bugs of unmaintained releases In-Reply-To: <4784BAC2.30201@redhat.com> References: <1199534677.4111.210.camel@shinybook.infradead.org> <477F77F0.3060706@leemhuis.info> <20080105074732.4a7466bd@redhat.com> <4783B237.3030103@redhat.com> <1199822763.3340.45.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1199829204.4111.409.camel@shinybook.infradead.org> <478466B6.4060709@leemhuis.info> <20080109093202.1f81335d@ludwig-alpha.unil.ch> <47848B10.8050604@leemhuis.info> <1199877752.4111.459.camel@shinybook.infradead.org> <4784BAC2.30201@redhat.com> Message-ID: <1199882877.2978.7.camel@pmac.infradead.org> On Wed, 2008-01-09 at 13:14 +0100, Christopher Aillon wrote: > On 01/09/2008 12:22 PM, David Woodhouse wrote: > > So do we have a nebulous group of 'programmers with free time' and call > > upon them as an when they're needed, or do we have a programmer sign up > > to 'own' a package in conjunction with the 'packager'? > > > > I favour the latter, for much the same reason as we have specific > > package owners in the first place rather than a free-for-all?: > > Why not both? This way the not as popular packages may have a chance of > getting fixes from someone when needed. Absolutely, but then we really are digressing into the "WTF happened to teamwork" discussion. I think there should be a programmer who signs up to be responsible for each package. As a separate issue, I think that ACLs should be abolished and anyone who _wants_ to help (and has executed the CLA and is trusted enough to have been sponsored and given an account) should be _permitted_ to help. I was trying to avoid conflating the two -- there is merit in having named individuals who are listed as having taken responsibility for certain things, as well as _allowing_ people to help out wherever they like in a more informal fashion. It's not strictly an either-or choice. -- dwmw2 From rc040203 at freenet.de Wed Jan 9 12:58:04 2008 From: rc040203 at freenet.de (Ralf Corsepius) Date: Wed, 09 Jan 2008 13:58:04 +0100 Subject: closing out old bugs of unmaintained releases In-Reply-To: <20080109093914.0586a2de.bugs.michael@gmx.net> References: <1199534677.4111.210.camel@shinybook.infradead.org> <477F77F0.3060706@leemhuis.info> <20080105074732.4a7466bd@redhat.com> <4783B237.3030103@redhat.com> <1199822763.3340.45.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1199829204.4111.409.camel@shinybook.infradead.org> <478466B6.4060709@leemhuis.info> <20080109093914.0586a2de.bugs.michael@gmx.net> Message-ID: <1199883484.5534.240.camel@beck.corsepiu.local> On Wed, 2008-01-09 at 09:39 +0100, Michael Schwendt wrote: > On Wed, 09 Jan 2008 07:16:22 +0100, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote: > > > On 08.01.2008 22:53, David Woodhouse wrote: > > > Perhaps one option would be for non-programmer packagers to team up with > > > a programmer/sponsor to take on the task of package maintenance? > > > > Don't put more bureaucracy or hurdles in the way. That won't scale and > > will frustrate people and some will feel a second-class citizen > > Not just that, it is completely unrealistic to hope that there would be > enough volunteers to fill the "programmer/sponsor" role. That's true, but my answer is different than yours: I feel the current sponsorship/tutor/mentor model is dead, because the infrastructure and the packaging workflow are not in a shape suitable for such a model to work out and because some "maintainers" are unwilling to team up. > > What > > IMHO would be good instead of what you outline: groups of people (SIGs) > > a package-monkey can contact if he needs help to fix or improve > > something needs programming skills. > > Is it necessary to increase complexity of the Fedora Project's structure > by adding lots of small SIGs like that? Why not? They collect people with common interests. IMO, a good thing. But, as the perl-sig issue (JPO AWOL) in late last year demonstrated, the real issue which is preventing such groups from working out on collaborating on package maintenance, is Fedora's infrastructure (esp. ACLs). Ralf From mmcgrath at redhat.com Mon Jan 14 00:28:55 2008 From: mmcgrath at redhat.com (Mike McGrath) Date: Sun, 13 Jan 2008 18:28:55 -0600 (CST) Subject: "Action Items" From FUDCon? Message-ID: Can anyone think of any action items the infrastructure team (or others for that matter) may need to do as a result of discussions during hackfest/fudcon? -Mike /me hates the phrase "Action Items" but "Stuff to do from FUDCon" just didn't sound right. From stickster at gmail.com Mon Jan 14 03:33:24 2008 From: stickster at gmail.com (Paul W. Frields) Date: Sun, 13 Jan 2008 22:33:24 -0500 Subject: "Action Items" From FUDCon? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <1200281604.18971.91.camel@localhost.localdomain> On Sun, 2008-01-13 at 18:28 -0600, Mike McGrath wrote: > Can anyone think of any action items the infrastructure team (or others > for that matter) may need to do as a result of discussions during > hackfest/fudcon? > > -Mike > > /me hates the phrase "Action Items" but "Stuff to do from FUDCon" just > didn't sound right. I use that phrase myself, sorry if it's obscene. :-D I'm thinking back to our SSO session, where of course I did a lot of talking (maybe 1/2 to be fair) and not any writing. But we talked about: * being a WordPress/Lyceum (multiuser) provider * Seth knows about this as well as of this morning, and didn't immediately want to kill anyone * using it to test OpenID capabilities (there's an OpenID 2.0 plugin for WP) Hopefully this will spark some memories of other things that came up, but that's what comes to my mind immediately. -- Paul W. Frields, RHCE http://paul.frields.org/ gpg fingerprint: 3DA6 A0AC 6D58 FEC4 0233 5906 ACDB C937 BD11 3717 Fedora Project: http://pfrields.fedorapeople.org/ 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 jspaleta at gmail.com Mon Jan 14 03:42:37 2008 From: jspaleta at gmail.com (Jeff Spaleta) Date: Sun, 13 Jan 2008 18:42:37 -0900 Subject: "Action Items" From FUDCon? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <604aa7910801131942j1cc293f3j18cc23d25d5c0311@mail.gmail.com> On Jan 13, 2008 3:28 PM, Mike McGrath wrote: > Can anyone think of any action items the infrastructure team (or others > for that matter) may need to do as a result of discussions during > hackfest/fudcon? figure out how to get koji to write back an immutable unique tag back into cvs for each non-scratch koji build that completes. Or something equivalent so we can regenerate srpms from cvs reasonably easily for any package version we have released. There is an issue right now with forced retagging in cvs still being possible which means we can't rely on the tags that get created when a contributor does a make tag. -jef From mspevack at redhat.com Mon Jan 14 03:43:39 2008 From: mspevack at redhat.com (Max Spevack) Date: Sun, 13 Jan 2008 22:43:39 -0500 (EST) Subject: "Action Items" From FUDCon? In-Reply-To: <1200281604.18971.91.camel@localhost.localdomain> References: <1200281604.18971.91.camel@localhost.localdomain> Message-ID: On Sun, 13 Jan 2008, Paul W. Frields wrote: > * being a WordPress/Lyceum (multiuser) provider If the decision is made to do this, then any work that we do in this area could be immediately useful to Red Hat Magazine, which has had occasionaly infrastructure difficulties but right now is running on Lyceum. I'd be willing to wager that the Fedora setup could meet our needs and also theirs, and perhaps lead to a deal in which whatever hardware they are using can be included into our pool provided that we keep Red Hat Magazine up, which would be a very small amount of additional work on top of what it seems like we might do anyway. Does what I'm trying to say make sense? If we do X work to get our own multi-user blog infrastructure up, for a very small amount we might be able to do a better and cheaper job for the Red Hat Magazine folks, and in doing so be able to make use of some of their hardware. --Max From jspaleta at gmail.com Mon Jan 14 03:51:52 2008 From: jspaleta at gmail.com (Jeff Spaleta) Date: Sun, 13 Jan 2008 18:51:52 -0900 Subject: "Action Items" From FUDCon? In-Reply-To: <1200281604.18971.91.camel@localhost.localdomain> References: <1200281604.18971.91.camel@localhost.localdomain> Message-ID: <604aa7910801131951m741a84e7ncd6fe11e329e8e11@mail.gmail.com> On Jan 13, 2008 6:33 PM, Paul W. Frields wrote: > * being a WordPress/Lyceum (multiuser) provider > * Seth knows about this as well as of this morning, and didn't > immediately want to kill anyone > * using it to test OpenID capabilities (there's an OpenID 2.0 plugin > for WP) The Fedoratv codebase is a wordpress derivative as well. So keep that in mind. Having our own wordpress instance, might mean we can grow a competent contributor base for both a wordpress and Fedoratv base and move the Fedoratv development forward more quickly. -jef From sopwith at gmail.com Mon Jan 14 04:03:09 2008 From: sopwith at gmail.com (Elliot Lee) Date: Sun, 13 Jan 2008 20:03:09 -0800 Subject: "Action Items" From FUDCon? In-Reply-To: <604aa7910801131951m741a84e7ncd6fe11e329e8e11@mail.gmail.com> References: <1200281604.18971.91.camel@localhost.localdomain> <604aa7910801131951m741a84e7ncd6fe11e329e8e11@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <0A6A06FA-E1D4-4B02-B560-96BBD348E6FE@gmail.com> On Jan 13, 2008, at 19:51 , Jeff Spaleta wrote: > On Jan 13, 2008 6:33 PM, Paul W. Frields wrote: >> * being a WordPress/Lyceum (multiuser) provider >> * Seth knows about this as well as of this morning, and didn't >> immediately want to kill anyone >> * using it to test OpenID capabilities (there's an OpenID 2.0 plugin >> for WP) > > The Fedoratv codebase is a wordpress derivative as well. So keep that > in mind. Having our own wordpress instance, might mean we can grow a > competent contributor base for both a wordpress and Fedoratv base and > move the Fedoratv development forward more quickly. FWIW, I evaluated various blog systems a while back for use by the community of a large publishing-related site, and Wordpress/Lyceum were among the less desirable ones. Especially avoid Wordpress-MU (it creates a new set of DB tables for every single user...) Just wanted to suggest taking a look at roller.apache.org or blojsom.com. The main Roller hacker also lives in the NC Triangle area, and was very helpful answering my questions in the past, as well as incorporating changes to accomodate my requirements. Best, -- Elliot From skvidal at fedoraproject.org Mon Jan 14 04:09:26 2008 From: skvidal at fedoraproject.org (seth vidal) Date: Sun, 13 Jan 2008 23:09:26 -0500 Subject: "Action Items" From FUDCon? In-Reply-To: <0A6A06FA-E1D4-4B02-B560-96BBD348E6FE@gmail.com> References: <1200281604.18971.91.camel@localhost.localdomain> <604aa7910801131951m741a84e7ncd6fe11e329e8e11@mail.gmail.com> <0A6A06FA-E1D4-4B02-B560-96BBD348E6FE@gmail.com> Message-ID: <1200283766.13733.22.camel@cutter> On Sun, 2008-01-13 at 20:03 -0800, Elliot Lee wrote: > FWIW, I evaluated various blog systems a while back for use by the > community of a large publishing-related site, and Wordpress/Lyceum > were among the less desirable ones. Especially avoid Wordpress-MU (it > creates a new set of DB tables for every single user...) > > Just wanted to suggest taking a look at roller.apache.org or > blojsom.com. The main Roller hacker also lives in the NC Triangle > area, and was very helpful answering my questions in the past, as well > as incorporating changes to accomodate my requirements. > The biggest plus to wordpress is its openid integration. According to Mr Frields it is top notch and is something we probably want to pursue in all of our apps, eventually. -sv From jonstanley at gmail.com Mon Jan 14 05:21:52 2008 From: jonstanley at gmail.com (Jon Stanley) Date: Mon, 14 Jan 2008 00:21:52 -0500 Subject: "Action Items" From FUDCon? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Jan 13, 2008 7:28 PM, Mike McGrath wrote: > Can anyone think of any action items the infrastructure team (or others > for that matter) may need to do as a result of discussions during > hackfest/fudcon? We (me and John Poelstra) need to come up with a bugzilla workflow that's sane, and present it to FESco for review/ripping apart :) > /me hates the phrase "Action Items" but "Stuff to do from FUDCon" just > didn't sound right. AI's is fine with me, but I guess that I have corporate brain rot :/ From jeff at ocjtech.us Mon Jan 14 05:50:07 2008 From: jeff at ocjtech.us (Jeffrey Ollie) Date: Sun, 13 Jan 2008 23:50:07 -0600 Subject: "Action Items" From FUDCon? In-Reply-To: <604aa7910801131942j1cc293f3j18cc23d25d5c0311@mail.gmail.com> References: <604aa7910801131942j1cc293f3j18cc23d25d5c0311@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <935ead450801132150nf3c4effx15297677e9bf6e82@mail.gmail.com> On 1/13/08, Jeff Spaleta wrote: > On Jan 13, 2008 3:28 PM, Mike McGrath wrote: > > Can anyone think of any action items the infrastructure team (or others > > for that matter) may need to do as a result of discussions during > > hackfest/fudcon? > > figure out how to get koji to write back an immutable unique tag back > into cvs for each non-scratch koji build that completes. Or something > equivalent so we can regenerate srpms from cvs reasonably easily for > any package version we have released. There is an issue right now > with forced retagging in cvs still being possible which means we can't > rely on the tags that get created when a contributor does a make tag. >From what I know of CVS, this isn't possible from inside CVS and likely very difficult from outside CVS too. Basically, you'd have to set up a database outside CVS that would track the version (and maybe the MD5/SHA signature) of every file that koji used to build the SRPM. With this setup you could at least know if CVS had been messed with after Koji did the build. I know I'm going to evoke some groans when I say this, but Git provides exactly the mechanism that you're looking for. The Git commit id is actually a SHA1 hash of the history of a particular commit. If you know the Git commit id you can be guaranteed that you got exactly the same source out that you put in. I believe that Mercurial has a similar system, however I'm not sure that that Mercurial makes as strong guarantees as Git does. I believe that both Git and Mercurial provide the ability to GPG sign a tag - another way to accomplish this goal would be for Koji to sign the tags that it builds from. Jeff From jspaleta at gmail.com Mon Jan 14 06:02:46 2008 From: jspaleta at gmail.com (Jeff Spaleta) Date: Sun, 13 Jan 2008 21:02:46 -0900 Subject: "Action Items" From FUDCon? In-Reply-To: <935ead450801132150nf3c4effx15297677e9bf6e82@mail.gmail.com> References: <604aa7910801131942j1cc293f3j18cc23d25d5c0311@mail.gmail.com> <935ead450801132150nf3c4effx15297677e9bf6e82@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <604aa7910801132202h6caa29barf7a22c2863d3f96d@mail.gmail.com> On Jan 13, 2008 8:50 PM, Jeffrey Ollie wrote: > >From what I know of CVS, this isn't possible from inside CVS and > likely very difficult from outside CVS too. Basically, you'd have to > set up a database outside CVS that would track the version (and maybe > the MD5/SHA signature) of every file that koji used to build the SRPM. > With this setup you could at least know if CVS had been messed with > after Koji did the build. Are you aware of what are cvs is setup to do right now? make srpm basically provides the needed functionality in a checked out cvs tree. For the purpose of recreating srpms for binaries we distribute on-demand we just have to have tags we can trust corresponding to a build we can trust. In discussion with infrastructure and release people before it was brought up that it would be a good idea to have koji re-tag back into cvs after a build to indicate it was a releasable build and that its a trivial change in how things are done. -jef From jeff at ocjtech.us Mon Jan 14 06:45:01 2008 From: jeff at ocjtech.us (Jeffrey Ollie) Date: Mon, 14 Jan 2008 00:45:01 -0600 Subject: "Action Items" From FUDCon? In-Reply-To: <604aa7910801132202h6caa29barf7a22c2863d3f96d@mail.gmail.com> References: <604aa7910801131942j1cc293f3j18cc23d25d5c0311@mail.gmail.com> <935ead450801132150nf3c4effx15297677e9bf6e82@mail.gmail.com> <604aa7910801132202h6caa29barf7a22c2863d3f96d@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <935ead450801132245wf32f021ya305f6a803df37af@mail.gmail.com> On 1/14/08, Jeff Spaleta wrote: > On Jan 13, 2008 8:50 PM, Jeffrey Ollie wrote: > > >From what I know of CVS, this isn't possible from inside CVS and > > likely very difficult from outside CVS too. Basically, you'd have to > > set up a database outside CVS that would track the version (and maybe > > the MD5/SHA signature) of every file that koji used to build the SRPM. > > With this setup you could at least know if CVS had been messed with > > after Koji did the build. > > Are you aware of what are cvs is setup to do right now? make srpm > basically provides the needed functionality in a checked out cvs tree. > For the purpose of recreating srpms for binaries we distribute > on-demand we just have to have tags we can trust corresponding to a > build we can trust. In discussion with infrastructure and release > people before it was brought up that it would be a good idea to have > koji re-tag back into cvs after a build to indicate it was a > releasable build and that its a trivial change in how things are done. The problem with your line of reasoning is that you can't trust the tags in CVS. Isn't that why we are having this discussion in the first place? If people can move the regular tags in CVS (and they can) they'd be able to move the tags that Koji adds just as easily. Why not extend the taginfo script already in use to prohibit tag moving and deletion? For extra points you could only prohibit moving or deleting tags that had been submitted to Koji for a build (I think that you'd want to preserve even unsuccessful build tags for postmortems). While the security/reliability of CVS's scripts isn't stellar (re the syncmail control-c problems) this would get you closer to the goal. I think that this would also have a deleterious effect on the speed of the tagging operation. Personally, I'm tired of hacking around CVS's deficiencies and would rather work on moving to a VCS that provided stronger guarantees about the integrity of the data. Jeff From Axel.Thimm at ATrpms.net Mon Jan 14 06:57:15 2008 From: Axel.Thimm at ATrpms.net (Axel Thimm) Date: Mon, 14 Jan 2008 08:57:15 +0200 Subject: "Action Items" From FUDCon? In-Reply-To: <604aa7910801131942j1cc293f3j18cc23d25d5c0311@mail.gmail.com> References: <604aa7910801131942j1cc293f3j18cc23d25d5c0311@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <20080114065715.GA12126@puariko.nirvana> On Sun, Jan 13, 2008 at 06:42:37PM -0900, Jeff Spaleta wrote: > On Jan 13, 2008 3:28 PM, Mike McGrath wrote: > > Can anyone think of any action items the infrastructure team (or others > > for that matter) may need to do as a result of discussions during > > hackfest/fudcon? > > figure out how to get koji to write back an immutable unique tag back > into cvs for each non-scratch koji build that completes. Or something > equivalent so we can regenerate srpms from cvs reasonably easily for > any package version we have released. There is an issue right now > with forced retagging in cvs still being possible which means we can't > rely on the tags that get created when a contributor does a make tag. I would consider "forced retagging" a feature not a bug. Otherwise for each failed build during development you get a release tag inflation with no useful %changelog entries (sure one can pile up all comments about how many bugs one introduced during an upgrade of a package, but that's not what the %changelog is about ;). And having scratch builds to avoid this and a proper one at the end sounds like too much CPU cycles burning. But I fully agree on the need to have a reproducable method for packages. Just don't remove the retagging *feature* for packagers :) -- 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 Mon Jan 14 07:02:15 2008 From: Axel.Thimm at ATrpms.net (Axel Thimm) Date: Mon, 14 Jan 2008 09:02:15 +0200 Subject: "Action Items" From FUDCon? In-Reply-To: <935ead450801132245wf32f021ya305f6a803df37af@mail.gmail.com> References: <604aa7910801131942j1cc293f3j18cc23d25d5c0311@mail.gmail.com> <935ead450801132150nf3c4effx15297677e9bf6e82@mail.gmail.com> <604aa7910801132202h6caa29barf7a22c2863d3f96d@mail.gmail.com> <935ead450801132245wf32f021ya305f6a803df37af@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <20080114070215.GB12126@puariko.nirvana> On Mon, Jan 14, 2008 at 12:45:01AM -0600, Jeffrey Ollie wrote: > Personally, I'm tired of hacking around CVS's deficiencies and would > rather work on moving to a VCS that provided stronger guarantees about > the integrity of the data. Couldn't agree more - we did have a VCS strike team to determine the next generation vcs to use, what happened to it (of which I was part of, so actually it is a question to myself ...). Maybe we should go away from this list and consult on fedora-infra/buildsys lists again on what the successor to CVS should be. I think it had boiled down to either mercurial or git. (FWIW the current CVS problem could be solved by having koji remember the file revisions over which the user has no control - it's the symbolical tags that the user can retag - drawback is that one needs koji to remember all files & revision/per/file for each build, but koji is an automaton, so it will cope with it until given a proper vcs :) -- 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 jspaleta at gmail.com Mon Jan 14 07:12:27 2008 From: jspaleta at gmail.com (Jeff Spaleta) Date: Sun, 13 Jan 2008 22:12:27 -0900 Subject: "Action Items" From FUDCon? In-Reply-To: <20080114065715.GA12126@puariko.nirvana> References: <604aa7910801131942j1cc293f3j18cc23d25d5c0311@mail.gmail.com> <20080114065715.GA12126@puariko.nirvana> Message-ID: <604aa7910801132312u79074821pc8eb0ef5be589d20@mail.gmail.com> On Jan 13, 2008 9:57 PM, Axel Thimm wrote: > I would consider "forced retagging" a feature not a bug. Otherwise for > each failed build during development you get a release tag inflation > with no useful %changelog entries (sure one can pile up all comments > about how many bugs one introduced during an upgrade of a package, but > that's not what the %changelog is about ;). Perhaps you read this wrong. I'm not looking to take away the ability of contributors to retag like they are currently doing. But I want a way for koji to add an additional tag back into cvs that maintainers don't need to touch as part of the workflow for creating tags that koji uses for input. > > And having scratch builds to avoid this and a proper one at the end > sounds like too much CPU cycles burning. Again perhaps i wasn't clear. I don't care about scratch builds at all. I don't need people to do scratch builds, I don't need koji to write a tag back into cvs for scratch builds. I just want koji to write a tag back to CVS for things that completely a build with a release candidate target of some sort that we can rely on to exist. So if I need to regenerate the srpm associated with that koji build which we released to a public tree. > > But I fully agree on the need to have a reproducable method for > packages. Just don't remove the retagging *feature* for packagers :) I'd very much like to avoid removing retagging. If koji was writing new, specially formatted tags back to CVS at the end of each completed build would that get in way of using retagging like you have been using? -jef From jspaleta at gmail.com Mon Jan 14 07:14:45 2008 From: jspaleta at gmail.com (Jeff Spaleta) Date: Sun, 13 Jan 2008 22:14:45 -0900 Subject: "Action Items" From FUDCon? In-Reply-To: <20080114070215.GB12126@puariko.nirvana> References: <604aa7910801131942j1cc293f3j18cc23d25d5c0311@mail.gmail.com> <935ead450801132150nf3c4effx15297677e9bf6e82@mail.gmail.com> <604aa7910801132202h6caa29barf7a22c2863d3f96d@mail.gmail.com> <935ead450801132245wf32f021ya305f6a803df37af@mail.gmail.com> <20080114070215.GB12126@puariko.nirvana> Message-ID: <604aa7910801132314u7569bd1fu4a6eb64498841c18@mail.gmail.com> On Jan 13, 2008 10:02 PM, Axel Thimm wrote: > (FWIW the current CVS problem could be solved by having koji remember > the file revisions over which the user has no control - it's the > symbolical tags that the user can retag - drawback is that one needs > koji to remember all files & revision/per/file for each build, but > koji is an automaton, so it will cope with it until given a proper vcs I cannot rely on koji holding the information necessary for srpm regeneration. The information needs to be in cvs, so that the only thing needed to regenerate the srpm for a specific published binary rpm is access to an archive of cvs at some future date. -jef From stickster at gmail.com Mon Jan 14 13:33:49 2008 From: stickster at gmail.com (Paul W. Frields) Date: Mon, 14 Jan 2008 08:33:49 -0500 Subject: "Action Items" From FUDCon? In-Reply-To: <1200283766.13733.22.camel@cutter> References: <1200281604.18971.91.camel@localhost.localdomain> <604aa7910801131951m741a84e7ncd6fe11e329e8e11@mail.gmail.com> <0A6A06FA-E1D4-4B02-B560-96BBD348E6FE@gmail.com> <1200283766.13733.22.camel@cutter> Message-ID: <1200317629.18971.121.camel@localhost.localdomain> On Sun, 2008-01-13 at 23:09 -0500, seth vidal wrote: > On Sun, 2008-01-13 at 20:03 -0800, Elliot Lee wrote: > > > FWIW, I evaluated various blog systems a while back for use by the > > community of a large publishing-related site, and Wordpress/Lyceum > > were among the less desirable ones. Especially avoid Wordpress-MU (it > > creates a new set of DB tables for every single user...) > > > > Just wanted to suggest taking a look at roller.apache.org or > > blojsom.com. The main Roller hacker also lives in the NC Triangle > > area, and was very helpful answering my questions in the past, as well > > as incorporating changes to accomodate my requirements. > > > > The biggest plus to wordpress is its openid integration. According to Mr > Frields it is top notch and is something we probably want to pursue in > all of our apps, eventually. To be fair, I just said it *has it*, but it does appear to work just fine on my blog. The plugin is here: http://wordpress.org/extend/plugins/openid/ We should do what we can to encourage adoption of OpenID, IMHO. -- Paul W. Frields, RHCE http://paul.frields.org/ gpg fingerprint: 3DA6 A0AC 6D58 FEC4 0233 5906 ACDB C937 BD11 3717 Fedora Project: http://pfrields.fedorapeople.org/ 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 gdk at redhat.com Mon Jan 14 13:55:33 2008 From: gdk at redhat.com (Greg DeKoenigsberg) Date: Mon, 14 Jan 2008 08:55:33 -0500 (EST) Subject: "Action Items" From FUDCon? In-Reply-To: <604aa7910801131951m741a84e7ncd6fe11e329e8e11@mail.gmail.com> References: <1200281604.18971.91.camel@localhost.localdomain> <604aa7910801131951m741a84e7ncd6fe11e329e8e11@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: On Sun, 13 Jan 2008, Jeff Spaleta wrote: > On Jan 13, 2008 6:33 PM, Paul W. Frields wrote: >> * being a WordPress/Lyceum (multiuser) provider >> * Seth knows about this as well as of this morning, and didn't >> immediately want to kill anyone >> * using it to test OpenID capabilities (there's an OpenID 2.0 plugin >> for WP) > > The Fedoratv codebase is a wordpress derivative as well. So keep that > in mind. Having our own wordpress instance, might mean we can grow a > competent contributor base for both a wordpress and Fedoratv base and > move the Fedoratv development forward more quickly. It's also been a stated goal of the Percolate folks to bring that codebase back to being merely a plug-in to Wordpress, instead of an entire fork. The more capacity/knowledge around Wordpress we can build, the better. --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 jeff at ocjtech.us Mon Jan 14 15:26:40 2008 From: jeff at ocjtech.us (Jeffrey Ollie) Date: Mon, 14 Jan 2008 09:26:40 -0600 Subject: "Action Items" From FUDCon? In-Reply-To: <604aa7910801132314u7569bd1fu4a6eb64498841c18@mail.gmail.com> References: <604aa7910801131942j1cc293f3j18cc23d25d5c0311@mail.gmail.com> <935ead450801132150nf3c4effx15297677e9bf6e82@mail.gmail.com> <604aa7910801132202h6caa29barf7a22c2863d3f96d@mail.gmail.com> <935ead450801132245wf32f021ya305f6a803df37af@mail.gmail.com> <20080114070215.GB12126@puariko.nirvana> <604aa7910801132314u7569bd1fu4a6eb64498841c18@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <935ead450801140726w53965a47x87c34b808846a6d1@mail.gmail.com> On 1/14/08, Jeff Spaleta wrote: > On Jan 13, 2008 10:02 PM, Axel Thimm wrote: > > (FWIW the current CVS problem could be solved by having koji remember > > the file revisions over which the user has no control - it's the > > symbolical tags that the user can retag - drawback is that one needs > > koji to remember all files & revision/per/file for each build, but > > koji is an automaton, so it will cope with it until given a proper vcs > > I cannot rely on koji holding the information necessary for srpm > regeneration. The information needs to be in cvs, so that the only > thing needed to regenerate the srpm for a specific published binary > rpm is access to an archive of cvs at some future date. I think that the least disruptive option is to enhance the tag checking script to prevent moving or deleting CVS tags that have been submitted to Koji for building. It's not a perfect solution because CVS provides very weak guarantees of data integrity/consistency but it may be "good enough". Jeff From mmcgrath at redhat.com Mon Jan 14 15:26:58 2008 From: mmcgrath at redhat.com (Mike McGrath) Date: Mon, 14 Jan 2008 09:26:58 -0600 (CST) Subject: "Action Items" From FUDCon? In-Reply-To: <20080114070215.GB12126@puariko.nirvana> References: <604aa7910801131942j1cc293f3j18cc23d25d5c0311@mail.gmail.com> <935ead450801132150nf3c4effx15297677e9bf6e82@mail.gmail.com> <604aa7910801132202h6caa29barf7a22c2863d3f96d@mail.gmail.com> <935ead450801132245wf32f021ya305f6a803df37af@mail.gmail.com> <20080114070215.GB12126@puariko.nirvana> Message-ID: On Mon, 14 Jan 2008, Axel Thimm wrote: > On Mon, Jan 14, 2008 at 12:45:01AM -0600, Jeffrey Ollie wrote: > > Personally, I'm tired of hacking around CVS's deficiencies and would > > rather work on moving to a VCS that provided stronger guarantees about > > the integrity of the data. > > Couldn't agree more - we did have a VCS strike team to determine the > next generation vcs to use, what happened to it (of which I was part > of, so actually it is a question to myself ...). Maybe we should go > away from this list and consult on fedora-infra/buildsys lists again > on what the successor to CVS should be. I think it had boiled down to > either mercurial or git. No one ever really stood up and said "Here's my vision for what I think the next VCS should be" and stood with it (through the fire and flames that will come to anyone who does that). We had some people get into some very good discussions but unfortunately I think $DAYJOB is in the way. If someone is interested, here's the page, start putting meetings together. Until that time I think we're stuck with CVS. http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Infrastructure/SCMSig -Mike From mmcgrath at redhat.com Mon Jan 14 15:30:45 2008 From: mmcgrath at redhat.com (Mike McGrath) Date: Mon, 14 Jan 2008 09:30:45 -0600 (CST) Subject: "Action Items" From FUDCon? In-Reply-To: References: <1200281604.18971.91.camel@localhost.localdomain> Message-ID: On Sun, 13 Jan 2008, Max Spevack wrote: > On Sun, 13 Jan 2008, Paul W. Frields wrote: > > > * being a WordPress/Lyceum (multiuser) provider > > If the decision is made to do this, then any work that we do in this area > could be immediately useful to Red Hat Magazine, which has had occasionaly > infrastructure difficulties but right now is running on Lyceum. > > I'd be willing to wager that the Fedora setup could meet our needs and also > theirs, and perhaps lead to a deal in which whatever hardware they are using > can be included into our pool provided that we keep Red Hat Magazine up, which > would be a very small amount of additional work on top of what it seems like > we might do anyway. > > Does what I'm trying to say make sense? If we do X work to get our own > multi-user blog infrastructure up, for a very small amount we might be able to > do a better and cheaper job for the Red Hat Magazine folks, and in doing so be > able to make use of some of their hardware. This is something we can certainly look at. I've created a bug for those that want to take an interest in how its installed/reviewed: https://fedorahosted.org/fedora-infrastructure/ticket/342 Its down as a Fedora 10 milestone though hopefully we can get some time / space to do it prior to that. -Mike From jkeating at redhat.com Mon Jan 14 15:55:08 2008 From: jkeating at redhat.com (Jesse Keating) Date: Mon, 14 Jan 2008 10:55:08 -0500 Subject: "Action Items" From FUDCon? In-Reply-To: <935ead450801140726w53965a47x87c34b808846a6d1@mail.gmail.com> References: <604aa7910801131942j1cc293f3j18cc23d25d5c0311@mail.gmail.com> <935ead450801132150nf3c4effx15297677e9bf6e82@mail.gmail.com> <604aa7910801132202h6caa29barf7a22c2863d3f96d@mail.gmail.com> <935ead450801132245wf32f021ya305f6a803df37af@mail.gmail.com> <20080114070215.GB12126@puariko.nirvana> <604aa7910801132314u7569bd1fu4a6eb64498841c18@mail.gmail.com> <935ead450801140726w53965a47x87c34b808846a6d1@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <20080114105508.57b63d1a@redhat.com> On Mon, 14 Jan 2008 09:26:40 -0600 "Jeffrey Ollie" wrote: > I think that the least disruptive option is to enhance the tag > checking script to prevent moving or deleting CVS tags that have been > submitted to Koji for building. It's not a perfect solution because > CVS provides very weak guarantees of data integrity/consistency but it > may be "good enough". Except that you can just call cvs itself to do the tag manipulation, and that I don't think can be prevented. -- 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 jeff at ocjtech.us Mon Jan 14 16:02:23 2008 From: jeff at ocjtech.us (Jeffrey Ollie) Date: Mon, 14 Jan 2008 10:02:23 -0600 Subject: "Action Items" From FUDCon? In-Reply-To: References: <604aa7910801131942j1cc293f3j18cc23d25d5c0311@mail.gmail.com> <935ead450801132150nf3c4effx15297677e9bf6e82@mail.gmail.com> <604aa7910801132202h6caa29barf7a22c2863d3f96d@mail.gmail.com> <935ead450801132245wf32f021ya305f6a803df37af@mail.gmail.com> <20080114070215.GB12126@puariko.nirvana> Message-ID: <935ead450801140802q471a0ed4ya82fd19caadb671a@mail.gmail.com> On 1/14/08, Mike McGrath wrote: > > No one ever really stood up and said "Here's my vision for what I think > the next VCS should be" and stood with it (through the fire and flames > that will come to anyone who does that). I think that part of this is that no matter which VCS gets proposed there's a certain percentage of the population that screams bloody murder because either or both of these conditions are true: 1) It's not their pet VCS. 2) It's different from what the packaging community is used to. It's definitely hard to get the motivation to withstand the religious debates... Lennert Buytenhek has done a lot of work to build a solution using Git, so if it's decided to go that route we've got a leg up. > We had some people get into > some very good discussions but unfortunately I think $DAYJOB is in the > way. > > If someone is interested, here's the page, start putting meetings > together. Until that time I think we're stuck with CVS. Yeah, I think that's the rub here. The people who get paid to work on Fedora are busy enough with their current Fedora tasks. The people that don't get paid to work on Fedora are busy with their own work. What are the chances that RH or some other Fedora-friendly corporation would be able to dedicate someone's time to solving this problem? I think that it'd need to be more than an intern or a Google SoC project to make any real progress against the political hurdles. Jeff From jeff at ocjtech.us Mon Jan 14 16:02:40 2008 From: jeff at ocjtech.us (Jeffrey Ollie) Date: Mon, 14 Jan 2008 10:02:40 -0600 Subject: "Action Items" From FUDCon? In-Reply-To: <20080114105508.57b63d1a@redhat.com> References: <604aa7910801131942j1cc293f3j18cc23d25d5c0311@mail.gmail.com> <935ead450801132150nf3c4effx15297677e9bf6e82@mail.gmail.com> <604aa7910801132202h6caa29barf7a22c2863d3f96d@mail.gmail.com> <935ead450801132245wf32f021ya305f6a803df37af@mail.gmail.com> <20080114070215.GB12126@puariko.nirvana> <604aa7910801132314u7569bd1fu4a6eb64498841c18@mail.gmail.com> <935ead450801140726w53965a47x87c34b808846a6d1@mail.gmail.com> <20080114105508.57b63d1a@redhat.com> Message-ID: <935ead450801140802m77598ebbs13c074a18c59ad11@mail.gmail.com> On 1/14/08, Jesse Keating wrote: > On Mon, 14 Jan 2008 09:26:40 -0600 > "Jeffrey Ollie" wrote: > > > I think that the least disruptive option is to enhance the tag > > checking script to prevent moving or deleting CVS tags that have been > > submitted to Koji for building. It's not a perfect solution because > > CVS provides very weak guarantees of data integrity/consistency but it > > may be "good enough". > > Except that you can just call cvs itself to do the tag manipulation, > and that I don't think can be prevented. Yes, which is why it isn't a perfect solution, but people seem to want to band-aid CVS ("the devil they know") rather than move to something that has a more elegant solution to this problem ("the devil they don't know"). Jeff From matt at domsch.com Mon Jan 14 16:22:21 2008 From: matt at domsch.com (Matt Domsch) Date: Mon, 14 Jan 2008 10:22:21 -0600 Subject: "Action Items" From FUDCon? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20080114162219.GA15117@domsch.com> On Sun, Jan 13, 2008 at 06:28:55PM -0600, Mike McGrath wrote: > Can anyone think of any action items the infrastructure team (or others > for that matter) may need to do as a result of discussions during > hackfest/fudcon? Lots of little things came out of discussions I was in. Not all are action items, just to ponder. * MirrorManager mirrorlist needs to be able to provide the list of mirrors _by protocol_. e.g append &proto={http,ftp,rsync} to get back the list of rsync mirrors. Should be easy enough for me to add. Unity folks want this. * Promote/rebrand the Rescue ISO into the "Fedora Network-based Installer". Needs trivial change (clumens will make) to use default path download.fp.o/pub/fedora/.... This will allow users to get started installing or upgrading by downloading only ~100MB instead of ~700MB. Debate fate of boot.iso which lets people get started by downloading only 8MB, knowing they need to download another 92MB stage2 immediately during install too. * follow-up - teach anaconda loader to parse a mirrorlist instead of using a single default path. This provides better failover capability and lets users choose which mirror they want. * follow-up - anaconda doesn't have a way to mimic yum Ctrl-C to jump to the next mirror in the mirrorlist in case you've hit a dud/slow mirror. Would be nice to have. * yum-avahi plugin, and some form of sharing. Think avahi query 'who has foo-0.1.3-1.i386.rpm in your yum cache?', get back answers, and download from that local user. Repo metadata could be done likewise (it too is signed after all). * UEFI support is shaping up thanks to PeterJ. Now to finish that in time for F9. * DaveJ had some good ideas for disabling unneeded syncs during install (e.g. remount / as ext2 during install - no reason to journal then, and mount as ext3 afterwards). Fix rpm so it doesn't fsync() after writing each file to disk. Also fix the syslogd so it doesn't fsync() after each line when writing out the logs during bootup. * Mock has gotten faster recently - enough so that we could probably throw lots more builds at our build systems. One fallout is that when a in the dependency tree changes, we could have koji kick off scratch builds of all applications later in the dependency tree, to discover compile-time breakage of those later applications. This would let us catch these earlier. Some people do this already themselves manually - I'm saying integrate it into koji. (If we need to add more build servers, we can investigate.) * With the re-invigorated marketing push, look for ways to get additional sponsorship and to integrate sponsors into the Fedora community (as opposed to merely asking for money). * Improve Packaging around software licenses to more automate checking for license compatibility (two apps separately licensed - are their licenses compatible...) -Matt From matt at domsch.com Mon Jan 14 19:44:38 2008 From: matt at domsch.com (Matt Domsch) Date: Mon, 14 Jan 2008 13:44:38 -0600 Subject: "Action Items" From FUDCon? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20080114194438.GA9335@domsch.com> On Sun, Jan 13, 2008 at 06:28:55PM -0600, Mike McGrath wrote: > Can anyone think of any action items the infrastructure team (or others > for that matter) may need to do as a result of discussions during > hackfest/fudcon? * FAS 1 and 2 make sure usernames can be >8 chars. From stickster at gmail.com Mon Jan 14 21:11:25 2008 From: stickster at gmail.com (Paul W. Frields) Date: Mon, 14 Jan 2008 21:11:25 +0000 Subject: "Action Items" From FUDCon? In-Reply-To: <20080114162219.GA15117@domsch.com> References: <20080114162219.GA15117@domsch.com> Message-ID: <1200345085.27222.51.camel@localhost.localdomain> On Mon, 2008-01-14 at 10:22 -0600, Matt Domsch wrote: > On Sun, Jan 13, 2008 at 06:28:55PM -0600, Mike McGrath wrote: > > Can anyone think of any action items the infrastructure team (or others > > for that matter) may need to do as a result of discussions during > > hackfest/fudcon? > > > Lots of little things came out of discussions I was in. Not all are > action items, just to ponder. Looking at your action list, I realized that I have many, many pages of notes taken in various places to transcribe here. I only mentioned the one that immediately came to mind for Infrastructure, but spreading the rest out for consumption would be a good thing. More to come.... -- Paul W. Frields, RHCE http://paul.frields.org/ gpg fingerprint: 3DA6 A0AC 6D58 FEC4 0233 5906 ACDB C937 BD11 3717 Fedora Project: http://pfrields.fedorapeople.org/ 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 bugs.michael at gmx.net Tue Jan 15 09:40:13 2008 From: bugs.michael at gmx.net (Michael Schwendt) Date: Tue, 15 Jan 2008 10:40:13 +0100 Subject: "Action Items" From FUDCon? In-Reply-To: <20080114162219.GA15117@domsch.com> References: <20080114162219.GA15117@domsch.com> Message-ID: <20080115104013.121ae937.bugs.michael@gmx.net> On Mon, 14 Jan 2008 10:22:21 -0600, Matt Domsch wrote: > * Mock has gotten faster recently - enough so that we could probably > throw lots more builds at our build systems. Can Koji deal with "lots more builds" in appropriate ways? Would it kill (and later requeue) a low-priority build-job in favour of a more important build-job? [...] It's the huge packages (e.g. openoffice, kernel or several MB of C++) which occupy a build-host for a long time because compiling them takes much more time than setting up a mock buildroot. When such build-jobs are active, they slow down other builds on the same host significantly. Koji tries to spread the load, but for "lots more builds", such as scratch and debug builds, it would better use special spare servers if any of those jobs ran for a long or unexpected period. Unless it can kill+requeue less important builds automatically. As Plague has gotten faster recently, too, and no longer chokes on downloading build results, the build server load becomes more obvious. Together with mock's caching of initial buildroots, the many small packages now build in roughly one minute when a build-host is not too busy. Examples in footnote [1]. But as soon as a builder runs a "heavy" koji build-job in parallel, it can be seen how that slows down the additional plague build-job: http://buildsys.fedoraproject.org/build-status/job.psp?uid=37880 - xenbuilder2 took 5 minutes for i386/x86_64 - ppc2 took 19 minutes (!) http://buildsys.fedoraproject.org/build-status/job.psp?uid=37878 - hammer2 took 1 minute for i386 (!) - ppc2 took 3 minutes - xenbuilder2 took 10 minutes for x86_64 http://buildsys.fedoraproject.org/build-status/job.psp?uid=37876 - ppc2 took 4 minutes - xenbuilder2 took 10-11 minutes for i386/x86_64 The second example is most impressive. Plague doesn't choose hammer2 most of the time, because with the current config it first occupies two of the four slots on xenbuilder2 before using hammer2. It doesn't know either when koji already uses a build-host. But I assume that koji builds are slowed down similarly. So, better not try to keep the build-hosts busy when that would increase the average time of response for our packagers. The more free the builders are, the faster a packager receives results for a build, even for a helpful scratch-build of a package that compiles for 10-15 minutes till it ends with an error. -- [1] http://buildsys.fedoraproject.org/build-status/job.psp?uid=37870 http://buildsys.fedoraproject.org/build-status/job.psp?uid=37875 http://buildsys.fedoraproject.org/build-status/job.psp?uid=37874 http://buildsys.fedoraproject.org/build-status/job.psp?uid=37865 http://buildsys.fedoraproject.org/build-status/job.psp?uid=37859 http://buildsys.fedoraproject.org/build-status/job.psp?uid=37853 From jkeating at redhat.com Tue Jan 15 16:42:10 2008 From: jkeating at redhat.com (Jesse Keating) Date: Tue, 15 Jan 2008 11:42:10 -0500 Subject: Flush end of lifed binaries from master mirror Message-ID: <20080115114210.23e801e1@redhat.com> It was brought up during FUDCon that we could help our mirrors out a lot if we flushed our outdated binary content. Old test releases, released earlier than FC6. Just the binaries for now, the sources can stay around (well except for the test releases, those can go). Does anybody have any objections to doing this? I'll make sure the binaries are sufficiently archived somewhere before flushing them. -- 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 skvidal at fedoraproject.org Tue Jan 15 16:41:55 2008 From: skvidal at fedoraproject.org (seth vidal) Date: Tue, 15 Jan 2008 11:41:55 -0500 Subject: Flush end of lifed binaries from master mirror In-Reply-To: <20080115114210.23e801e1@redhat.com> References: <20080115114210.23e801e1@redhat.com> Message-ID: <1200415315.15198.3.camel@cutter> On Tue, 2008-01-15 at 11:42 -0500, Jesse Keating wrote: > It was brought up during FUDCon that we could help our mirrors out a > lot if we flushed our outdated binary content. Old test releases, > released earlier than FC6. Just the binaries for now, the sources can > stay around (well except for the test releases, those can go). > > Does anybody have any objections to doing this? I'll make sure the > binaries are sufficiently archived somewhere before flushing them. None, nuke them from orbit. It's the only way to be sure. -sv From smooge at gmail.com Tue Jan 15 20:30:55 2008 From: smooge at gmail.com (Stephen John Smoogen) Date: Tue, 15 Jan 2008 13:30:55 -0700 Subject: Flush end of lifed binaries from master mirror In-Reply-To: <20080115114210.23e801e1@redhat.com> References: <20080115114210.23e801e1@redhat.com> Message-ID: <80d7e4090801151230m6687e844u796708105ea1f2b1@mail.gmail.com> On Jan 15, 2008 9:42 AM, Jesse Keating wrote: > It was brought up during FUDCon that we could help our mirrors out a > lot if we flushed our outdated binary content. Old test releases, > released earlier than FC6. Just the binaries for now, the sources can > stay around (well except for the test releases, those can go). > > Does anybody have any objections to doing this? I'll make sure the > binaries are sufficiently archived somewhere before flushing them. > Well as long as the archives don't flush the data because it got flushed from master mirror :). The other issue is how long does the source code need to be available from the primary source for GNU GPL or other licenses requirements? Both of these are probably moot questions... but I will play mr ignoramus. -- Stephen J Smoogen. -- CSIRT/Linux System Administrator How far that little candle throws his beams! So shines a good deed in a naughty world. = Shakespeare. "The Merchant of Venice" From matt at domsch.com Tue Jan 15 20:44:47 2008 From: matt at domsch.com (Matt Domsch) Date: Tue, 15 Jan 2008 14:44:47 -0600 Subject: Flush end of lifed binaries from master mirror In-Reply-To: <80d7e4090801151230m6687e844u796708105ea1f2b1@mail.gmail.com> References: <20080115114210.23e801e1@redhat.com> <80d7e4090801151230m6687e844u796708105ea1f2b1@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <20080115204447.GA507@domsch.com> On Tue, Jan 15, 2008 at 01:30:55PM -0700, Stephen John Smoogen wrote: > Well as long as the archives don't flush the data because it got > flushed from master mirror :). The other issue is how long does the > source code need to be available from the primary source for GNU GPL > or other licenses requirements? Both of these are probably moot > questions... but I will play mr ignoramus. We distribute GPLv2 code under paragraph 3a, source posted concurrent with binaries. Therefore we can remove both concurrently, or just remove the binaries (Jesse's proposal) at will. We can be nice and leave the source there for longer than the binaries if we wish. Thanks, Matt From jspaleta at gmail.com Tue Jan 15 20:56:21 2008 From: jspaleta at gmail.com (Jeff Spaleta) Date: Tue, 15 Jan 2008 11:56:21 -0900 Subject: Flush end of lifed binaries from master mirror In-Reply-To: <80d7e4090801151230m6687e844u796708105ea1f2b1@mail.gmail.com> References: <20080115114210.23e801e1@redhat.com> <80d7e4090801151230m6687e844u796708105ea1f2b1@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <604aa7910801151256n5d5c71afm6456e4f764175d6c@mail.gmail.com> On Jan 15, 2008 11:30 AM, Stephen John Smoogen wrote: > The other issue is how long does the > source code need to be available from the primary source for GNU GPL > or other licenses requirements? Both of these are probably moot > questions... but I will play mr ignoramus. As of right now.. we don't have to keep source any longer than we keep binaries because we distribute under 3a of the GPL. When you get binaries from servers we control, you pretty much have to decide whether or not you want the source then. If you redistribute what you got from us, the onus is on you to provide source for anyone who takes binaries from you. That's how it stands right now. Soon, like F9 soon, I'd really like to be able to see us extend access to source for 'long enough' so that downstream distributors can rely on us and point people back to us for source for a specific period of time..after which they are again responsible for providing source to people if they choose to continue distributing. I think after fudcon a lot of the stakeholders agree that we can do something along these lines, cover our asses legally speaking, and more important not be assholes about source access. They aren't the same thing, necessarily. I'm hoping we can solve the tagging issues with cvs so we can generate srpm from an archive of our cvs and lookaside caches and know with reasonable assurance that the result is the desired srpm that koji used. To do that we might break some contributors' work flow associated with using forced retagging.. and I'd like to avoid doing that. But being responsible about access to sources is a very important thing. From a legal perspective i think we have our asses covered by just giving someone a full archive of our cvs and look aside cache (using archive.org for example) and letting them dig through it. But I don't want to just do the minimum here and be an ass. I want to try to make sure that we have a source distribution that is easy enough to use, but isn't continuing to burden our infrastructure by having to cache srpms when we don't have to. Give me a cvs tag namespace that maintainers don't need to forcibly retag that maps to releasable binary builds and we have a simple way to regenerate srpm's on the fly just from the cvs archive. And the cvs archive is not a bottleneck in terms of space. We simply cannot rely on koji's cache for any time scale of merit. Koji takes up way more space that what is actually in cvs and the lookaside, and its naive to think we can get away with trying to historically cache at the koji level. CVS where we deal with source material, and that is where we need to re-generate historic srpms when asked for. if we move to some other source control system, then we make sure we have a similar ability.. but how we deal with source distribution requirements as it impacts downstream distributors (like our ambassadors who hand out binaries at tradeshows) needs to be enhanced sooner rather than later. It's not going to wait for cvs to be replaced. -jef From poelstra at redhat.com Thu Jan 17 19:34:00 2008 From: poelstra at redhat.com (John Poelstra) Date: Thu, 17 Jan 2008 11:34:00 -0800 Subject: Fedora Board Recap 2007-JAN-13 Message-ID: <478FADA8.2020304@redhat.com> http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Board/Meetings/2008-01-13 == Roll Call == Attendees: Max Spevack, Steve Dickson, Bill Nottingham, Chris Aillon, John Poelstra, Matt Domsch, Jef Spaleta, Karsten Wade, Paul Frields, Dennis Gilmore, and Seth Vidal. Regrets: Bob McWirther, Chris Aillon Available Fedora Project Board Members met at FUDCon in Raliegh, North Carolina to discuss current business and to bring Paul Frields (new Fedora Project Leader) up to speeed. == Next Meeting == * 2008-01-22 (Tuesday) at 17:00 EST * John Poelstra to set up conference code and send meeting reminder == Budget Update == * Max is working with Red Hat's finance department to iron out finances for Fedora and to hopefully make things work smoother in the future. == FUDCon F9 Survey == * All members present thought it would be useful to conduct survey of FUDCon attendees to find out: 1. what types of Fedora users attended 1. useful information for making the next FUDCon better * Need board member to own this action == FUDCon F10 Boston 2008 == * Next FUDCon will be held in conjunction with the Red Hat Summit in Boston, Massachussets * Red Hat Summit dates are June 18 to 20, 2008 (Wednesday to Friday) * Discussed in general, but tabled additional discussion until afternoon marketing meeting with Leigh Day * '''Exact''' dates for FUDCon have not been set, but it will occur around the time of the summit == Customized Spin Requests == * Board granted approval to two spins proposed by Raul Sundaram 1. Tamil 1. Punjabi * Board is open to the Fedora XFCE spin, but did not vote on it because of unresolved technical issues == More Tools to Improve Package Quality == * Renew call to improve tools such as rpmdiff to catch additional packaging bugs. == Documentation-Devel Package == * open sourcing of Red Hat's internal documentation tool chain * community and project board unclear what it does * recently landed for package review which is being held up because of the package name * no actionable board issues here for the time being From blizzard at 0xdeadbeef.com Thu Jan 17 22:16:53 2008 From: blizzard at 0xdeadbeef.com (Christopher Blizzard) Date: Thu, 17 Jan 2008 17:16:53 -0500 Subject: Fedora Board Recap 2007-JAN-13 In-Reply-To: <478FADA8.2020304@redhat.com> References: <478FADA8.2020304@redhat.com> Message-ID: <78456233-D065-4398-A37B-C7CD09FF6E4F@0xdeadbeef.com> On Jan 17, 2008, at 2:34 PM, John Poelstra wrote: > * Board is open to the Fedora XFCE spin, but did not vote on it > because of unresolved technical issues What are the unresolved technical issues? --Chris From dennis at ausil.us Thu Jan 17 22:31:56 2008 From: dennis at ausil.us (Dennis Gilmore) Date: Thu, 17 Jan 2008 16:31:56 -0600 Subject: Fedora Board Recap 2007-JAN-13 In-Reply-To: <78456233-D065-4398-A37B-C7CD09FF6E4F@0xdeadbeef.com> References: <478FADA8.2020304@redhat.com> <78456233-D065-4398-A37B-C7CD09FF6E4F@0xdeadbeef.com> Message-ID: <200801171631.56635.dennis@ausil.us> On Thursday 17 January 2008, Christopher Blizzard wrote: > On Jan 17, 2008, at 2:34 PM, John Poelstra wrote: > > * Board is open to the Fedora XFCE spin, but did not vote on it > > because of unresolved technical issues > > What are the unresolved technical issues? the biggest one is that if you install it you get twm as the window manager and not a XFCE desktop environment. Dennis From mspevack at redhat.com Fri Jan 18 00:49:53 2008 From: mspevack at redhat.com (Max Spevack) Date: Thu, 17 Jan 2008 19:49:53 -0500 (EST) Subject: Fedora Board Recap 2007-JAN-13 In-Reply-To: <200801171631.56635.dennis@ausil.us> References: <478FADA8.2020304@redhat.com> <78456233-D065-4398-A37B-C7CD09FF6E4F@0xdeadbeef.com> <200801171631.56635.dennis@ausil.us> Message-ID: On Thu, 17 Jan 2008, Dennis Gilmore wrote: > the biggest one is that if you install it you get twm as the window > manager and not a XFCE desktop environment. Maybe we should just call it the Fedora TWM spin. ;) From ffm at intserverror.com Fri Jan 18 01:21:19 2008 From: ffm at intserverror.com (ffm) Date: Thu, 17 Jan 2008 20:21:19 -0500 Subject: Fedora account restrictions Message-ID: <20862be60801171721k605924b5qf30bc58085924d3c@mail.gmail.com> After a lengthy discussion on IRC, they told me to post here. I am trying to get a package in the repos, http://launchpad.net/gasp , so that it can be used on the OLPC XO. Unfortunately, I am not legaly allowed to sign contracts, as I am <18 but >13. My name also cannot be disclosed. I would be able to aquire parental permission to do so, but I still would not be permitted from having my name appear in the logs, instead being identified by my psyudonym, "ffm". I understand the concern on the part of end users who would like to know who is making their software, but is there any way I can disclose such information only to the Red Hat corperation, but not to the world? *https://admin.fedoraproject.org/accounts/userbox.cgi *reqires that my name be included, which I would rather not do. Thanks, FFM -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From jspaleta at gmail.com Fri Jan 18 01:53:54 2008 From: jspaleta at gmail.com (Jeff Spaleta) Date: Thu, 17 Jan 2008 16:53:54 -0900 Subject: Fedora account restrictions In-Reply-To: <20862be60801171721k605924b5qf30bc58085924d3c@mail.gmail.com> References: <20862be60801171721k605924b5qf30bc58085924d3c@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <604aa7910801171753t557e94eau7d13c53bea440833@mail.gmail.com> On Jan 17, 2008 4:21 PM, ffm wrote: > After a lengthy discussion on IRC, they told me to post here. > > I am trying to get a package in the repos, http://launchpad.net/gasp , so > that it can be used on the OLPC XO. > > Unfortunately, I am not legaly allowed to sign contracts, as I am <18 but > >13. My name also cannot be disclosed. > I would be able to aquire parental > permission to do so, but I still would not be permitted from having my name > appear in the logs, instead being identified by my psyudonym, "ffm". Your name cannot be disclosed legally? Or is it just undesirable to be disclosed? I can understand there possibly being an issue with being a minor with regard to legal contracts, but not being able to have your name disclosed on a legal basis seems odd to me. Can't we have your legal guardian sign the contract taking responsibility for your actions by doing so, and be willing to disclose their name in place of yours whenever necessary? > > I understand the concern on the part of end users who would like to know who > is making their software, but is there any way I can disclose such > information only to the Red Hat corperation, but not to the world? > > https://admin.fedoraproject.org/accounts/userbox.cgi reqires that my name be > included, which I would rather not do. I'm not sure its appropriate to allow anonymous contribution. But I am sensitive to the issue of minors exposing personal information. Perhaps its enough to allow minors to participate with parental/guardian consent in such a way that the project can disclose the parent's name as a contributor, but then the minors who are doing the actual contributing remain anonymous. It's an interesting issue. -jef From ffm at intserverror.com Fri Jan 18 01:58:37 2008 From: ffm at intserverror.com (ffm) Date: Thu, 17 Jan 2008 20:58:37 -0500 Subject: Fedora account restrictions In-Reply-To: <604aa7910801171753t557e94eau7d13c53bea440833@mail.gmail.com> References: <20862be60801171721k605924b5qf30bc58085924d3c@mail.gmail.com> <604aa7910801171753t557e94eau7d13c53bea440833@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <20862be60801171758j3e6e4530od3ab4ca0d0f7a775@mail.gmail.com> On Jan 17, 2008 8:53 PM, Jeff Spaleta wrote: > On Jan 17, 2008 4:21 PM, ffm wrote: > > After a lengthy discussion on IRC, they told me to post here. > > > > I am trying to get a package in the repos, http://launchpad.net/gasp , > so > > that it can be used on the OLPC XO. > > > > Unfortunately, I am not legaly allowed to sign contracts, as I am <18 > but > > >13. My name also cannot be disclosed. > > > I would be able to aquire parental > > permission to do so, but I still would not be permitted from having my > name > > appear in the logs, instead being identified by my psyudonym, "ffm". > > Your name cannot be disclosed legally? Or is it just undesirable to > be disclosed? I can understand there possibly being an issue with > being a minor with regard to legal contracts, but not being able to > have your name disclosed on a legal basis seems odd to me. I have no problem with Red Hat knowing my name, nor do my parents, but it would be prefered that this information was not in the public logs, at least not googleable. I am not sure on the legal issues of this. Can't we have your legal guardian sign the contract taking > responsibility for your actions by doing so, and be willing to > disclose their name in place of yours whenever necessary? That's why I am asking here. Thanks, FFM -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From stickster at gmail.com Fri Jan 18 02:16:25 2008 From: stickster at gmail.com (Paul W. Frields) Date: Thu, 17 Jan 2008 21:16:25 -0500 Subject: FUDCon/F9 survey Message-ID: <1200622585.19225.142.camel@localhost.localdomain> We have the opportunity to take an aftermarket survey of FUDCon attendees. Here's a proposal, additional questions welcome. It would be good to get this out pronto. In the future we'll have this prepared to open up for input the day after FUDCon. * * * FUDCON F9 - RALEIGH, NC 2008 ============================ (Survey to run for 10 days starting ASAP) This survey asks you about your experiences as an attendee at the recent Fedora Users and Developers Conference (FUDCon) in Raleigh, NC from 11-13 January 2008. Your responses help us plan future FUDCon events and ensure attendees get as much as possible out of the time spent with their fellow Fedora community members. 1. Did you attend FUDCon/F9? o Yes o No (if NO, skip to Question #6) o Planned to attend, but was unable to make it (sickness/travel delays) 2. When did you arrive in Raleigh for FUDCon? (choose one) o Earlier than Thursday o Thursday o Friday o Saturday o Sunday 3. What was your mode of travel to/from home? (select all that apply) _ Drove a car _ Caught a ride _ Took a plane _ Took a train _ Live local to the event 4. When did you depart the conference? (choose one) o Friday o Saturday o Sunday o Later than Sunday 5. Who paid for your attendance at FUDCon? (choose one) o My place of business o The open source project I represent o I paid for my attendance 6. Which one of the following categories represent your relationship with Fedora? (select all that apply) _ I don't use Fedora, but want to find out more about it _ I use Fedora and want to improve my skills _ I use Fedora and want to learn to contribute _ I contribute to upstream open source projects that could be, or are, in Fedora _ I contribute to Fedora in my spare time as a volunteer _ I am not a Red Hat employee, but I contribute to Fedora for another entity _ I am a Red Hat employee who contributes to Fedora as part of my job _ I am a Red Hat employee who contributes to Fedora full-time For each of the questions below, indicate on a scale of 1-5, with 1 being not at all important and 5 being very important, how important each of the indicated factors was in your decision to attend FUDCon. 7. ___ The cost of the conference 8. ___ The overall cost of attendance (lodging, travel, etc.) 8. ___ Where the conference was held (geographic location) 9. ___ Meeting and networking with other attendeees 10. ___ The hackfest sessions 11. ___ The BarCamp sessions 12. ___ FUDPub and other extramural outings 13. ___ Physical closeness to a Red Hat facility For each of the items below, indicate on a scale of 1-5, with 1 being low and 5 being high, your satisfaction with each portion of the FUDCon event. 14. ___ The cost of the conference 15. ___ The overall cost of attendance (lodging, travel, etc.) 16. ___ City where the conference was held 17. ___ Meeting and networking with other attendeees 18. ___ The hackfest sessions 19. ___ The BarCamp sessions 20. ___ FUDPub and other extramural outings 21. Which schedule do you prefer? (choose one) o BarCamp on Saturday, Hackfest on Friday + Sunday o BarCamp on Friday, Hackfest on Saturday + Sunday 22. What did you like most about the conference? (short answer) 23. What did you dislike most about the conference? (short answer) 24. Based on your attendance at this event, would you attend another like it? o Yes o No 25. If the answer to the previous question was "No," why not? (short answer) ____________________________ -- Paul W. Frields, RHCE http://paul.frields.org/ gpg fingerprint: 3DA6 A0AC 6D58 FEC4 0233 5906 ACDB C937 BD11 3717 Fedora Project: http://pfrields.fedorapeople.org/ 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 smooge at gmail.com Fri Jan 18 02:33:53 2008 From: smooge at gmail.com (Stephen John Smoogen) Date: Thu, 17 Jan 2008 19:33:53 -0700 Subject: Flush end of lifed binaries from master mirror In-Reply-To: <20080115204447.GA507@domsch.com> References: <20080115114210.23e801e1@redhat.com> <80d7e4090801151230m6687e844u796708105ea1f2b1@mail.gmail.com> <20080115204447.GA507@domsch.com> Message-ID: <80d7e4090801171833h38e8fb8fg4b03748b8279f6ee@mail.gmail.com> On Jan 15, 2008 1:44 PM, Matt Domsch wrote: > On Tue, Jan 15, 2008 at 01:30:55PM -0700, Stephen John Smoogen wrote: > > Well as long as the archives don't flush the data because it got > > flushed from master mirror :). The other issue is how long does the > > source code need to be available from the primary source for GNU GPL > > or other licenses requirements? Both of these are probably moot > > questions... but I will play mr ignoramus. > > We distribute GPLv2 code under paragraph 3a, source posted concurrent > with binaries. Therefore we can remove both concurrently, or just > remove the binaries (Jesse's proposal) at will. > > We can be nice and leave the source there for longer than the binaries > if we wish. > > Thanks, > Matt Thanks. I get confused with 3a and 3b since I remember mostly serving data via physical media versus just downloads. -- Stephen J Smoogen. -- CSIRT/Linux System Administrator How far that little candle throws his beams! So shines a good deed in a naughty world. = Shakespeare. "The Merchant of Venice" From notting at redhat.com Fri Jan 18 02:32:47 2008 From: notting at redhat.com (Bill Nottingham) Date: Thu, 17 Jan 2008 21:32:47 -0500 Subject: FUDCon/F9 survey In-Reply-To: <1200622585.19225.142.camel@localhost.localdomain> References: <1200622585.19225.142.camel@localhost.localdomain> Message-ID: <20080118023247.GB1991@nostromo.devel.redhat.com> Paul W. Frields (stickster at gmail.com) said: > 22. What did you like most about the conference? (short answer) > > 23. What did you dislike most about the conference? (short answer) > > 24. Based on your attendance at this event, would you attend another > like it? > o Yes > o No > > 25. If the answer to the previous question was "No," why not? (short > answer) > ____________________________ There's always the 'random comments', or 'things you'd like to see at FUDCon that weren't at FUDCon', etc. Bill From sopwith at gmail.com Fri Jan 18 02:37:47 2008 From: sopwith at gmail.com (Elliot Lee) Date: Thu, 17 Jan 2008 18:37:47 -0800 Subject: Fedora account restrictions In-Reply-To: <20862be60801171721k605924b5qf30bc58085924d3c@mail.gmail.com> References: <20862be60801171721k605924b5qf30bc58085924d3c@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: On Jan 17, 2008 5:21 PM, ffm wrote: > After a lengthy discussion on IRC, they told me to post here. > > I am trying to get a package in the repos, http://launchpad.net/gasp , so > that it can be used on the OLPC XO. > > Unfortunately, I am not legaly allowed to sign contracts, as I am <18 but > >13. My name also cannot be disclosed. I would be able to aquire parental > permission to do so, but I still would not be permitted from having my name > appear in the logs, instead being identified by my psyudonym, "ffm". > > I understand the concern on the part of end users who would like to know who > is making their software, but is there any way I can disclose such > information only to the Red Hat corperation, but not to the world? > > https://admin.fedoraproject.org/accounts/userbox.cgi reqires that my name be > included, which I would rather not do. You could have one of your parents sign up for a Fedora account in their name, complete the agreement, and give the account login info to you (possibly even using your e-mail address). Since they are legally responsible for your actions and are the ones who need to sign contracts for you, it seems like it should work...? Best, -- Elliot From jspaleta at gmail.com Fri Jan 18 02:57:32 2008 From: jspaleta at gmail.com (Jeff Spaleta) Date: Thu, 17 Jan 2008 17:57:32 -0900 Subject: FUDCon/F9 survey In-Reply-To: <20080118023247.GB1991@nostromo.devel.redhat.com> References: <1200622585.19225.142.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20080118023247.GB1991@nostromo.devel.redhat.com> Message-ID: <604aa7910801171857v763d2d8ev9558d5ec2ab0003e@mail.gmail.com> On Jan 17, 2008 5:32 PM, Bill Nottingham wrote: > or 'things you'd like to see > at FUDCon that weren't at FUDCon', etc. Please add that question, so I can start a write-in campaign for 'robotic telescopes'. -jef From jwboyer at gmail.com Fri Jan 18 03:18:32 2008 From: jwboyer at gmail.com (Josh Boyer) Date: Thu, 17 Jan 2008 21:18:32 -0600 Subject: Fedora Board Recap 2007-JAN-13 In-Reply-To: <478FADA8.2020304@redhat.com> References: <478FADA8.2020304@redhat.com> Message-ID: <20080117211832.38f65cb0@zod.rchland.ibm.com> On Thu, 17 Jan 2008 11:34:00 -0800 John Poelstra wrote: > == More Tools to Improve Package Quality == > * Renew call to improve tools such as rpmdiff to catch additional > packaging bugs. You need more people much more than better tools. Incoming reviews are already handled by too few (but awesome!) people. Audits of existing packages (e.g. making sure people continue to follow the guidelines or adapt existing packages to new guidelines) are virtually non-existent. Automation and better tooling will perhaps attract more to do reviews and audits, but it will only go so far. Reviewing is fairly thankless work, which is something that will need to be corrected somehow (hand-waving here) if we want to encourage more people to do it. josh From sundaram at fedoraproject.org Fri Jan 18 10:40:37 2008 From: sundaram at fedoraproject.org (Rahul Sundaram) Date: Fri, 18 Jan 2008 16:10:37 +0530 Subject: Fedora Board Recap 2007-JAN-13 In-Reply-To: References: <478FADA8.2020304@redhat.com> <78456233-D065-4398-A37B-C7CD09FF6E4F@0xdeadbeef.com> <200801171631.56635.dennis@ausil.us> Message-ID: <47908225.9040302@fedoraproject.org> Max Spevack wrote: > On Thu, 17 Jan 2008, Dennis Gilmore wrote: > >> the biggest one is that if you install it you get twm as the window >> manager and not a XFCE desktop environment. > > Maybe we should just call it the Fedora TWM spin. ;) Well, if you boot it as a live cd or in USB, you will get Xfce. Post installation, it defaults to TWM which is think is a bug somewhere since /etc/sysconfig/desktop just disappears. Also /etc/X11/xinit/Xclients probably should not hard core the logic it does. I have the kickstart file at http://sundaram.fedorapeople.org/livecd-fedora-8-xfce.ks Any help is welcome. Rahul From blizzard at 0xdeadbeef.com Fri Jan 18 17:09:53 2008 From: blizzard at 0xdeadbeef.com (Christopher Blizzard) Date: Fri, 18 Jan 2008 12:09:53 -0500 Subject: Fedora Board Recap 2007-JAN-13 In-Reply-To: <200801171631.56635.dennis@ausil.us> References: <478FADA8.2020304@redhat.com> <78456233-D065-4398-A37B-C7CD09FF6E4F@0xdeadbeef.com> <200801171631.56635.dennis@ausil.us> Message-ID: On Jan 17, 2008, at 5:31 PM, Dennis Gilmore wrote: > On Thursday 17 January 2008, Christopher Blizzard wrote: >> On Jan 17, 2008, at 2:34 PM, John Poelstra wrote: >>> * Board is open to the Fedora XFCE spin, but did not vote on it >>> because of unresolved technical issues >> >> What are the unresolved technical issues? > > the biggest one is that if you install it you get twm as the window > manager > and not a XFCE desktop environment. Yes, that sounds like a serious problem. Carry on! --Chris From dwmw2 at infradead.org Fri Jan 18 17:44:36 2008 From: dwmw2 at infradead.org (David Woodhouse) Date: Sat, 19 Jan 2008 01:44:36 +0800 Subject: Fedora account restrictions In-Reply-To: <20862be60801171758j3e6e4530od3ab4ca0d0f7a775@mail.gmail.com> References: <20862be60801171721k605924b5qf30bc58085924d3c@mail.gmail.com> <604aa7910801171753t557e94eau7d13c53bea440833@mail.gmail.com> <20862be60801171758j3e6e4530od3ab4ca0d0f7a775@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <1200678276.2709.38.camel@shinybook.infradead.org> On Thu, 2008-01-17 at 20:58 -0500, ffm wrote: > I have no problem with Red Hat knowing my name, nor do my parents, but it > would be prefered that this information was not in the public logs, at > least not googleable. I am not sure on the legal issues of this. I don't think your age is relevant in the context of this question, if question it is. I don't believe that anonymous contributions are appropriate, and I think that anyone requesting them would have to be fairly confused. You seem relatively sensible and coherent -- I'm guessing that it's not actually _you_ who would prefer your name to be hidden? -- dwmw2 From ffm at intserverror.com Fri Jan 18 18:06:51 2008 From: ffm at intserverror.com (ffm) Date: Fri, 18 Jan 2008 18:06:51 +0000 Subject: Fedora account restrictions In-Reply-To: <1200678276.2709.38.camel@shinybook.infradead.org> References: <20862be60801171721k605924b5qf30bc58085924d3c@mail.gmail.com> <604aa7910801171753t557e94eau7d13c53bea440833@mail.gmail.com> <20862be60801171758j3e6e4530od3ab4ca0d0f7a775@mail.gmail.com> <1200678276.2709.38.camel@shinybook.infradead.org> Message-ID: <20862be60801181006v130e30a4r85534723fd905cef@mail.gmail.com> On Jan 18, 2008 5:44 PM, David Woodhouse wrote: > > You seem relatively sensible and coherent -- I'm guessing that it's not > actually _you_ who would prefer your name to be hidden? > Correct. Sadly, it isn't my decision. I would have no problem with giving out my name, but I am otherwise barred. -ffm -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From fedora at leemhuis.info Fri Jan 18 18:09:25 2008 From: fedora at leemhuis.info (Thorsten Leemhuis) Date: Fri, 18 Jan 2008 19:09:25 +0100 Subject: FUDCon/F9 survey In-Reply-To: <1200622585.19225.142.camel@localhost.localdomain> References: <1200622585.19225.142.camel@localhost.localdomain> Message-ID: <4790EB55.8010306@leemhuis.info> On 18.01.2008 03:16, Paul W. Frields wrote: > We have the opportunity to take an aftermarket survey of FUDCon > attendees. Side note: I always wondered if we should use a survey now and then to ask all Fedora contributers for their options, if they are still happy or what they want to see changed (I now and then in private get comments from some long term contributers that indicate I'm not the only one who thinks a lot of things for volunteer contributer got a lot worse over the past 12 months [since the merge]). But that's a different topic (albeit I think such a survey would be as important to do as this one). > 1. Did you attend FUDCon/F9? [...] > o No (if NO, skip to Question #6) [...] > For each of the questions below, indicate on a scale of 1-5, with 1 > being not at all important and 5 being very important, how important > each of the indicated factors was in your decision to attend FUDCon. And how to rate them if my decision was not to attend FUDCon? [...] > For each of the items below, indicate on a scale of 1-5, with 1 being > low and 5 being high, your satisfaction with each portion of the FUDCon > event. Similar comment there. CU knurd From stickster at gmail.com Fri Jan 18 18:46:19 2008 From: stickster at gmail.com (Paul W. Frields) Date: Fri, 18 Jan 2008 13:46:19 -0500 Subject: FUDCon/F9 survey In-Reply-To: <4790EB55.8010306@leemhuis.info> References: <1200622585.19225.142.camel@localhost.localdomain> <4790EB55.8010306@leemhuis.info> Message-ID: <1200681979.15397.0.camel@localhost.localdomain> > > 1. Did you attend FUDCon/F9? > [...] > > o No (if NO, skip to Question #6) > [...] > > For each of the questions below, indicate on a scale of 1-5, with 1 > > being not at all important and 5 being very important, how important > > each of the indicated factors was in your decision to attend FUDCon. > > And how to rate them if my decision was not to attend FUDCon? "...decision whether to..." Point taken, thanks. -- Paul W. Frields, RHCE http://paul.frields.org/ gpg fingerprint: 3DA6 A0AC 6D58 FEC4 0233 5906 ACDB C937 BD11 3717 Fedora Project: http://pfrields.fedorapeople.org/ 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 dwmw2 at infradead.org Fri Jan 18 22:35:08 2008 From: dwmw2 at infradead.org (David Woodhouse) Date: Sat, 19 Jan 2008 06:35:08 +0800 Subject: Fedora account restrictions In-Reply-To: <20862be60801181006v130e30a4r85534723fd905cef@mail.gmail.com> References: <20862be60801171721k605924b5qf30bc58085924d3c@mail.gmail.com> <604aa7910801171753t557e94eau7d13c53bea440833@mail.gmail.com> <20862be60801171758j3e6e4530od3ab4ca0d0f7a775@mail.gmail.com> <1200678276.2709.38.camel@shinybook.infradead.org> <20862be60801181006v130e30a4r85534723fd905cef@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <1200695708.2709.197.camel@shinybook.infradead.org> On Fri, 2008-01-18 at 18:06 +0000, ffm wrote: > On Jan 18, 2008 5:44 PM, David Woodhouse wrote: > > You seem relatively sensible and coherent -- I'm guessing that > it's not actually _you_ who would prefer your name to be > hidden? > > Correct. Sadly, it isn't my decision. I would have no problem with > giving out my name, but I am otherwise barred. Well, whether we let you contribute to Fedora or not isn't my decision -- but if it were, I would reluctantly say 'no'. I sympathise with your position, but we need to have some accountability for contributions, and I think that allowing anonymous contributors is a very bad precedent to set. I don't much like the idea of letting some company, even my esteemed employer, keep contributors' identities in 'escrow'. Fedora should be an independent project, and I have a distinct feeling that the conspiracy nuts would go wild with such an arrangement. I'm sorry to be unhelpful, especially as I'd really welcome your contributions to OLPC. The best I can do is to wish you good luck with the overly paranoid people you have to deal with. Help them to keep taking the tablets, and maybe they'll relent some time before you come of age. You really ought to be permitted to give your name, rank and serial number, if nothing else :) Others may disagree with me and allow you to contribute, of course -- s I said, it's not my decision. Or maybe you can find a package-monkey to volunteer to do the Fedora commits/builds/etc. for you, while you do the real work of maintaining the package? -- dwmw2 From rtlm10 at gmail.com Fri Jan 18 23:18:00 2008 From: rtlm10 at gmail.com (Russell Harrison) Date: Fri, 18 Jan 2008 18:18:00 -0500 Subject: Fedora account restrictions In-Reply-To: <1200695708.2709.197.camel@shinybook.infradead.org> References: <20862be60801171721k605924b5qf30bc58085924d3c@mail.gmail.com> <604aa7910801171753t557e94eau7d13c53bea440833@mail.gmail.com> <20862be60801171758j3e6e4530od3ab4ca0d0f7a775@mail.gmail.com> <1200678276.2709.38.camel@shinybook.infradead.org> <20862be60801181006v130e30a4r85534723fd905cef@mail.gmail.com> <1200695708.2709.197.camel@shinybook.infradead.org> Message-ID: <1ed4a0130801181518j641646a6xcf8ff4ecde230db0@mail.gmail.com> On Jan 18, 2008 5:35 PM, David Woodhouse wrote: > I don't much like the idea of letting some company, even my esteemed > employer, keep contributors' identities in 'escrow'. Fedora should be an > independent project, and I have a distinct feeling that the conspiracy > nuts would go wild with such an arrangement. One thing I thought was interesting was that he said his name couldn't be somewhere "Googleable". I wonder if it would be possible to hide a minor's real name in the fedora accounts system yet still have it available to say members of the Fedora Board for accountability and verification reasons. Obviously there has to be a level of trust between the minor, the parrents, the people able to access his identity, and the Fedora project members as a whole. While I feel strongly about not allowing anonymous contributions, I don't want to close out people in similar situations as ffm. I think this is a case I think we'll see again and we should be encouraging participation of motivated minors. This is a topic that brings up many difficult issues that may require a great deal of work both technical, and legal / political, but I'd like to see it resolved in a way that will allow us to effectivly mentor the future of Fedora. Besides, I know many a kid out there that's way smarter than me. ;-) I'd hate to miss out on the good work they could be doing. When they turn 18 we can give them the credit they deserve. -- Russell Harrison Systems Administrator -- Linux Desktops Cisco Systems, Inc. Note: The positions or opinions expressed in this email are my own. They are not necessarily those of my employer. From dwmw2 at infradead.org Sat Jan 19 00:48:49 2008 From: dwmw2 at infradead.org (David Woodhouse) Date: Sat, 19 Jan 2008 08:48:49 +0800 Subject: Fedora account restrictions In-Reply-To: <1ed4a0130801181518j641646a6xcf8ff4ecde230db0@mail.gmail.com> References: <20862be60801171721k605924b5qf30bc58085924d3c@mail.gmail.com> <604aa7910801171753t557e94eau7d13c53bea440833@mail.gmail.com> <20862be60801171758j3e6e4530od3ab4ca0d0f7a775@mail.gmail.com> <1200678276.2709.38.camel@shinybook.infradead.org> <20862be60801181006v130e30a4r85534723fd905cef@mail.gmail.com> <1200695708.2709.197.camel@shinybook.infradead.org> <1ed4a0130801181518j641646a6xcf8ff4ecde230db0@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <1200703729.2709.239.camel@shinybook.infradead.org> On Fri, 2008-01-18 at 18:18 -0500, Russell Harrison wrote: > While I feel strongly about not allowing anonymous contributions, I > don't want to close out people in similar situations as ffm. I think > this is a case I think we'll see again and we should be encouraging > participation of motivated minors. As I said, I don't think his age is relevant to this question. The answer should be the same for an adult as it is for a minor. It's not about whether he can execute the CLA in his own right -- it's about the anonymity. For whatever reason, this potential contributor chooses to remain anonymous. And I for one do not think that's appropriate for a Fedora contributor. It is not our business whether he does that because of a deeply confused state of mind of his own, or because of bizarre and stupid restrictions imposed on him by a third party, to whom he chooses to defer on this issue. It's certainly not our business that that third party seems to be his parent or guardian, and it's not relevant to us, in that context, that he's under 18. -- dwmw2 From tcallawa at redhat.com Sat Jan 19 00:55:35 2008 From: tcallawa at redhat.com (Tom "spot" Callaway) Date: Fri, 18 Jan 2008 19:55:35 -0500 Subject: Fedora account restrictions In-Reply-To: <1200703729.2709.239.camel@shinybook.infradead.org> References: <20862be60801171721k605924b5qf30bc58085924d3c@mail.gmail.com> <604aa7910801171753t557e94eau7d13c53bea440833@mail.gmail.com> <20862be60801171758j3e6e4530od3ab4ca0d0f7a775@mail.gmail.com> <1200678276.2709.38.camel@shinybook.infradead.org> <20862be60801181006v130e30a4r85534723fd905cef@mail.gmail.com> <1200695708.2709.197.camel@shinybook.infradead.org> <1ed4a0130801181518j641646a6xcf8ff4ecde230db0@mail.gmail.com> <1200703729.2709.239.camel@shinybook.infradead.org> Message-ID: <1200704135.4387.0.camel@localhost.localdomain> On Sat, 2008-01-19 at 08:48 +0800, David Woodhouse wrote: > For whatever reason, this potential contributor chooses to remain > anonymous. And I for one do not think that's appropriate for a Fedora > contributor. I agree. His age is irrelevant, but we cannot have anonymous contributions and still be accountable. ~spot From bugs.michael at gmx.net Sat Jan 19 01:07:02 2008 From: bugs.michael at gmx.net (Michael Schwendt) Date: Sat, 19 Jan 2008 02:07:02 +0100 Subject: FUDCon/F9 survey In-Reply-To: <4790EB55.8010306@leemhuis.info> References: <1200622585.19225.142.camel@localhost.localdomain> <4790EB55.8010306@leemhuis.info> Message-ID: <20080119020702.0c18753b.bugs.michael@gmx.net> On Fri, 18 Jan 2008 19:09:25 +0100, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote: > [...] (I now and then in private get comments > from some long term contributers that indicate I'm not the only one who > thinks a lot of things for volunteer contributer got a lot worse over > the past 12 months [since the merge]). That's normal. There are contributors (and sometimes "ordinary" Fedora users) who hunt for committee members in private mail, looking for a reliable person, a community representative. Sometimes they explicitly ask to treat their letter and name confidentially. If you have seldomly something to criticize on public communication channels, you are less interesting or probably even uninteresting to them. Probably one can increase the likelihood of being contacted and influence it with heavy use of an official looking e-mail signature plus use of the fedoraproject.org address. I don't know how you feel about it, but I didn't feel good in such situations. From jwboyer at gmail.com Sat Jan 19 03:28:43 2008 From: jwboyer at gmail.com (Josh Boyer) Date: Fri, 18 Jan 2008 21:28:43 -0600 Subject: Fedora account restrictions In-Reply-To: <1200704135.4387.0.camel@localhost.localdomain> References: <20862be60801171721k605924b5qf30bc58085924d3c@mail.gmail.com> <604aa7910801171753t557e94eau7d13c53bea440833@mail.gmail.com> <20862be60801171758j3e6e4530od3ab4ca0d0f7a775@mail.gmail.com> <1200678276.2709.38.camel@shinybook.infradead.org> <20862be60801181006v130e30a4r85534723fd905cef@mail.gmail.com> <1200695708.2709.197.camel@shinybook.infradead.org> <1ed4a0130801181518j641646a6xcf8ff4ecde230db0@mail.gmail.com> <1200703729.2709.239.camel@shinybook.infradead.org> <1200704135.4387.0.camel@localhost.localdomain> Message-ID: <20080118212843.3bf6123d@zod.rchland.ibm.com> On Fri, 18 Jan 2008 19:55:35 -0500 "Tom \"spot\" Callaway" wrote: > > On Sat, 2008-01-19 at 08:48 +0800, David Woodhouse wrote: > > For whatever reason, this potential contributor chooses to remain > > anonymous. And I for one do not think that's appropriate for a Fedora > > contributor. > > I agree. His age is irrelevant, but we cannot have anonymous > contributions and still be accountable. I agree as well. josh From matt at domsch.com Sat Jan 19 03:33:59 2008 From: matt at domsch.com (Matt Domsch) Date: Fri, 18 Jan 2008 21:33:59 -0600 Subject: Fedora account restrictions In-Reply-To: <1200704135.4387.0.camel@localhost.localdomain> References: <20862be60801171721k605924b5qf30bc58085924d3c@mail.gmail.com> <604aa7910801171753t557e94eau7d13c53bea440833@mail.gmail.com> <20862be60801171758j3e6e4530od3ab4ca0d0f7a775@mail.gmail.com> <1200678276.2709.38.camel@shinybook.infradead.org> <20862be60801181006v130e30a4r85534723fd905cef@mail.gmail.com> <1200695708.2709.197.camel@shinybook.infradead.org> <1ed4a0130801181518j641646a6xcf8ff4ecde230db0@mail.gmail.com> <1200703729.2709.239.camel@shinybook.infradead.org> <1200704135.4387.0.camel@localhost.localdomain> Message-ID: <20080119033359.GB13432@domsch.com> On Fri, Jan 18, 2008 at 07:55:35PM -0500, Tom spot Callaway wrote: > > On Sat, 2008-01-19 at 08:48 +0800, David Woodhouse wrote: > > For whatever reason, this potential contributor chooses to remain > > anonymous. And I for one do not think that's appropriate for a Fedora > > contributor. > > I agree. His age is irrelevant, but we cannot have anonymous > contributions and still be accountable. Agreed. Other projects (Linux Kernel for example) have the same rule, for the same reason. -Matt From fedora at leemhuis.info Sat Jan 19 09:27:54 2008 From: fedora at leemhuis.info (Thorsten Leemhuis) Date: Sat, 19 Jan 2008 10:27:54 +0100 Subject: FUDCon/F9 survey In-Reply-To: <20080119020702.0c18753b.bugs.michael@gmx.net> References: <1200622585.19225.142.camel@localhost.localdomain> <4790EB55.8010306@leemhuis.info> <20080119020702.0c18753b.bugs.michael@gmx.net> Message-ID: <4791C29A.7080805@leemhuis.info> On 19.01.2008 02:07, Michael Schwendt wrote: > On Fri, 18 Jan 2008 19:09:25 +0100, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote: > >> [...] (I now and then in private get comments >> from some long term contributers that indicate I'm not the only one who >> thinks a lot of things for volunteer contributer got a lot worse over >> the past 12 months [since the merge]). > That's normal. There are contributors (and sometimes "ordinary" Fedora > users) who hunt for committee members in private mail, [...] I'm not a committee member anymore in Fedora-land (if you don't count EPEL) and I didn't mean those mails. I got the impression during ordinary talks with other spare time contributers that are around in Fedora-land for some years now. CU knurd From bugs.michael at gmx.net Sat Jan 19 17:46:34 2008 From: bugs.michael at gmx.net (Michael Schwendt) Date: Sat, 19 Jan 2008 18:46:34 +0100 Subject: Mandatory subscriptions to a memo-list? Message-ID: <20080119184634.ddb5e5b8.bugs.michael@gmx.net> Are all packagers/contributors subscribed to fedora-devel-announce? Is subscription mandatory? IMO, the recent blow-up of rawhide has shown once more that a way to send memos to all contributors (in this case "packagers") is needed. Some commits to packages say "Rebuild for new glibc ABI" which clearly is based on misunderstanding the wrong broken deps notifications. I this case, an early memo would have saved packagers from preparing unneeded rebuilds. Thoughts? From jspaleta at gmail.com Sat Jan 19 18:10:03 2008 From: jspaleta at gmail.com (Jeff Spaleta) Date: Sat, 19 Jan 2008 09:10:03 -0900 Subject: Fedora account restrictions In-Reply-To: <20080119033359.GB13432@domsch.com> References: <20862be60801171721k605924b5qf30bc58085924d3c@mail.gmail.com> <604aa7910801171753t557e94eau7d13c53bea440833@mail.gmail.com> <20862be60801171758j3e6e4530od3ab4ca0d0f7a775@mail.gmail.com> <1200678276.2709.38.camel@shinybook.infradead.org> <20862be60801181006v130e30a4r85534723fd905cef@mail.gmail.com> <1200695708.2709.197.camel@shinybook.infradead.org> <1ed4a0130801181518j641646a6xcf8ff4ecde230db0@mail.gmail.com> <1200703729.2709.239.camel@shinybook.infradead.org> <1200704135.4387.0.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20080119033359.GB13432@domsch.com> Message-ID: <604aa7910801191010o53689fd8p8c64de038d951e17@mail.gmail.com> On Jan 18, 2008 6:33 PM, Matt Domsch wrote: > Agreed. Other projects (Linux Kernel for example) have the same > rule, for the same reason. Does the upstream linux kernel require a CLA? Or CLA model is closely modeled on apache, I wonder if Apache allows it. But regardless... let's figure out what exactly are we talking about in context. We are talking about not making the real name of a person publically known. All the same information is in the FAS system, including the person's name, physical address and phone number. Out of all the personal identifying information the only thing we currently leak through publically accessible interfaces is the peron's real name. If we, on request, allowed a nickname to be displayed in place of the real name how is that less accountable? We rely primarily on emails and irc nicks for the majority of communication for day-to-day business. That stuff has absolutely no correlation with a person's real name, even the fas account name is not required to encode the person's real name. If there was ever a problem that required tracking down a contributor, we would be relying on privileged information to do it... either the phone number or the physical address... things we aren't making publically searchable. -jef"fakemaxspevack"spaleta From bpepple at fedoraproject.org Sat Jan 19 18:10:30 2008 From: bpepple at fedoraproject.org (Brian Pepple) Date: Sat, 19 Jan 2008 13:10:30 -0500 Subject: Mandatory subscriptions to a memo-list? In-Reply-To: <20080119184634.ddb5e5b8.bugs.michael@gmx.net> References: <20080119184634.ddb5e5b8.bugs.michael@gmx.net> Message-ID: <1200766230.12030.3.camel@kennedy> On Sat, 2008-01-19 at 18:46 +0100, Michael Schwendt wrote: > Are all packagers/contributors subscribed to fedora-devel-announce? > Is subscription mandatory? If I remember correctly packagers are automatically subscribed to the fedora-devel-announce list, and the fedora-devel list is optional. 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 tibbs at math.uh.edu Sat Jan 19 18:22:47 2008 From: tibbs at math.uh.edu (Jason L Tibbitts III) Date: 19 Jan 2008 12:22:47 -0600 Subject: Mandatory subscriptions to a memo-list? In-Reply-To: <20080119184634.ddb5e5b8.bugs.michael@gmx.net> References: <20080119184634.ddb5e5b8.bugs.michael@gmx.net> Message-ID: >>>>> "MS" == Michael Schwendt writes: MS> I this case, an early memo would have saved packagers from MS> preparing unneeded rebuilds. Well, an announcement was sent to fedora-devel-announce, which I believe all package maintainers are members of. Even after this announcement, however, there were still many questions about the broken deps reports. Whether those folks didn't get the message or whether they just didn't read it before seeing the broken deps report, we can't say. I guess someone could ask them. - J< From mmcgrath at redhat.com Sat Jan 19 20:03:38 2008 From: mmcgrath at redhat.com (Mike McGrath) Date: Sat, 19 Jan 2008 14:03:38 -0600 (CST) Subject: Mandatory subscriptions to a memo-list? In-Reply-To: <20080119184634.ddb5e5b8.bugs.michael@gmx.net> References: <20080119184634.ddb5e5b8.bugs.michael@gmx.net> Message-ID: On Sat, 19 Jan 2008, Michael Schwendt wrote: > Are all packagers/contributors subscribed to fedora-devel-announce? > Is subscription mandatory? > > IMO, the recent blow-up of rawhide has shown once more that a way to > send memos to all contributors (in this case "packagers") is needed. > Some commits to packages say "Rebuild for new glibc ABI" which clearly > is based on misunderstanding the wrong broken deps notifications. I this > case, an early memo would have saved packagers from preparing > unneeded rebuilds. > > Thoughts? I have similar problems when sending outage notifications. When I have a message to get out to the community, where do I send it? In the case of outages it affects art, docs, websites, etc teams. But the plain old Fedora-announce list doesn't seem quite right (its more for end user communication I think). -Mike From matt at domsch.com Sat Jan 19 20:48:52 2008 From: matt at domsch.com (Matt Domsch) Date: Sat, 19 Jan 2008 14:48:52 -0600 Subject: Fedora account restrictions In-Reply-To: <604aa7910801191010o53689fd8p8c64de038d951e17@mail.gmail.com> References: <604aa7910801171753t557e94eau7d13c53bea440833@mail.gmail.com> <20862be60801171758j3e6e4530od3ab4ca0d0f7a775@mail.gmail.com> <1200678276.2709.38.camel@shinybook.infradead.org> <20862be60801181006v130e30a4r85534723fd905cef@mail.gmail.com> <1200695708.2709.197.camel@shinybook.infradead.org> <1ed4a0130801181518j641646a6xcf8ff4ecde230db0@mail.gmail.com> <1200703729.2709.239.camel@shinybook.infradead.org> <1200704135.4387.0.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20080119033359.GB13432@domsch.com> <604aa7910801191010o53689fd8p8c64de038d951e17@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <20080119204852.GC13432@domsch.com> On Sat, Jan 19, 2008 at 09:10:03AM -0900, Jeff Spaleta wrote: > On Jan 18, 2008 6:33 PM, Matt Domsch wrote: > > Agreed. Other projects (Linux Kernel for example) have the same > > rule, for the same reason. > > > Does the upstream linux kernel require a CLA? Or CLA model is closely > modeled on apache, I wonder if Apache allows it. But regardless... > let's figure out what exactly are we talking about in context. > > We are talking about not making the real name of a person publically > known. We can't guarantee that the real name won't become publically known. What are the repercussions if the name _does_ somehow become publically known, against the contributor's wishes? From skvidal at fedoraproject.org Sat Jan 19 20:58:27 2008 From: skvidal at fedoraproject.org (seth vidal) Date: Sat, 19 Jan 2008 15:58:27 -0500 Subject: Fedora account restrictions In-Reply-To: <20080119204852.GC13432@domsch.com> References: <604aa7910801171753t557e94eau7d13c53bea440833@mail.gmail.com> <20862be60801171758j3e6e4530od3ab4ca0d0f7a775@mail.gmail.com> <1200678276.2709.38.camel@shinybook.infradead.org> <20862be60801181006v130e30a4r85534723fd905cef@mail.gmail.com> <1200695708.2709.197.camel@shinybook.infradead.org> <1ed4a0130801181518j641646a6xcf8ff4ecde230db0@mail.gmail.com> <1200703729.2709.239.camel@shinybook.infradead.org> <1200704135.4387.0.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20080119033359.GB13432@domsch.com> <604aa7910801191010o53689fd8p8c64de038d951e17@mail.gmail.com> <20080119204852.GC13432@domsch.com> Message-ID: <1200776307.3275.16.camel@cutter> On Sat, 2008-01-19 at 14:48 -0600, Matt Domsch wrote: > On Sat, Jan 19, 2008 at 09:10:03AM -0900, Jeff Spaleta wrote: > > On Jan 18, 2008 6:33 PM, Matt Domsch wrote: > > > Agreed. Other projects (Linux Kernel for example) have the same > > > rule, for the same reason. > > > > > > Does the upstream linux kernel require a CLA? Or CLA model is closely > > modeled on apache, I wonder if Apache allows it. But regardless... > > let's figure out what exactly are we talking about in context. > > > > We are talking about not making the real name of a person publically > > known. > > We can't guarantee that the real name won't become publically known. > What are the repercussions if the name _does_ somehow become > publically known, against the contributor's wishes? > I think the concern here is about disclosing the name of a minor in the US. IIRC there are federal laws about that. -sv From jonstanley at gmail.com Sat Jan 19 21:18:50 2008 From: jonstanley at gmail.com (Jon Stanley) Date: Sat, 19 Jan 2008 16:18:50 -0500 Subject: Fedora account restrictions In-Reply-To: <1200776307.3275.16.camel@cutter> References: <604aa7910801171753t557e94eau7d13c53bea440833@mail.gmail.com> <20862be60801181006v130e30a4r85534723fd905cef@mail.gmail.com> <1200695708.2709.197.camel@shinybook.infradead.org> <1ed4a0130801181518j641646a6xcf8ff4ecde230db0@mail.gmail.com> <1200703729.2709.239.camel@shinybook.infradead.org> <1200704135.4387.0.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20080119033359.GB13432@domsch.com> <604aa7910801191010o53689fd8p8c64de038d951e17@mail.gmail.com> <20080119204852.GC13432@domsch.com> <1200776307.3275.16.camel@cutter> Message-ID: On Jan 19, 2008 3:58 PM, seth vidal wrote: > I think the concern here is about disclosing the name of a minor in the > US. IIRC there are federal laws about that. IANAL, but I think that you're talking about COPA here, which regulates the collection of "personally identifiable information" from children under the age of 13. The only bar to someone that is >13 but <18 is the ability to enter into a legally binding contract (the CLA). Perhaps the original poster could enlighten us on exactly what he/other people believe the problem is. From Axel.Thimm at ATrpms.net Sat Jan 19 21:39:34 2008 From: Axel.Thimm at ATrpms.net (Axel Thimm) Date: Sat, 19 Jan 2008 23:39:34 +0200 Subject: Mandatory subscriptions to a memo-list? In-Reply-To: References: <20080119184634.ddb5e5b8.bugs.michael@gmx.net> Message-ID: <20080119213934.GA8821@puariko.nirvana> On Sat, Jan 19, 2008 at 02:03:38PM -0600, Mike McGrath wrote: > On Sat, 19 Jan 2008, Michael Schwendt wrote: > > > Are all packagers/contributors subscribed to fedora-devel-announce? > > Is subscription mandatory? It should, as well as ... > > IMO, the recent blow-up of rawhide has shown once more that a way to > > send memos to all contributors (in this case "packagers") is needed. > > Some commits to packages say "Rebuild for new glibc ABI" which clearly > > is based on misunderstanding the wrong broken deps notifications. I this > > case, an early memo would have saved packagers from preparing > > unneeded rebuilds. > > > > Thoughts? > > I have similar problems when sending outage notifications. When I have a > message to get out to the community, where do I send it? In the case of > outages it affects art, docs, websites, etc teams. But the plain old > Fedora-announce list doesn't seem quite right (its more for end user > communication I think). ... Fedora artists, documenters, webmasters etc. Or paraphrased: Everything not end-user consumable should go to fedora-devel-announce and everyone involved with Fedora more than as an end user should be subscribed there. The alternative of creating new *-announce lists will add to the list inflation problem. -- 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 jonstanley at gmail.com Sat Jan 19 21:44:21 2008 From: jonstanley at gmail.com (Jon Stanley) Date: Sat, 19 Jan 2008 16:44:21 -0500 Subject: Mandatory subscriptions to a memo-list? In-Reply-To: <20080119213934.GA8821@puariko.nirvana> References: <20080119184634.ddb5e5b8.bugs.michael@gmx.net> <20080119213934.GA8821@puariko.nirvana> Message-ID: On Jan 19, 2008 4:39 PM, Axel Thimm wrote: > Or paraphrased: Everything not end-user consumable should go to > fedora-devel-announce and everyone involved with Fedora more than as > an end user should be subscribed there. Why not rename that to fedora-contrib-announce in that case? > The alternative of creating new *-announce lists will add to the list > inflation problem. +1 From bugs.michael at gmx.net Sat Jan 19 22:10:11 2008 From: bugs.michael at gmx.net (Michael Schwendt) Date: Sat, 19 Jan 2008 23:10:11 +0100 Subject: Mandatory subscriptions to a memo-list? In-Reply-To: <20080119213934.GA8821@puariko.nirvana> References: <20080119184634.ddb5e5b8.bugs.michael@gmx.net> <20080119213934.GA8821@puariko.nirvana> Message-ID: <20080119231011.a1338c0a.bugs.michael@gmx.net> On Sat, 19 Jan 2008 23:39:34 +0200, Axel Thimm wrote: > > > Thoughts? > > > > I have similar problems when sending outage notifications. When I have a > > message to get out to the community, where do I send it? In the case of > > outages it affects art, docs, websites, etc teams. But the plain old > > Fedora-announce list doesn't seem quite right (its more for end user > > communication I think). > > ... Fedora artists, documenters, webmasters etc. > > Or paraphrased: Everything not end-user consumable should go to > fedora-devel-announce and everyone involved with Fedora more than as > an end user should be subscribed there. > > The alternative of creating new *-announce lists will add to the list > inflation problem. Once the lists and mandatory subscriptions exist -- and provided that the contributors cannot unsubscribe -- what is left is to make the subscribers aware of the lists, so they can set up their mail filters appropriately. Memos, which end up in a folder filled with the traffic of other fedora lists, would be less helpful. What about a news feed for such memos? From jspaleta at gmail.com Sat Jan 19 22:16:33 2008 From: jspaleta at gmail.com (Jeff Spaleta) Date: Sat, 19 Jan 2008 13:16:33 -0900 Subject: Fedora account restrictions In-Reply-To: <20080119204852.GC13432@domsch.com> References: <604aa7910801171753t557e94eau7d13c53bea440833@mail.gmail.com> <1200678276.2709.38.camel@shinybook.infradead.org> <20862be60801181006v130e30a4r85534723fd905cef@mail.gmail.com> <1200695708.2709.197.camel@shinybook.infradead.org> <1ed4a0130801181518j641646a6xcf8ff4ecde230db0@mail.gmail.com> <1200703729.2709.239.camel@shinybook.infradead.org> <1200704135.4387.0.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20080119033359.GB13432@domsch.com> <604aa7910801191010o53689fd8p8c64de038d951e17@mail.gmail.com> <20080119204852.GC13432@domsch.com> Message-ID: <604aa7910801191416s1ef0fb3fj997634c3ba4b0df3@mail.gmail.com> On Jan 19, 2008 11:48 AM, Matt Domsch wrote: > We can't guarantee that the real name won't become publically known. > What are the repercussions if the name _does_ somehow become > publically known, against the contributor's wishes? I don't know if there are repercussions in any legal sense... but if there are... then surely information like physical address and phone number are already covered by those legalities. In for a penny... in for a pound. What I'm really not seeing, is the downside of holding a contributor's real name as privileged information in the same way we hold their phone number if requested? Even if there is no legal requirement to do so, this can certainly fall into the 'not being an ass' when it comes to managing the personal information of minors. If you wanted to set a bar to meet to keep these types or requests low in number, then I would go further and say that any contributor requesting to have their real name hidden in fas, would need to find another contributor with a non-hidden name who will vouch for them. If something goes wrong, then that non-hidden contributor and all the hidden-name contributors being vouched for lose access. With a policy like this we could have a highschool or middleschool teacher with a non-hidden real name vouch for a group of students they personally know. -jef From Axel.Thimm at ATrpms.net Sat Jan 19 22:18:40 2008 From: Axel.Thimm at ATrpms.net (Axel Thimm) Date: Sun, 20 Jan 2008 00:18:40 +0200 Subject: Mandatory subscriptions to a memo-list? In-Reply-To: <20080119231011.a1338c0a.bugs.michael@gmx.net> References: <20080119184634.ddb5e5b8.bugs.michael@gmx.net> <20080119213934.GA8821@puariko.nirvana> <20080119231011.a1338c0a.bugs.michael@gmx.net> Message-ID: <20080119221840.GA11306@puariko.nirvana> On Sat, Jan 19, 2008 at 11:10:11PM +0100, Michael Schwendt wrote: > On Sat, 19 Jan 2008 23:39:34 +0200, Axel Thimm wrote: > > > > > Thoughts? > > > > > > I have similar problems when sending outage notifications. When I have a > > > message to get out to the community, where do I send it? In the case of > > > outages it affects art, docs, websites, etc teams. But the plain old > > > Fedora-announce list doesn't seem quite right (its more for end user > > > communication I think). > > > > ... Fedora artists, documenters, webmasters etc. > > > > Or paraphrased: Everything not end-user consumable should go to > > fedora-devel-announce and everyone involved with Fedora more than as > > an end user should be subscribed there. > > > > The alternative of creating new *-announce lists will add to the list > > inflation problem. > > Once the lists and mandatory subscriptions exist -- and provided that > the contributors cannot unsubscribe -- what is left is to make the > subscribers aware of the lists, so they can set up their mail filters > appropriately. Memos, which end up in a folder filled with the traffic > of other fedora lists, would be less helpful. > > What about a news feed for such memos? A news feed is good, but there should always be a mail channel as well. There do exist some mail2feed software that can make an announce list to a news feed I suppose. -- 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 rtlm10 at gmail.com Sat Jan 19 23:37:00 2008 From: rtlm10 at gmail.com (Russell Harrison) Date: Sat, 19 Jan 2008 18:37:00 -0500 Subject: Fedora account restrictions In-Reply-To: <604aa7910801191416s1ef0fb3fj997634c3ba4b0df3@mail.gmail.com> References: <604aa7910801171753t557e94eau7d13c53bea440833@mail.gmail.com> <20862be60801181006v130e30a4r85534723fd905cef@mail.gmail.com> <1200695708.2709.197.camel@shinybook.infradead.org> <1ed4a0130801181518j641646a6xcf8ff4ecde230db0@mail.gmail.com> <1200703729.2709.239.camel@shinybook.infradead.org> <1200704135.4387.0.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20080119033359.GB13432@domsch.com> <604aa7910801191010o53689fd8p8c64de038d951e17@mail.gmail.com> <20080119204852.GC13432@domsch.com> <604aa7910801191416s1ef0fb3fj997634c3ba4b0df3@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <1ed4a0130801191537i5b99675mcbbeceb792f9a4cc@mail.gmail.com> On Jan 19, 2008 5:16 PM, Jeff Spaleta wrote: > If you wanted to set a bar to meet to keep these types or requests low > in number, then I would go further and say that any contributor > requesting to have their real name hidden in fas, would need to find > another contributor with a non-hidden name who will vouch for them. If > something goes wrong, then that non-hidden contributor and all the > hidden-name contributors being vouched for lose access. With a policy > like this we could have a highschool or middleschool teacher with a > non-hidden real name vouch for a group of students they personally > know. + 1 Russell From Axel.Thimm at ATrpms.net Sun Jan 20 08:30:36 2008 From: Axel.Thimm at ATrpms.net (Axel Thimm) Date: Sun, 20 Jan 2008 10:30:36 +0200 Subject: Fedora account restrictions In-Reply-To: <1200695708.2709.197.camel@shinybook.infradead.org> References: <20862be60801171721k605924b5qf30bc58085924d3c@mail.gmail.com> <604aa7910801171753t557e94eau7d13c53bea440833@mail.gmail.com> <20862be60801171758j3e6e4530od3ab4ca0d0f7a775@mail.gmail.com> <1200678276.2709.38.camel@shinybook.infradead.org> <20862be60801181006v130e30a4r85534723fd905cef@mail.gmail.com> <1200695708.2709.197.camel@shinybook.infradead.org> Message-ID: <20080120083036.GA5745@puariko.nirvana> On Sat, Jan 19, 2008 at 06:35:08AM +0800, David Woodhouse wrote: > Others may disagree with me and allow you to contribute, of course -- s > I said, it's not my decision. Or maybe you can find a package-monkey to > volunteer to do the Fedora commits/builds/etc. for you, while you do the > real work of maintaining the package? I agree with David and Tom - if a package screws up my system I need to be able to identify immediately from the changelogs who messed up with it and be able to conmtact him/her. And not have some pseudonyms making me hunt through FAS or possibly even with a request to a real person protecting this data. David's suggestion of a Fedora proxy/guardian who will review any submitted work (i.e. will be able to vouch on this like if it were his submission and therefore be held accountable at the end) is perhaps the golden compromise here. In this sense it is not just a package monkey, as the proxy will have to be able to sign off this work as if it were his own, so needs to dig as deep into it as possible (reviewing patches, verifying tarballs and the whole package) So my advise to ffm: Find one or two Fedorans that you can trust your identity with and that are working on the same subject like you do (OLPC?) and submit them your work for review until you get 18. The changelogs should be under the Fedorian guardian's name, but can mention the sourse with a pseudonym. For example * Sun Jan 20 2008 David Woodhouse - 1.1.1-1 - Upgrade to 1.1.1 (by ffm). Once you turn 18 you can officially ask for taking over the packages you have been indirectly maintaining and the Fedora guardian(s) will pass them over. Given that the Fedora guardian will have to invest some work to pass your work through you usually would not be able to find too many volunteering people, but the echo in this thread has been very positive, so you still have very good chances! -- 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 bugs.michael at gmx.net Sun Jan 20 11:42:24 2008 From: bugs.michael at gmx.net (Michael Schwendt) Date: Sun, 20 Jan 2008 12:42:24 +0100 Subject: Fedora account restrictions In-Reply-To: <20080120083036.GA5745@puariko.nirvana> References: <20862be60801171721k605924b5qf30bc58085924d3c@mail.gmail.com> <604aa7910801171753t557e94eau7d13c53bea440833@mail.gmail.com> <20862be60801171758j3e6e4530od3ab4ca0d0f7a775@mail.gmail.com> <1200678276.2709.38.camel@shinybook.infradead.org> <20862be60801181006v130e30a4r85534723fd905cef@mail.gmail.com> <1200695708.2709.197.camel@shinybook.infradead.org> <20080120083036.GA5745@puariko.nirvana> Message-ID: <20080120124224.07af41ff.bugs.michael@gmx.net> On Sun, 20 Jan 2008 10:30:36 +0200, Axel Thimm wrote: > On Sat, Jan 19, 2008 at 06:35:08AM +0800, David Woodhouse wrote: > > Others may disagree with me and allow you to contribute, of course -- s > > I said, it's not my decision. Or maybe you can find a package-monkey to > > volunteer to do the Fedora commits/builds/etc. for you, while you do the > > real work of maintaining the package? > > I agree with David and Tom - if a package screws up my system I need > to be able to identify immediately from the changelogs who messed up > with it and be able to conmtact him/her. And not have some pseudonyms > making me hunt through FAS or possibly even with a request to a real > person protecting this data. A question unanswered on fedora-devel-list, is it currently possible with the FAS to display a contributor's sponsor? With the following advertised page it isn't: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Infrastructure/AccountSystem/QueryAccount From dwmw2 at infradead.org Sun Jan 20 14:58:48 2008 From: dwmw2 at infradead.org (David Woodhouse) Date: Sun, 20 Jan 2008 22:58:48 +0800 Subject: Fedora account restrictions In-Reply-To: <20080120083036.GA5745@puariko.nirvana> References: <20862be60801171721k605924b5qf30bc58085924d3c@mail.gmail.com> <604aa7910801171753t557e94eau7d13c53bea440833@mail.gmail.com> <20862be60801171758j3e6e4530od3ab4ca0d0f7a775@mail.gmail.com> <1200678276.2709.38.camel@shinybook.infradead.org> <20862be60801181006v130e30a4r85534723fd905cef@mail.gmail.com> <1200695708.2709.197.camel@shinybook.infradead.org> <20080120083036.GA5745@puariko.nirvana> Message-ID: <1200841128.2932.33.camel@shinybook.infradead.org> On Sun, 2008-01-20 at 10:30 +0200, Axel Thimm wrote: > * Sun Jan 20 2008 David Woodhouse - 1.1.1-1 > - Upgrade to 1.1.1 (by ffm). On a kind of related topic, triggered by the above misspelling of my email address -- can we please have a rule that the email address in changelogs like the above should be a _real_ email address? I never quite understood why people bother with pointless obfuscation that the address harvesters can trivially undo anyway. -- dwmw2 From jkeating at redhat.com Sun Jan 20 15:39:30 2008 From: jkeating at redhat.com (Jesse Keating) Date: Sun, 20 Jan 2008 10:39:30 -0500 Subject: Fedora account restrictions In-Reply-To: <1200841128.2932.33.camel@shinybook.infradead.org> References: <20862be60801171721k605924b5qf30bc58085924d3c@mail.gmail.com> <604aa7910801171753t557e94eau7d13c53bea440833@mail.gmail.com> <20862be60801171758j3e6e4530od3ab4ca0d0f7a775@mail.gmail.com> <1200678276.2709.38.camel@shinybook.infradead.org> <20862be60801181006v130e30a4r85534723fd905cef@mail.gmail.com> <1200695708.2709.197.camel@shinybook.infradead.org> <20080120083036.GA5745@puariko.nirvana> <1200841128.2932.33.camel@shinybook.infradead.org> Message-ID: <20080120103930.24a97264@redhat.com> On Sun, 20 Jan 2008 22:58:48 +0800 David Woodhouse wrote: > On a kind of related topic, triggered by the above misspelling of my > email address -- can we please have a rule that the email address in > changelogs like the above should be a _real_ email address? > > I never quite understood why people bother with pointless obfuscation > that the address harvesters can trivially undo anyway. I'd rather that info be autofilled in from the source controls system using the account name of the person, since account at fedoraproject.org is a very likely real email address. Then you get the actual person who committed the change, rather than whatever somebody felt like writing in the changelog. -- 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 ricky at fedoraproject.org Sun Jan 20 16:42:30 2008 From: ricky at fedoraproject.org (Ricky Zhou) Date: Sun, 20 Jan 2008 11:42:30 -0500 Subject: Fedora account restrictions In-Reply-To: <20080120124224.07af41ff.bugs.michael@gmx.net> References: <20862be60801171721k605924b5qf30bc58085924d3c@mail.gmail.com> <604aa7910801171753t557e94eau7d13c53bea440833@mail.gmail.com> <20862be60801171758j3e6e4530od3ab4ca0d0f7a775@mail.gmail.com> <1200678276.2709.38.camel@shinybook.infradead.org> <20862be60801181006v130e30a4r85534723fd905cef@mail.gmail.com> <1200695708.2709.197.camel@shinybook.infradead.org> <20080120083036.GA5745@puariko.nirvana> <20080120124224.07af41ff.bugs.michael@gmx.net> Message-ID: <20080120164230.GA31443@Max.nyc1.dsl.speakeasy.net> On 2008-01-20 12:42:24 PM, Michael Schwendt wrote: > A question unanswered on fedora-devel-list, is it currently possible > with the FAS to display a contributor's sponsor? > > With the following advertised page it isn't: > http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Infrastructure/AccountSystem/QueryAccount Yup, it is (in the sense of who sponsored a person into a group). For now, you have to look at the user from the group view, though (ex. https://admin.fedoraproject.org/accounts/groupbox.cgi?_role_show_all=1&name=web) Thanks, Ricky -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: not available URL: From fedora at leemhuis.info Sun Jan 20 16:59:34 2008 From: fedora at leemhuis.info (Thorsten Leemhuis) Date: Sun, 20 Jan 2008 17:59:34 +0100 Subject: Fedora account restrictions In-Reply-To: <20080120124224.07af41ff.bugs.michael@gmx.net> References: <20862be60801171721k605924b5qf30bc58085924d3c@mail.gmail.com> <604aa7910801171753t557e94eau7d13c53bea440833@mail.gmail.com> <20862be60801171758j3e6e4530od3ab4ca0d0f7a775@mail.gmail.com> <1200678276.2709.38.camel@shinybook.infradead.org> <20862be60801181006v130e30a4r85534723fd905cef@mail.gmail.com> <1200695708.2709.197.camel@shinybook.infradead.org> <20080120083036.GA5745@puariko.nirvana> <20080120124224.07af41ff.bugs.michael@gmx.net> Message-ID: <47937DF6.8070300@leemhuis.info> On 20.01.2008 12:42, Michael Schwendt wrote: > A question unanswered on fedora-devel-list, is it currently possible > with the FAS to display a contributor's sponsor? > With the following advertised page it isn't: > http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Infrastructure/AccountSystem/QueryAccount If I query myself via that URL I get directed to a FAS page that lists my FAS details; in the "Existing memberships" table at the bottom I see the groups I'm a member in; for each of those in the rightmost column there is the FAS name of the person who sponsered me for that group (including cvsextras). That afaics should be what you are looking for. Or did I get the question wrong? CU knurd From jonstanley at gmail.com Sun Jan 20 17:10:05 2008 From: jonstanley at gmail.com (Jon Stanley) Date: Sun, 20 Jan 2008 12:10:05 -0500 Subject: Fedora account restrictions In-Reply-To: <47937DF6.8070300@leemhuis.info> References: <20862be60801171721k605924b5qf30bc58085924d3c@mail.gmail.com> <604aa7910801171753t557e94eau7d13c53bea440833@mail.gmail.com> <20862be60801171758j3e6e4530od3ab4ca0d0f7a775@mail.gmail.com> <1200678276.2709.38.camel@shinybook.infradead.org> <20862be60801181006v130e30a4r85534723fd905cef@mail.gmail.com> <1200695708.2709.197.camel@shinybook.infradead.org> <20080120083036.GA5745@puariko.nirvana> <20080120124224.07af41ff.bugs.michael@gmx.net> <47937DF6.8070300@leemhuis.info> Message-ID: On Jan 20, 2008 11:59 AM, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote: > If I query myself via that URL I get directed to a FAS page that lists > my FAS details; Right, but try querying someone else (try jstanley for me) From jwboyer at gmail.com Sun Jan 20 17:58:29 2008 From: jwboyer at gmail.com (Josh Boyer) Date: Sun, 20 Jan 2008 11:58:29 -0600 Subject: Fedora account restrictions In-Reply-To: <1200841128.2932.33.camel@shinybook.infradead.org> References: <20862be60801171721k605924b5qf30bc58085924d3c@mail.gmail.com> <604aa7910801171753t557e94eau7d13c53bea440833@mail.gmail.com> <20862be60801171758j3e6e4530od3ab4ca0d0f7a775@mail.gmail.com> <1200678276.2709.38.camel@shinybook.infradead.org> <20862be60801181006v130e30a4r85534723fd905cef@mail.gmail.com> <1200695708.2709.197.camel@shinybook.infradead.org> <20080120083036.GA5745@puariko.nirvana> <1200841128.2932.33.camel@shinybook.infradead.org> Message-ID: <20080120115829.42b2fb65@zod.rchland.ibm.com> On Sun, 20 Jan 2008 22:58:48 +0800 David Woodhouse wrote: > > On Sun, 2008-01-20 at 10:30 +0200, Axel Thimm wrote: > > * Sun Jan 20 2008 David Woodhouse - 1.1.1-1 > > - Upgrade to 1.1.1 (by ffm). > > On a kind of related topic, triggered by the above misspelling of my > email address -- can we please have a rule that the email address in > changelogs like the above should be a _real_ email address? Do you really want a rule around that? It just seems like more policy that isn't going to be enforced anyway. > I never quite understood why people bother with pointless obfuscation > that the address harvesters can trivially undo anyway. I don't understand it either. But creating a rule seems overkill. josh From jonstanley at gmail.com Sun Jan 20 18:04:47 2008 From: jonstanley at gmail.com (Jon Stanley) Date: Sun, 20 Jan 2008 13:04:47 -0500 Subject: Fedora account restrictions In-Reply-To: <20080120115829.42b2fb65@zod.rchland.ibm.com> References: <20862be60801171721k605924b5qf30bc58085924d3c@mail.gmail.com> <604aa7910801171753t557e94eau7d13c53bea440833@mail.gmail.com> <20862be60801171758j3e6e4530od3ab4ca0d0f7a775@mail.gmail.com> <1200678276.2709.38.camel@shinybook.infradead.org> <20862be60801181006v130e30a4r85534723fd905cef@mail.gmail.com> <1200695708.2709.197.camel@shinybook.infradead.org> <20080120083036.GA5745@puariko.nirvana> <1200841128.2932.33.camel@shinybook.infradead.org> <20080120115829.42b2fb65@zod.rchland.ibm.com> Message-ID: On Jan 20, 2008 12:58 PM, Josh Boyer wrote: > Do you really want a rule around that? It just seems like more policy > that isn't going to be enforced anyway. I don't think that a rule was being suggested as much as an automated process to replace changelog entries with @fp.o From jwboyer at gmail.com Sun Jan 20 18:43:01 2008 From: jwboyer at gmail.com (Josh Boyer) Date: Sun, 20 Jan 2008 12:43:01 -0600 Subject: Fedora account restrictions In-Reply-To: References: <20862be60801171721k605924b5qf30bc58085924d3c@mail.gmail.com> <604aa7910801171753t557e94eau7d13c53bea440833@mail.gmail.com> <20862be60801171758j3e6e4530od3ab4ca0d0f7a775@mail.gmail.com> <1200678276.2709.38.camel@shinybook.infradead.org> <20862be60801181006v130e30a4r85534723fd905cef@mail.gmail.com> <1200695708.2709.197.camel@shinybook.infradead.org> <20080120083036.GA5745@puariko.nirvana> <1200841128.2932.33.camel@shinybook.infradead.org> <20080120115829.42b2fb65@zod.rchland.ibm.com> Message-ID: <20080120124301.5ea4589b@zod.rchland.ibm.com> On Sun, 20 Jan 2008 13:04:47 -0500 "Jon Stanley" wrote: > On Jan 20, 2008 12:58 PM, Josh Boyer wrote: > > > Do you really want a rule around that? It just seems like more policy > > that isn't going to be enforced anyway. > > I don't think that a rule was being suggested as much as an automated > process to replace changelog entries with @fp.o Erm, that was Jesse's suggestion. The original email, which you've cut out of the context, explicitly asked for a rule. Automating it is fine. Making a rule requiring it would be a waste of time unless someone explicitly tracked package changelogs to make sure they were following the rule. josh From kanarip at kanarip.com Sun Jan 20 21:23:56 2008 From: kanarip at kanarip.com (Jeroen van Meeuwen) Date: Sun, 20 Jan 2008 22:23:56 +0100 Subject: Fedora Board Recap 2007-JAN-13 In-Reply-To: <47908225.9040302@fedoraproject.org> References: <478FADA8.2020304@redhat.com> <78456233-D065-4398-A37B-C7CD09FF6E4F@0xdeadbeef.com> <200801171631.56635.dennis@ausil.us> <47908225.9040302@fedoraproject.org> Message-ID: <4793BBEC.90809@kanarip.com> Rahul Sundaram wrote: > Max Spevack wrote: >> On Thu, 17 Jan 2008, Dennis Gilmore wrote: >> >>> the biggest one is that if you install it you get twm as the window >>> manager and not a XFCE desktop environment. >> >> Maybe we should just call it the Fedora TWM spin. ;) > > Well, if you boot it as a live cd or in USB, you will get Xfce. Post > installation, it defaults to TWM which is think is a bug somewhere since > /etc/sysconfig/desktop just disappears. Also /etc/X11/xinit/Xclients > probably should not hard core the logic it does. I have the kickstart > file at > > http://sundaram.fedorapeople.org/livecd-fedora-8-xfce.ks > > Any help is welcome. > I'm confused with the EOF's you're using. It seems you want /etc/rc.d/init.d/fedora-live to have: cat > /etc/sysconfig/desktop < From dwmw2 at infradead.org Mon Jan 21 00:17:29 2008 From: dwmw2 at infradead.org (David Woodhouse) Date: Mon, 21 Jan 2008 08:17:29 +0800 Subject: Fedora account restrictions In-Reply-To: <20080120103930.24a97264@redhat.com> References: <20862be60801171721k605924b5qf30bc58085924d3c@mail.gmail.com> <604aa7910801171753t557e94eau7d13c53bea440833@mail.gmail.com> <20862be60801171758j3e6e4530od3ab4ca0d0f7a775@mail.gmail.com> <1200678276.2709.38.camel@shinybook.infradead.org> <20862be60801181006v130e30a4r85534723fd905cef@mail.gmail.com> <1200695708.2709.197.camel@shinybook.infradead.org> <20080120083036.GA5745@puariko.nirvana> <1200841128.2932.33.camel@shinybook.infradead.org> <20080120103930.24a97264@redhat.com> Message-ID: <1200874649.2932.90.camel@shinybook.infradead.org> On Sun, 2008-01-20 at 10:39 -0500, Jesse Keating wrote: > I'd rather that info be autofilled in from the source controls system > using the account name of the person, since account at fedoraproject.org > is a very likely real email address. Then you get the actual person > who committed the change, rather than whatever somebody felt like > writing in the changelog. When someone gives me a specfile patch, or a patch which applies directly to the package CVS repository, it usually includes their name in the changelog. When I'm just the monkey typing 'cvs commit' I see no reason to change that. -- dwmw2 From jkeating at redhat.com Mon Jan 21 01:47:42 2008 From: jkeating at redhat.com (Jesse Keating) Date: Sun, 20 Jan 2008 20:47:42 -0500 Subject: Fedora account restrictions In-Reply-To: <1200874649.2932.90.camel@shinybook.infradead.org> References: <20862be60801171721k605924b5qf30bc58085924d3c@mail.gmail.com> <604aa7910801171753t557e94eau7d13c53bea440833@mail.gmail.com> <20862be60801171758j3e6e4530od3ab4ca0d0f7a775@mail.gmail.com> <1200678276.2709.38.camel@shinybook.infradead.org> <20862be60801181006v130e30a4r85534723fd905cef@mail.gmail.com> <1200695708.2709.197.camel@shinybook.infradead.org> <20080120083036.GA5745@puariko.nirvana> <1200841128.2932.33.camel@shinybook.infradead.org> <20080120103930.24a97264@redhat.com> <1200874649.2932.90.camel@shinybook.infradead.org> Message-ID: <20080120204742.05bcf26f@redhat.com> On Mon, 21 Jan 2008 08:17:29 +0800 David Woodhouse wrote: > When someone gives me a specfile patch, or a patch which applies > directly to the package CVS repository, it usually includes their name > in the changelog. When I'm just the monkey typing 'cvs commit' I see > no reason to change that. Except that you can't verify that the name or email in the changelog is the right one. The first stop along the chain of wtf is the person who committed the change, regardless of where the change came from. -- 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 rtlm10 at gmail.com Mon Jan 21 04:24:29 2008 From: rtlm10 at gmail.com (Russell Harrison) Date: Sun, 20 Jan 2008 23:24:29 -0500 Subject: Fedora account restrictions In-Reply-To: <20080120083036.GA5745@puariko.nirvana> References: <20862be60801171721k605924b5qf30bc58085924d3c@mail.gmail.com> <604aa7910801171753t557e94eau7d13c53bea440833@mail.gmail.com> <20862be60801171758j3e6e4530od3ab4ca0d0f7a775@mail.gmail.com> <1200678276.2709.38.camel@shinybook.infradead.org> <20862be60801181006v130e30a4r85534723fd905cef@mail.gmail.com> <1200695708.2709.197.camel@shinybook.infradead.org> <20080120083036.GA5745@puariko.nirvana> Message-ID: <1ed4a0130801202024m256b1972he2ef09474fcedc92@mail.gmail.com> On Jan 20, 2008 3:30 AM, Axel Thimm wrote: > I agree with David and Tom - if a package screws up my system I need > to be able to identify immediately from the changelogs who messed up > with it and be able to conmtact him/her. And not have some pseudonyms > making me hunt through FAS or possibly even with a request to a real > person protecting this data. I should point out that his parents would like his real name kept out of the public light. They are fine with his email (or at least one that he is checking on a regular basis / forwards to his normal email) being published. Wouldn't that make him just as accessible as any other Fedora contributor in the event he would need to be contacted? I'm a strong believer in getting talented students involved and excited as soon as possible. In order to do that we do have the obligation to protect their identity when requested. One of the things I respect the most about the Fedora Project is its dedication to openness and accountability. I'm confident we can come up with a solution that satisfies both of these ideals. They are both too important to be mutually exclusive. -- Russell Harrison Systems Administrator -- Linux Desktops Cisco Systems, Inc. Note: The positions or opinions expressed in this email are my own. They are not necessarily those of my employer. From kwade at redhat.com Mon Jan 21 06:57:14 2008 From: kwade at redhat.com (Karsten 'quaid' Wade) Date: Sun, 20 Jan 2008 22:57:14 -0800 Subject: Fedora account restrictions In-Reply-To: <604aa7910801191416s1ef0fb3fj997634c3ba4b0df3@mail.gmail.com> References: <604aa7910801171753t557e94eau7d13c53bea440833@mail.gmail.com> <1200678276.2709.38.camel@shinybook.infradead.org> <20862be60801181006v130e30a4r85534723fd905cef@mail.gmail.com> <1200695708.2709.197.camel@shinybook.infradead.org> <1ed4a0130801181518j641646a6xcf8ff4ecde230db0@mail.gmail.com> <1200703729.2709.239.camel@shinybook.infradead.org> <1200704135.4387.0.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20080119033359.GB13432@domsch.com> <604aa7910801191010o53689fd8p8c64de038d951e17@mail.gmail.com> <20080119204852.GC13432@domsch.com> <604aa7910801191416s1ef0fb3fj997634c3ba4b0df3@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <1200898634.20813.252.camel@calliope.phig.org> On Sat, 2008-01-19 at 13:16 -0900, Jeff Spaleta wrote: > If you wanted to set a bar to meet to keep these types or requests low > in number, then I would go further and say that any contributor > requesting to have their real name hidden in fas, would need to find > another contributor with a non-hidden name who will vouch for them. If > something goes wrong, then that non-hidden contributor and all the > hidden-name contributors being vouched for lose access. With a policy > like this we could have a highschool or middleschool teacher with a > non-hidden real name vouch for a group of students they personally > know. +1 -- Karsten Wade, Developer Community Mgr. Dev Fu : http://developer.redhatmagazine.com Fedora : http://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 dwmw2 at infradead.org Mon Jan 21 11:11:18 2008 From: dwmw2 at infradead.org (David Woodhouse) Date: Mon, 21 Jan 2008 19:11:18 +0800 Subject: Fedora account restrictions In-Reply-To: <1ed4a0130801202024m256b1972he2ef09474fcedc92@mail.gmail.com> References: <20862be60801171721k605924b5qf30bc58085924d3c@mail.gmail.com> <604aa7910801171753t557e94eau7d13c53bea440833@mail.gmail.com> <20862be60801171758j3e6e4530od3ab4ca0d0f7a775@mail.gmail.com> <1200678276.2709.38.camel@shinybook.infradead.org> <20862be60801181006v130e30a4r85534723fd905cef@mail.gmail.com> <1200695708.2709.197.camel@shinybook.infradead.org> <20080120083036.GA5745@puariko.nirvana> <1ed4a0130801202024m256b1972he2ef09474fcedc92@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <1200913878.2932.112.camel@shinybook.infradead.org> On Sun, 2008-01-20 at 23:24 -0500, Russell Harrison wrote: > I'm a strong believer in getting talented students involved and > excited as soon as possible. In order to do that we do have the > obligation to protect their identity when requested. You're again confusing the issue of age with the issue of anonymity. The fact that his parents are paranoid muppets and are _imposing_ the anonymity on him, and that he chooses to accept that, is not our business. Our business is that he's coming to us asking if he can be a contributor while remaining anonymous -- and we seem mostly to be saying 'no'. -- dwmw2 From rtlm10 at gmail.com Mon Jan 21 13:32:14 2008 From: rtlm10 at gmail.com (Russell Harrison) Date: Mon, 21 Jan 2008 08:32:14 -0500 Subject: Fedora account restrictions In-Reply-To: <1200913878.2932.112.camel@shinybook.infradead.org> References: <20862be60801171721k605924b5qf30bc58085924d3c@mail.gmail.com> <604aa7910801171753t557e94eau7d13c53bea440833@mail.gmail.com> <20862be60801171758j3e6e4530od3ab4ca0d0f7a775@mail.gmail.com> <1200678276.2709.38.camel@shinybook.infradead.org> <20862be60801181006v130e30a4r85534723fd905cef@mail.gmail.com> <1200695708.2709.197.camel@shinybook.infradead.org> <20080120083036.GA5745@puariko.nirvana> <1ed4a0130801202024m256b1972he2ef09474fcedc92@mail.gmail.com> <1200913878.2932.112.camel@shinybook.infradead.org> Message-ID: <1ed4a0130801210532g4cec69e7ra9a8404ddb367964@mail.gmail.com> On Jan 21, 2008 6:11 AM, David Woodhouse wrote: > You're again confusing the issue of age with the issue of anonymity. The > fact that his parents are paranoid muppets and are _imposing_ the > anonymity on him, and that he chooses to accept that, is not our > business. Our business is that he's coming to us asking if he can be a > contributor while remaining anonymous -- and we seem mostly to be saying > 'no'. My understanding is that he isn't requesting to remain anonymous to the Fedora Project. He's requesting that his name not be used in places visible to the Internet at large. I'm not suggesting that we allow anonymous contributions. I'm looking for a way to keep the personal data of a minor available to only fp members or a subset of members. I do feel its important that all contributions be connected to an actual person. Does that mean we have to broadcast that name to the rest of the Internet? -- Russell Harrison Systems Administrator -- Linux Desktops Cisco Systems, Inc. Note: The positions or opinions expressed in this email are my own. They are not necessarily those of my employer. From jwboyer at gmail.com Mon Jan 21 14:23:07 2008 From: jwboyer at gmail.com (Josh Boyer) Date: Mon, 21 Jan 2008 08:23:07 -0600 Subject: Fedora account restrictions In-Reply-To: <1ed4a0130801210532g4cec69e7ra9a8404ddb367964@mail.gmail.com> References: <20862be60801171721k605924b5qf30bc58085924d3c@mail.gmail.com> <604aa7910801171753t557e94eau7d13c53bea440833@mail.gmail.com> <20862be60801171758j3e6e4530od3ab4ca0d0f7a775@mail.gmail.com> <1200678276.2709.38.camel@shinybook.infradead.org> <20862be60801181006v130e30a4r85534723fd905cef@mail.gmail.com> <1200695708.2709.197.camel@shinybook.infradead.org> <20080120083036.GA5745@puariko.nirvana> <1ed4a0130801202024m256b1972he2ef09474fcedc92@mail.gmail.com> <1200913878.2932.112.camel@shinybook.infradead.org> <1ed4a0130801210532g4cec69e7ra9a8404ddb367964@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <20080121082307.7764006a@zod.rchland.ibm.com> On Mon, 21 Jan 2008 08:32:14 -0500 "Russell Harrison" wrote: > My understanding is that he isn't requesting to remain anonymous to > the Fedora Project. He's requesting that his name not be used in > places visible to the Internet at large. I'm not suggesting that we > allow anonymous contributions. I'm looking for a way to keep the > personal data of a minor available to only fp members or a subset of > members. I do feel its important that all contributions be connected > to an actual person. Does that mean we have to broadcast that name to > the rest of the Internet? No, but you can't prevent someone that _does_ have access from doing so. The Fedora Project cannot be held liable for that. josh From jkeating at redhat.com Mon Jan 21 14:24:35 2008 From: jkeating at redhat.com (Jesse Keating) Date: Mon, 21 Jan 2008 09:24:35 -0500 Subject: Fedora account restrictions In-Reply-To: <1ed4a0130801210532g4cec69e7ra9a8404ddb367964@mail.gmail.com> References: <20862be60801171721k605924b5qf30bc58085924d3c@mail.gmail.com> <604aa7910801171753t557e94eau7d13c53bea440833@mail.gmail.com> <20862be60801171758j3e6e4530od3ab4ca0d0f7a775@mail.gmail.com> <1200678276.2709.38.camel@shinybook.infradead.org> <20862be60801181006v130e30a4r85534723fd905cef@mail.gmail.com> <1200695708.2709.197.camel@shinybook.infradead.org> <20080120083036.GA5745@puariko.nirvana> <1ed4a0130801202024m256b1972he2ef09474fcedc92@mail.gmail.com> <1200913878.2932.112.camel@shinybook.infradead.org> <1ed4a0130801210532g4cec69e7ra9a8404ddb367964@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <20080121092435.5c0d0893@redhat.com> On Mon, 21 Jan 2008 08:32:14 -0500 "Russell Harrison" wrote: > My understanding is that he isn't requesting to remain anonymous to > the Fedora Project. He's requesting that his name not be used in > places visible to the Internet at large. I'm not suggesting that we > allow anonymous contributions. I'm looking for a way to keep the > personal data of a minor available to only fp members or a subset of > members. I do feel its important that all contributions be connected > to an actual person. Does that mean we have to broadcast that name to > the rest of the Internet? Not necessarily. However I wouldn't feel comfortable stating that we would keep it secret and then be on the hook should something happen and it no longer be secret. It's one thing to say we'll make every attempt, but it's another to say we'll keep it private. Add to that convenient tools we have like IRC bots that can look up somebody's Fedora account name and spit out their listed name and email address for the sake of contacting them. That's basically public information, it would take a lot of work to turn that private. -- 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 a.badger at gmail.com Mon Jan 21 16:43:13 2008 From: a.badger at gmail.com (Toshio Kuratomi) Date: Mon, 21 Jan 2008 08:43:13 -0800 Subject: Fedora account restrictions In-Reply-To: <20080121092435.5c0d0893@redhat.com> References: <20862be60801171721k605924b5qf30bc58085924d3c@mail.gmail.com> <604aa7910801171753t557e94eau7d13c53bea440833@mail.gmail.com> <20862be60801171758j3e6e4530od3ab4ca0d0f7a775@mail.gmail.com> <1200678276.2709.38.camel@shinybook.infradead.org> <20862be60801181006v130e30a4r85534723fd905cef@mail.gmail.com> <1200695708.2709.197.camel@shinybook.infradead.org> <20080120083036.GA5745@puariko.nirvana> <1ed4a0130801202024m256b1972he2ef09474fcedc92@mail.gmail.com> <1200913878.2932.112.camel@shinybook.infradead.org> <1ed4a0130801210532g4cec69e7ra9a8404ddb367964@mail.gmail.com> <20080121092435.5c0d0893@redhat.com> Message-ID: <4794CBA1.7010206@gmail.com> Jesse Keating wrote: > On Mon, 21 Jan 2008 08:32:14 -0500 > "Russell Harrison" wrote: > >> My understanding is that he isn't requesting to remain anonymous to >> the Fedora Project. He's requesting that his name not be used in >> places visible to the Internet at large. I'm not suggesting that we >> allow anonymous contributions. I'm looking for a way to keep the >> personal data of a minor available to only fp members or a subset of >> members. I do feel its important that all contributions be connected >> to an actual person. Does that mean we have to broadcast that name to >> the rest of the Internet? > > Not necessarily. However I wouldn't feel comfortable stating that we > would keep it secret and then be on the hook should something happen > and it no longer be secret. It's one thing to say we'll make every > attempt, but it's another to say we'll keep it private. +1 > Add to that > convenient tools we have like IRC bots that can look up somebody's > Fedora account name and spit out their listed name and email address > for the sake of contacting them. That's basically public information, > it would take a lot of work to turn that private. > Depending on what we're trying to keep hidden we could do something like store a psseudonym in the human_name field of FAS; real email address; real IRC nick. phone#, address, and real human_name could be saved in the internal_comments field where normal apps don't go poking around. Note that there's nothing preventing an app from getting information from internal_comments, just that nothing currently does (or has any reason to). -Toshio -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: OpenPGP digital signature URL: From tcallawa at redhat.com Mon Jan 21 16:50:17 2008 From: tcallawa at redhat.com (Tom "spot" Callaway) Date: Mon, 21 Jan 2008 11:50:17 -0500 Subject: Fedora account restrictions In-Reply-To: <4794CBA1.7010206@gmail.com> References: <20862be60801171721k605924b5qf30bc58085924d3c@mail.gmail.com> <604aa7910801171753t557e94eau7d13c53bea440833@mail.gmail.com> <20862be60801171758j3e6e4530od3ab4ca0d0f7a775@mail.gmail.com> <1200678276.2709.38.camel@shinybook.infradead.org> <20862be60801181006v130e30a4r85534723fd905cef@mail.gmail.com> <1200695708.2709.197.camel@shinybook.infradead.org> <20080120083036.GA5745@puariko.nirvana> <1ed4a0130801202024m256b1972he2ef09474fcedc92@mail.gmail.com> <1200913878.2932.112.camel@shinybook.infradead.org> <1ed4a0130801210532g4cec69e7ra9a8404ddb367964@mail.gmail.com> <20080121092435.5c0d0893@redhat.com> <4794CBA1.7010206@gmail.com> Message-ID: <1200934217.3522.15.camel@localhost.localdomain> On Mon, 2008-01-21 at 08:43 -0800, Toshio Kuratomi wrote: > Note that there's nothing preventing an app from getting information > from internal_comments, just that nothing currently does (or has any > reason to). Not just an app, but a "non-Red Hat employee" human. In order for this to have any chance of working, we'd have to prevent all non-Red Hat employees from having any access to the FAS systems, or anything that could get the data from FAS systems. Any possible benefit from anonymous contributors is vastly outweighed by the restrictions we'd have to make in the infrastructure group. The CLA is a legal document, providing accountability to Fedora and Red Hat. We need a real, legal name for that document, and I don't think we should even attempt to guarantee anonymity for anyone. It goes against the spirit of Open Source, which is the spirit of Fedora. ~spot From ffm at intserverror.com Mon Jan 21 17:14:14 2008 From: ffm at intserverror.com (ffm) Date: Mon, 21 Jan 2008 12:14:14 -0500 Subject: Fedora account restrictions In-Reply-To: <1ed4a0130801210532g4cec69e7ra9a8404ddb367964@mail.gmail.com> References: <20862be60801171721k605924b5qf30bc58085924d3c@mail.gmail.com> <604aa7910801171753t557e94eau7d13c53bea440833@mail.gmail.com> <20862be60801171758j3e6e4530od3ab4ca0d0f7a775@mail.gmail.com> <1200678276.2709.38.camel@shinybook.infradead.org> <20862be60801181006v130e30a4r85534723fd905cef@mail.gmail.com> <1200695708.2709.197.camel@shinybook.infradead.org> <20080120083036.GA5745@puariko.nirvana> <1ed4a0130801202024m256b1972he2ef09474fcedc92@mail.gmail.com> <1200913878.2932.112.camel@shinybook.infradead.org> <1ed4a0130801210532g4cec69e7ra9a8404ddb367964@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <20862be60801210914s70fafd9dq26ff32151506d65c@mail.gmail.com> On Jan 21, 2008 8:32 AM, Russell Harrison wrote: > My understanding is that he isn't requesting to remain anonymous to > the Fedora Project. He's requesting that his name not be used in > places visible to the Internet at large. I'm not suggesting that we > allow anonymous contributions. I'm looking for a way to keep the > personal data of a minor available to only fp members or a subset of > members. Yes. That is what would be preferred. My parents just do not want to be able for John Doe to google "ffm" or "Joe Bloggs " and find out that "ffm == Joe Bloggs". > I do feel its important that all contributions be connected > to an actual person. I agree. I am not asking for anonymity from my fellow developers, only from the "public eye" of search engines. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From bpepple at fedoraproject.org Mon Jan 21 17:15:00 2008 From: bpepple at fedoraproject.org (Brian Pepple) Date: Mon, 21 Jan 2008 12:15:00 -0500 Subject: Fedora account restrictions In-Reply-To: <1200934217.3522.15.camel@localhost.localdomain> References: <20862be60801171721k605924b5qf30bc58085924d3c@mail.gmail.com> <604aa7910801171753t557e94eau7d13c53bea440833@mail.gmail.com> <20862be60801171758j3e6e4530od3ab4ca0d0f7a775@mail.gmail.com> <1200678276.2709.38.camel@shinybook.infradead.org> <20862be60801181006v130e30a4r85534723fd905cef@mail.gmail.com> <1200695708.2709.197.camel@shinybook.infradead.org> <20080120083036.GA5745@puariko.nirvana> <1ed4a0130801202024m256b1972he2ef09474fcedc92@mail.gmail.com> <1200913878.2932.112.camel@shinybook.infradead.org> <1ed4a0130801210532g4cec69e7ra9a8404ddb367964@mail.gmail.com> <20080121092435.5c0d0893@redhat.com> <4794CBA1.7010206@gmail.com> <1200934217.3522.15.camel@localhost.localdomain> Message-ID: <1200935700.21414.0.camel@nixon> On Mon, 2008-01-21 at 11:50 -0500, Tom "spot" Callaway wrote: > Any possible benefit from anonymous contributors is vastly outweighed by > the restrictions we'd have to make in the infrastructure group. > > The CLA is a legal document, providing accountability to Fedora and Red > Hat. We need a real, legal name for that document, and I don't think we > should even attempt to guarantee anonymity for anyone. > > It goes against the spirit of Open Source, which is the spirit of > Fedora. +1 /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 bob at cbccgroup.com Mon Jan 21 18:42:56 2008 From: bob at cbccgroup.com (Robert 'Bob' Jensen) Date: Mon, 21 Jan 2008 12:42:56 -0600 Subject: Fedora account restrictions In-Reply-To: <20862be60801210914s70fafd9dq26ff32151506d65c@mail.gmail.com> References: <20862be60801171721k605924b5qf30bc58085924d3c@mail.gmail.com> <604aa7910801171753t557e94eau7d13c53bea440833@mail.gmail.com> <20862be60801171758j3e6e4530od3ab4ca0d0f7a775@mail.gmail.com> <1200678276.2709.38.camel@shinybook.infradead.org> <20862be60801181006v130e30a4r85534723fd905cef@mail.gmail.com> <1200695708.2709.197.camel@shinybook.infradead.org> <20080120083036.GA5745@puariko.nirvana> <1ed4a0130801202024m256b1972he2ef09474fcedc92@mail.gmail.com> <1200913878.2932.112.camel@shinybook.infradead.org> <1ed4a0130801210532g4cec69e7ra9a8404ddb367964@mail.gmail.com> <20862be60801210914s70fafd9dq26ff32151506d65c@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <4794E7B0.5030601@cbccgroup.com> ffm wrote: > Yes. That is what would be preferred. My parents just do not want to be > able for John Doe to google > "ffm" or "Joe Bloggs " and find > out that "ffm == Joe Bloggs". > > I agree. I am not asking for anonymity from my fellow developers, only > from the "public eye" of search engines. ffm, it is really not all that hard to figure out who you are. I was able to cross reference your package with some other hints to find your Name, location, school you attended this past spring, approximate age. It is scary how easy it was actually. I wish you and your parents luck in this effort and keep up the good work. Robert 'Bob' Jensen http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/BobJensen Fedora Unity Project http://fedoraunity.org/ From smooge at gmail.com Mon Jan 21 19:16:21 2008 From: smooge at gmail.com (Stephen John Smoogen) Date: Mon, 21 Jan 2008 12:16:21 -0700 Subject: Fedora account restrictions In-Reply-To: <1200913878.2932.112.camel@shinybook.infradead.org> References: <20862be60801171721k605924b5qf30bc58085924d3c@mail.gmail.com> <604aa7910801171753t557e94eau7d13c53bea440833@mail.gmail.com> <20862be60801171758j3e6e4530od3ab4ca0d0f7a775@mail.gmail.com> <1200678276.2709.38.camel@shinybook.infradead.org> <20862be60801181006v130e30a4r85534723fd905cef@mail.gmail.com> <1200695708.2709.197.camel@shinybook.infradead.org> <20080120083036.GA5745@puariko.nirvana> <1ed4a0130801202024m256b1972he2ef09474fcedc92@mail.gmail.com> <1200913878.2932.112.camel@shinybook.infradead.org> Message-ID: <80d7e4090801211116r250404a2g4d701df2eed3030d@mail.gmail.com> On Jan 21, 2008 4:11 AM, David Woodhouse wrote: > > On Sun, 2008-01-20 at 23:24 -0500, Russell Harrison wrote: > > I'm a strong believer in getting talented students involved and > > excited as soon as possible. In order to do that we do have the > > obligation to protect their identity when requested. > > You're again confusing the issue of age with the issue of anonymity. The > fact that his parents are paranoid muppets and are _imposing_ the > anonymity on him, and that he chooses to accept that, is not our > business. Our business is that he's coming to us asking if he can be a > contributor while remaining anonymous -- and we seem mostly to be saying > 'no'. Of course if he had just signed his name as David Woodjouse III, we would have been none the wiser. Does the Fedora/Red Hat organization do any background checks to make sure the person who has signed the contract etc really exists? So in some ways, we reward dishonesty and punish honesty. I am not sure there is a solution to this that isnt worse than the present. -- Stephen J Smoogen. -- CSIRT/Linux System Administrator How far that little candle throws his beams! So shines a good deed in a naughty world. = Shakespeare. "The Merchant of Venice" From rtlm10 at gmail.com Mon Jan 21 23:48:57 2008 From: rtlm10 at gmail.com (Russell Harrison) Date: Mon, 21 Jan 2008 18:48:57 -0500 Subject: Fedora account restrictions In-Reply-To: <20080121082307.7764006a@zod.rchland.ibm.com> References: <20862be60801171721k605924b5qf30bc58085924d3c@mail.gmail.com> <20862be60801171758j3e6e4530od3ab4ca0d0f7a775@mail.gmail.com> <1200678276.2709.38.camel@shinybook.infradead.org> <20862be60801181006v130e30a4r85534723fd905cef@mail.gmail.com> <1200695708.2709.197.camel@shinybook.infradead.org> <20080120083036.GA5745@puariko.nirvana> <1ed4a0130801202024m256b1972he2ef09474fcedc92@mail.gmail.com> <1200913878.2932.112.camel@shinybook.infradead.org> <1ed4a0130801210532g4cec69e7ra9a8404ddb367964@mail.gmail.com> <20080121082307.7764006a@zod.rchland.ibm.com> Message-ID: <1ed4a0130801211548m21be8b17l58f5595e1aba76c3@mail.gmail.com> On Jan 21, 2008 9:23 AM, Josh Boyer wrote: > No, but you can't prevent someone that _does_ have access from doing > so. The Fedora Project cannot be held liable for that. Good point. Unfortunately it is something that would be very easy to accidentally do. All it takes is one person who does know the name to slip and use it in a fedora email list or IRC channel. Any of which would be indexed quite quickly. :-( Russell From kwade at redhat.com Tue Jan 22 16:26:46 2008 From: kwade at redhat.com (Karsten 'quaid' Wade) Date: Tue, 22 Jan 2008 08:26:46 -0800 Subject: Fedora account restrictions In-Reply-To: <80d7e4090801211116r250404a2g4d701df2eed3030d@mail.gmail.com> References: <20862be60801171721k605924b5qf30bc58085924d3c@mail.gmail.com> <604aa7910801171753t557e94eau7d13c53bea440833@mail.gmail.com> <20862be60801171758j3e6e4530od3ab4ca0d0f7a775@mail.gmail.com> <1200678276.2709.38.camel@shinybook.infradead.org> <20862be60801181006v130e30a4r85534723fd905cef@mail.gmail.com> <1200695708.2709.197.camel@shinybook.infradead.org> <20080120083036.GA5745@puariko.nirvana> <1ed4a0130801202024m256b1972he2ef09474fcedc92@mail.gmail.com> <1200913878.2932.112.camel@shinybook.infradead.org> <80d7e4090801211116r250404a2g4d701df2eed3030d@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <1201019206.10247.88.camel@calliope.phig.org> On Mon, 2008-01-21 at 12:16 -0700, Stephen John Smoogen wrote: > So in some ways, we reward dishonesty and punish honesty. I am not > sure there is a solution to this that isnt worse than the present. For some reason this rankles. I guess you are right that in any body of people, a certain percentage may be there by deception, and it's likely that >1 contributors to Fedora spend their other time in some nefarious activity. Not sure I would term it "reward(ing) dishonesty". We don't apply an honesty filter to incoming contributors. Our systems permit anonymity, regardless of our intention. Human conventions create these gray areas. Sets of rules or ideals come into conflict and there is no easy, possible, or logical solution. Someone in such a situation who reacts in a moral way for the good of the community might have to do something that is, on the fact of it, dishonest. But is it morally reprehensible? Anyway, as you say, there doesn't seem to be a way out that isn't worse. -- Karsten Wade, Developer Community Mgr. Dev Fu : http://developer.redhatmagazine.com Fedora : http://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 sundaram at fedoraproject.org Wed Jan 23 07:39:20 2008 From: sundaram at fedoraproject.org (Rahul Sundaram) Date: Wed, 23 Jan 2008 13:09:20 +0530 Subject: Fedora Board Recap 2007-JAN-13 In-Reply-To: <4793BBEC.90809@kanarip.com> References: <478FADA8.2020304@redhat.com> <78456233-D065-4398-A37B-C7CD09FF6E4F@0xdeadbeef.com> <200801171631.56635.dennis@ausil.us> <47908225.9040302@fedoraproject.org> <4793BBEC.90809@kanarip.com> Message-ID: <4796EF28.5080405@fedoraproject.org> Jeroen van Meeuwen wrote: > Rahul Sundaram wrote: >> Max Spevack wrote: >>> On Thu, 17 Jan 2008, Dennis Gilmore wrote: >>> >>>> the biggest one is that if you install it you get twm as the window >>>> manager and not a XFCE desktop environment. >>> >>> Maybe we should just call it the Fedora TWM spin. ;) >> >> Well, if you boot it as a live cd or in USB, you will get Xfce. Post >> installation, it defaults to TWM which is think is a bug somewhere >> since /etc/sysconfig/desktop just disappears. Also >> /etc/X11/xinit/Xclients probably should not hard core the logic it >> does. I have the kickstart file at >> >> http://sundaram.fedorapeople.org/livecd-fedora-8-xfce.ks >> >> Any help is welcome. >> > > I'm confused with the EOF's you're using. > > It seems you want /etc/rc.d/init.d/fedora-live to have: > > cat > /etc/sysconfig/desktop < PREFERRED=/usr/bin/startxfce4 > ANOTHEREOF > > wrapped within the entire %post's cat << EOF, right? > > Attached a .ks with a more distinctive clarification of the point I'm > trying to make but I'm not sure it does what you want it to do. Makes no difference unfortunately since the installed system is still missing /etc/sysconfig/desktop file entirely. Note that a similar construct is used in KDE spin and works fine there. I guess I will see if switchdesk works better. Rahul From sundaram at fedoraproject.org Wed Jan 23 10:45:44 2008 From: sundaram at fedoraproject.org (Rahul Sundaram) Date: Wed, 23 Jan 2008 16:15:44 +0530 Subject: Fedora Board Recap 2007-JAN-13 In-Reply-To: <4796EF28.5080405@fedoraproject.org> References: <478FADA8.2020304@redhat.com> <78456233-D065-4398-A37B-C7CD09FF6E4F@0xdeadbeef.com> <200801171631.56635.dennis@ausil.us> <47908225.9040302@fedoraproject.org> <4793BBEC.90809@kanarip.com> <4796EF28.5080405@fedoraproject.org> Message-ID: <47971AD8.2020708@fedoraproject.org> Rahul Sundaram wrote: > Jeroen van Meeuwen wrote: >> Rahul Sundaram wrote: >>> Max Spevack wrote: >>>> On Thu, 17 Jan 2008, Dennis Gilmore wrote: >>>> >>>>> the biggest one is that if you install it you get twm as the window >>>>> manager and not a XFCE desktop environment. >>>> >>>> Maybe we should just call it the Fedora TWM spin. ;) >>> >>> Well, if you boot it as a live cd or in USB, you will get Xfce. Post >>> installation, it defaults to TWM which is think is a bug somewhere >>> since /etc/sysconfig/desktop just disappears. Also >>> /etc/X11/xinit/Xclients probably should not hard core the logic it >>> does. I have the kickstart file at >>> >>> http://sundaram.fedorapeople.org/livecd-fedora-8-xfce.ks >>> >>> Any help is welcome. >>> >> >> I'm confused with the EOF's you're using. >> >> It seems you want /etc/rc.d/init.d/fedora-live to have: >> >> cat > /etc/sysconfig/desktop <> PREFERRED=/usr/bin/startxfce4 >> ANOTHEREOF >> >> wrapped within the entire %post's cat << EOF, right? >> >> Attached a .ks with a more distinctive clarification of the point I'm >> trying to make but I'm not sure it does what you want it to do. > > Makes no difference unfortunately since the installed system is still > missing /etc/sysconfig/desktop file entirely. Note that a similar > construct is used in KDE spin and works fine there. I guess I will see > if switchdesk works better. Ok. Good news. I managed to fix the problem by moving the section right to the top of %post. Rahul From kanarip at kanarip.com Thu Jan 24 13:21:12 2008 From: kanarip at kanarip.com (Jeroen van Meeuwen) Date: Thu, 24 Jan 2008 14:21:12 +0100 Subject: Fedora Unity releases updated Fedora 7 Re-Spins Message-ID: <479890C8.7000704@kanarip.com> The Fedora Unity Project is proud to announce the release of new ISO Re-Spins (DVD and CD Sets) of Fedora 7. These Re-Spin ISOs are based on Fedora 7 and all updates released as of January 18th, 2008. The ISO images are available for i386, x86_64 and PPC architectures via jigdo starting Thursday, January 24th, 2008. We have included CD Image sets for those in the Fedora community that do not have DVD drives or burners available. Fedora Unity has taken up the Re-Spin task to provide the community with the chance to install Fedora with recent updates already included. These updates might otherwise comprise more than 1.99GiB of downloads for a full installation. This is a community project, for and by the community. You can contribute to the community by joining our test process. A special thanks goes out to: - Ben Williams (Southern_Gentlem), - Jeffrey Tadlock (zcat), - Dana Hoffman Jr. (Harley-D), - Jason Farrell (iWolf) Who have tested this Re-Spin in only 4 days (testing includes running 23 tests twice, per architecture -138 in total). Please note that this Re-Spin obsoletes the previous F7 Re-Spin by Fedora Unity, "20071030". If you are interested in helping with the testing or mirroring efforts, please contact the Fedora Unity team. Contact information is available at http://fedoraunity.org/ or the #fedora-unity channel on the Freenode IRC Network (irc.freenode.net). Go to http://spins.fedoraunity.org/spins to get the bits! To report bugs in the Re-Spins please use http://bugs.fedoraunity.org/ Fedora is a trademark of Red Hat, Inc. -- Kind regards, Jeroen van Meeuwen -kanarip Fedora Unity Founder kanarip at fedoraunity.org From kanarip at kanarip.com Thu Jan 24 15:28:29 2008 From: kanarip at kanarip.com (Jeroen van Meeuwen) Date: Thu, 24 Jan 2008 16:28:29 +0100 Subject: Fedora Unity releases updated Fedora 7 Re-Spins In-Reply-To: <479890C8.7000704@kanarip.com> References: <479890C8.7000704@kanarip.com> Message-ID: <4798AE9D.6080102@kanarip.com> Jeroen van Meeuwen wrote: > A special thanks goes out to: > > - Ben Williams (Southern_Gentlem), > - Jeffrey Tadlock (zcat), > - Dana Hoffman Jr. (Harley-D), > - Jason Farrell (iWolf) > I made the terrible mistake of mixing up the names for zcat and iWolf. Jeffrey Tadlock is iWolf, and Jason Farrell is zcat. I'm sorry, I hope you guys forgive me ;-) What's the going rate for this kind of mistake nowadays? A beer (or two?), a meal? Let me know! Kind regards, Jeroen "If it is Dutch it ain't much" van Meeuwen -kanarip From jspaleta at gmail.com Thu Jan 24 22:50:30 2008 From: jspaleta at gmail.com (Jeff Spaleta) Date: Thu, 24 Jan 2008 13:50:30 -0900 Subject: closing out old bugs of unmaintained releases In-Reply-To: <1199829204.4111.409.camel@shinybook.infradead.org> References: <1199534677.4111.210.camel@shinybook.infradead.org> <477F77F0.3060706@leemhuis.info> <20080105074732.4a7466bd@redhat.com> <4783B237.3030103@redhat.com> <1199822763.3340.45.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1199829204.4111.409.camel@shinybook.infradead.org> Message-ID: <604aa7910801241450q817b06eo94ca4eb98feb5118@mail.gmail.com> On Jan 8, 2008 12:53 PM, David Woodhouse wrote: > Perhaps one option would be for non-programmer packagers to team up with > a programmer/sponsor to take on the task of package maintenance? Where > currently a package has one 'owner', there would instead be two r?les -- > a 'packager' and potentially a separate 'hacker'. Those wanting to > package software which they can't fully maintain for themselves would > have to recruit a programmer-type to sign up for the job with them. Here's how I would like to see things go. I want to see SIGs as teams with somewhat defined roles. We define these roles projectwide, but each SIG as a team figure out who fills what role. Obviously you can't define all work in terms of roles. Some work will be specialized. Thats OKAY. But what the projectwide defined roles gives us, is a way to train up new contributors in a way so that we aren't burdening each SIG with the responsibility of training people to do the same common tasks. So what sort of roles would a typical SIG probably have. Off the cuff I'd say: developers (ie codemonkeys) maintainers (ie packagemonkeys) triagers (ie bugmonkeys) documenters (ie textmonkeys) artists (ie mediamonkeys) So SIG A's triagers are basically doing the same stuff that SIG B's triagers do. As a group all the triagers across all SIGs are building their own tools and processes to help each other out. But they focus their individual efforts on a particular SIGs piece of the bugzilla pie. Same thing with maintainers.... as a group maintainers affiliated across all SIGs would be doing the same sort of crap day in and day out. But the focus their attention on a SIG's scope of packages. And so on and so on. But what is really great about having defined roles at the project level.. is that we can attempt to organize projectwide training for a particular role. We can attempt to organize projectwide recruitment for a particular role. Once we recruit and do basic training for a role, projectwide, then we can plug those newly trained people into a particular SIG that has a role that needs filling without burdening the other experts in the SIG with the text of training for a role they aren't performing. What a SIG can then focus on is integrating that person's role based skills into that particular SIGs development culture. Personally I want to get to the point where we can essentially have a role training effort every quarter or so. One quarter we make a project wide push for triagers.. the next maybe its maintainers.. and so on and so on... then we repeat. But for this to work we need to empower SIGs to be the team model and take responsibility for well defined chunks of the software repository. -jef From jspaleta at gmail.com Fri Jan 25 07:46:00 2008 From: jspaleta at gmail.com (Jeff Spaleta) Date: Thu, 24 Jan 2008 22:46:00 -0900 Subject: role based SIG teams (Was: closing out old bugs of unmaintained releases) Message-ID: <604aa7910801242346t6902bb3fu94ab22994418265e@mail.gmail.com> On Jan 8, 2008 12:53 PM, David Woodhouse wrote: > Perhaps one option would be for non-programmer packagers to team up with > a programmer/sponsor to take on the task of package maintenance? Where > currently a package has one 'owner', there would instead be two r?les -- > a 'packager' and potentially a separate 'hacker'. Those wanting to > package software which they can't fully maintain for themselves would > have to recruit a programmer-type to sign up for the job with them. I wanted to follow-up on this with a little strawman diagram of how I would want to incorporate David's idea into a larger role-based team concept.. where the SIGs are the main organizational structure. Take a look at this diagram of how I would like to see SIGs generally structured in terms of team roles: http://fedorapeople.org/~jspaleta/role-based-sigs/sig-teams.png Generally speaking, I'd like to see Packaging SIG have people in place for each of the 5 roles identified. The connections between those roles in the diagram represent generally normal role interactions that would be expected between team members in a SIG. Outside of that, there are Interaction Specialists who act as a resource for all SIGs to deal with common tasks in certain areas. I've populated the colored rectangles around the diagram with examples of types of specialists for different tasks. David would fall into the arch-guru or programming-language-guru category and would most likely be called on to help maintainers and developers who make up a SIG to help with specific problems. But on the other side of things, artists and video experts would be resources for documenters and user-helpers who wanted to create user facing materials like tours and task howtos. In this diagram the colored role circles are things we could internally develop some sort of baseline training and recruitment program for. The colored specialist rectangles are things that would be more difficult to provide training for internally..and we are relying on expert skills that people have developed outside the project. Okay well feature wrangler is the exception to the rule here...but you get the idea. Thoughts? -jef From kwade at redhat.com Fri Jan 25 08:14:34 2008 From: kwade at redhat.com (Karsten 'quaid' Wade) Date: Fri, 25 Jan 2008 00:14:34 -0800 Subject: role based SIG teams (Was: closing out old bugs of unmaintained releases) In-Reply-To: <604aa7910801242346t6902bb3fu94ab22994418265e@mail.gmail.com> References: <604aa7910801242346t6902bb3fu94ab22994418265e@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <1201248874.19482.374.camel@calliope.phig.org> On Thu, 2008-01-24 at 22:46 -0900, Jeff Spaleta wrote: > On Jan 8, 2008 12:53 PM, David Woodhouse wrote: > > Perhaps one option would be for non-programmer packagers to team up with > > a programmer/sponsor to take on the task of package maintenance? Where > > currently a package has one 'owner', there would instead be two r?les -- > > a 'packager' and potentially a separate 'hacker'. Those wanting to > > package software which they can't fully maintain for themselves would > > have to recruit a programmer-type to sign up for the job with them. > > > I wanted to follow-up on this with a little strawman diagram of how I > would want to incorporate David's idea into a larger role-based team > concept.. where the SIGs are the main organizational structure. > > Take a look at this diagram of how I would like to see SIGs generally > structured in terms of team roles: > > http://fedorapeople.org/~jspaleta/role-based-sigs/sig-teams.png > > Generally speaking, I'd like to see Packaging SIG have people in place > for each of the 5 roles identified. The connections between those > roles in the diagram represent generally normal role interactions that > would be expected between team members in a SIG. > > Outside of that, there are Interaction Specialists who act as a > resource for all SIGs to deal with common tasks in certain areas. > I've populated the colored rectangles around the diagram with examples > of types of specialists for different tasks. David would fall into > the arch-guru or programming-language-guru category and would most > likely be called on to help maintainers and developers who make up a > SIG to help with specific problems. But on the other side of things, > artists and video experts would be resources for documenters and > user-helpers who wanted to create user facing materials like tours and > task howtos. > > In this diagram the colored role circles are things we could > internally develop some sort of baseline training and recruitment > program for. The colored specialist rectangles are things that would > be more difficult to provide training for internally..and we are > relying on expert skills that people have developed outside the > project. Okay well feature wrangler is the exception to the rule > here...but you get the idea. > > Thoughts? Initial reaction is +1^2. Good inspiration there. There was a post from Greg a while back that describes me: "Oh, right. I'm not actually an engineer."[1] So, any idea that helps us better help each other is a good thing. Also, I like circles and squares and diagrams. And rainbows. I'm particularly fond of rainbows. - Karsten [1] http://gregdek.livejournal.com/19843.html > -jef > > _______________________________________________ > fedora-advisory-board mailing list > fedora-advisory-board at redhat.com > http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-advisory-board -- Karsten Wade, Developer Community Mgr. Dev Fu : http://developer.redhatmagazine.com Fedora : http://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 gdk at redhat.com Fri Jan 25 14:45:35 2008 From: gdk at redhat.com (Greg DeKoenigsberg) Date: Fri, 25 Jan 2008 09:45:35 -0500 (EST) Subject: closing out old bugs of unmaintained releases In-Reply-To: <604aa7910801241450q817b06eo94ca4eb98feb5118@mail.gmail.com> References: <1199534677.4111.210.camel@shinybook.infradead.org> <477F77F0.3060706@leemhuis.info> <20080105074732.4a7466bd@redhat.com> <4783B237.3030103@redhat.com> <1199822763.3340.45.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1199829204.4111.409.camel@shinybook.infradead.org> <604aa7910801241450q817b06eo94ca4eb98feb5118@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: On Thu, 24 Jan 2008, Jeff Spaleta wrote: A big +1 to everything Jeff says here. --g > On Jan 8, 2008 12:53 PM, David Woodhouse wrote: >> Perhaps one option would be for non-programmer packagers to team up with >> a programmer/sponsor to take on the task of package maintenance? Where >> currently a package has one 'owner', there would instead be two r?les -- >> a 'packager' and potentially a separate 'hacker'. Those wanting to >> package software which they can't fully maintain for themselves would >> have to recruit a programmer-type to sign up for the job with them. > > Here's how I would like to see things go. I want to see SIGs as teams > with somewhat defined roles. We define these roles projectwide, but > each SIG as a team figure out who fills what role. Obviously you > can't define all work in terms of roles. Some work will be > specialized. Thats OKAY. > > But what the projectwide defined roles gives us, is a way to train up > new contributors in a way so that we aren't burdening each SIG with > the responsibility of training people to do the same common tasks. > > So what sort of roles would a typical SIG probably have. Off the cuff I'd say: > developers (ie codemonkeys) > maintainers (ie packagemonkeys) > triagers (ie bugmonkeys) > documenters (ie textmonkeys) > artists (ie mediamonkeys) > > So SIG A's triagers are basically doing the same stuff that SIG B's > triagers do. As a group all the triagers across all SIGs are building > their own tools and processes to help each other out. But they focus > their individual efforts on a particular SIGs piece of the bugzilla > pie. > > Same thing with maintainers.... as a group maintainers affiliated > across all SIGs would be doing the same sort of crap day in and day > out. But the focus their attention on a SIG's scope of packages. > > And so on and so on. > > But what is really great about having defined roles at the project > level.. is that we can attempt to organize projectwide training for a > particular role. We can attempt to organize projectwide recruitment > for a particular role. Once we recruit and do basic training for a > role, projectwide, then we can plug those newly trained people into a > particular SIG that has a role that needs filling without burdening > the other experts in the SIG with the text of training for a role they > aren't performing. What a SIG can then focus on is integrating that > person's role based skills into that particular SIGs development > culture. > > Personally I want to get to the point where we can essentially have a > role training effort every quarter or so. One quarter we make a > project wide push for triagers.. the next maybe its maintainers.. and > so on and so on... then we repeat. But for this to work we need to > empower SIGs to be the team model and take responsibility for well > defined chunks of the software repository. > > -jef > > _______________________________________________ > fedora-advisory-board mailing list > fedora-advisory-board at redhat.com > http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-advisory-board > -- 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 poelstra at redhat.com Fri Jan 25 16:22:43 2008 From: poelstra at redhat.com (John Poelstra) Date: Fri, 25 Jan 2008 08:22:43 -0800 Subject: Fedora Board Recap 2008-JAN-22 Message-ID: <479A0CD3.5000106@redhat.com> http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Board/Meetings/2008-01-22 == Roll Call == Attendees: Paul Frields, Chris Aillon, Seth Vidal, Karsten Wade, John Poelstra, Bill Nottingham, Jef Spaleta, Steve Dickson, Matt Domsch, Dennis Gilmore. Regrets: Jack Aboutboul, Bob McWirther, Max Spevack == Red Hat Summit in Boston == * Fedora talks * "Open source track" * Hackfest space * What are the logistics? * Whether and how to handle a barcamp? * There will be a Fedora booth * Could the expo floor be comp'd for FUDCon attendees? ACTIONS: 1. Steve Dickson to track down details to understand how Summit participants and FUDCon attendees will mix? 1. Max and Greg D are having a meeting with Shay and Leigh (Summit organizers) before the next Board call and will report back == FUDCon & Contributor Survey == * FUDCon survey sent to marketing people * What would be a useful way to query the contributors? * What types of questions would help get to the bottom of the issues? * Query contributors from the perspective of where we should invest people resoures and time ACTION: Need a board member to own this item--followup at next meeting == Areas of Fedora That Need More Attention? == * QA and testing * What is the situation with open sourcing RHTS? * What happened with testing.108 and "Table Cloth"? == Goals For the Board == * What things would the board like to accomplish over the next year? 1. Engaging more with Upstream 1. Think more about this and followup at next meeting == fedoraproject.org mail == * What is the status of it and who is working on it? * previous board discussions/decisions: * https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-advisory-board/2007-July/msg00102.html * https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-advisory-board/2007-August/msg00004.html == Next Meeting == * Tuesday, January 29, 2008 * 17:00 EST From sundaram at fedoraproject.org Fri Jan 25 21:22:59 2008 From: sundaram at fedoraproject.org (Rahul Sundaram) Date: Sat, 26 Jan 2008 02:52:59 +0530 Subject: Requests to the board Message-ID: <479A5333.1000106@fedoraproject.org> Hi, * Post a agenda and request input sometime before each meeting. * Have a public agenda (short term and long term) of things being considered by the board. If anything was part of the agenda but postponed, please note that information in the meeting mins. * Post meeting mins asap after the meeting. * If meetings are canceled or rescheduled for any reasons, do provide a announcement. * If the community has to elect specific members, the differing opinions between them on various issues being discussed needs to be published. Thanks. Rahul From jspaleta at gmail.com Fri Jan 25 21:49:02 2008 From: jspaleta at gmail.com (Jeff Spaleta) Date: Fri, 25 Jan 2008 12:49:02 -0900 Subject: Requests to the board In-Reply-To: <479A5333.1000106@fedoraproject.org> References: <479A5333.1000106@fedoraproject.org> Message-ID: <604aa7910801251349r5c08da2bkebbc9115055e051@mail.gmail.com> On Jan 25, 2008 12:22 PM, Rahul Sundaram wrote: > * If the community has to elect specific members, the differing opinions > between them on various issues being discussed needs to be published. Everything else, I'm happy to see happen. This however I don't think is a good idea. If you want to publicly ask a particular board member on how they feel about a particular topic. Then ask, publicly or privately as you see fit and they will answer accordingly as they see fit. If board members feel strongly enough about a need to dissent on a board decision, they can communicate it through fab. But I'm really not sure its wise to encourage people to talk about their personal differences on every board decision. Doing that might blow differences out of proportion. -jef"can't wait for the day when Board members can taut their voting record during re-election campaigns"spaleta From tcallawa at redhat.com Fri Jan 25 22:33:40 2008 From: tcallawa at redhat.com (Tom "spot" Callaway) Date: Fri, 25 Jan 2008 17:33:40 -0500 Subject: Requests to the board In-Reply-To: <604aa7910801251349r5c08da2bkebbc9115055e051@mail.gmail.com> References: <479A5333.1000106@fedoraproject.org> <604aa7910801251349r5c08da2bkebbc9115055e051@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <1201300420.20916.14.camel@dhcp83-155.boston.redhat.com> On Fri, 2008-01-25 at 12:49 -0900, Jeff Spaleta wrote: > On Jan 25, 2008 12:22 PM, Rahul Sundaram wrote: > > * If the community has to elect specific members, the differing opinions > > between them on various issues being discussed needs to be published. > > Everything else, I'm happy to see happen. This however I don't think > is a good idea. More transparency! A return to representative government! Re-implement the gold standard! Destroy the Trilateralists and the North American Union! Send the reptilians back to Alpha Draconis! Wow. Who put Ron Paul in my water? Seriously, though, I don't think that we need a mandatory per vote breakdown on issues. I'd rather not open the door to lobbying. If individual board members feel like publishing their voting records, so be it. ~spot From mmcgrath at redhat.com Fri Jan 25 22:47:36 2008 From: mmcgrath at redhat.com (Mike McGrath) Date: Fri, 25 Jan 2008 16:47:36 -0600 (CST) Subject: Requests to the board In-Reply-To: <604aa7910801251349r5c08da2bkebbc9115055e051@mail.gmail.com> References: <479A5333.1000106@fedoraproject.org> <604aa7910801251349r5c08da2bkebbc9115055e051@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: On Fri, 25 Jan 2008, Jeff Spaleta wrote: > On Jan 25, 2008 12:22 PM, Rahul Sundaram wrote: > > * If the community has to elect specific members, the differing opinions > > between them on various issues being discussed needs to be published. > > Everything else, I'm happy to see happen. This however I don't think > is a good idea. > If you want to publicly ask a particular board member on how they feel > about a particular topic. Then ask, publicly or privately as you see > fit and they will answer accordingly as they see fit. If board > members feel strongly enough about a need to dissent on a board > decision, they can communicate it through fab. But I'm really not sure > its wise to encourage people to talk about their personal differences > on every board decision. Doing that might blow differences out of > proportion. > > -jef"can't wait for the day when Board members can taut their voting > record during re-election campaigns"spaleta > I've been happy with the board, no need to fix something that isn't broken. -Mike From kwade at redhat.com Fri Jan 25 22:51:31 2008 From: kwade at redhat.com (Karsten 'quaid' Wade) Date: Fri, 25 Jan 2008 14:51:31 -0800 Subject: Requests to the board In-Reply-To: <479A5333.1000106@fedoraproject.org> References: <479A5333.1000106@fedoraproject.org> Message-ID: <1201301491.19482.473.camel@calliope.phig.org> On Sat, 2008-01-26 at 02:52 +0530, Rahul Sundaram wrote: > * Post meeting mins asap after the meeting. One thought on this: notes from a meeting are not the same as a set of minutes. The idea of minutes is to give all members a chance to read and ratify them. The traditional way is to read and ratfiy the minutes at the start of the *next* meeting, which is an awfully long wait. So, the delay from meeting to publish is a necessity, in that Board members need a chance to comment, correct, and approve. There are certainly some things we can do to shorten the interval, but it really cannot be erased entirely. - Karsten -- Karsten Wade, Developer Community Mgr. Dev Fu : http://developer.redhatmagazine.com Fedora : http://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 jspaleta at gmail.com Sat Jan 26 00:28:19 2008 From: jspaleta at gmail.com (Jeff Spaleta) Date: Fri, 25 Jan 2008 15:28:19 -0900 Subject: closing out old bugs of unmaintained releases In-Reply-To: References: <1199534677.4111.210.camel@shinybook.infradead.org> <477F77F0.3060706@leemhuis.info> <20080105074732.4a7466bd@redhat.com> <4783B237.3030103@redhat.com> <1199822763.3340.45.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1199829204.4111.409.camel@shinybook.infradead.org> <604aa7910801241450q817b06eo94ca4eb98feb5118@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <604aa7910801251628s673822d4t4571f171c78fd543@mail.gmail.com> On Jan 25, 2008 5:45 AM, Greg DeKoenigsberg wrote: > On Thu, 24 Jan 2008, Jeff Spaleta wrote: > > A big +1 to everything Jeff says here. If that's all you are ever going to do, I'm going to start adding references to robotic telescope operators just so you have something to disagree with. -jef"hulk hungry... hulk smash"spaleta From jwboyer at gmail.com Sat Jan 26 02:41:43 2008 From: jwboyer at gmail.com (Josh Boyer) Date: Fri, 25 Jan 2008 20:41:43 -0600 Subject: Requests to the board In-Reply-To: References: <479A5333.1000106@fedoraproject.org> <604aa7910801251349r5c08da2bkebbc9115055e051@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <20080125204143.5846d6fa@zod.rchland.ibm.com> On Fri, 25 Jan 2008 16:47:36 -0600 (CST) Mike McGrath wrote: > On Fri, 25 Jan 2008, Jeff Spaleta wrote: > > > On Jan 25, 2008 12:22 PM, Rahul Sundaram wrote: > > > * If the community has to elect specific members, the differing opinions > > > between them on various issues being discussed needs to be published. > > > > Everything else, I'm happy to see happen. This however I don't think > > is a good idea. > > If you want to publicly ask a particular board member on how they feel > > about a particular topic. Then ask, publicly or privately as you see > > fit and they will answer accordingly as they see fit. If board > > members feel strongly enough about a need to dissent on a board > > decision, they can communicate it through fab. But I'm really not sure > > its wise to encourage people to talk about their personal differences > > on every board decision. Doing that might blow differences out of > > proportion. > > > > -jef"can't wait for the day when Board members can taut their voting > > record during re-election campaigns"spaleta > > > > I've been happy with the board, no need to fix something that isn't > broken. Ok, so I agree with this mostly. But likely for an entirely different reason. I've been happy because the board hasn't really done anything that I feel gets in the way of Fedora growing and progressing. I can't say I honestly know what the board does exactly. Most of the meeting minutes that come out consist of things like "$random question: revisit later", or are so terse I've no idea what discussion could have possibly taken place. This is not to say the members of the board aren't doing wonderful things. Quite the opposite in fact. I can look at the list of board members and tell you what most of them do in Fedora outside of the board itself and they are all excellent people. But I still haven't a clue as to what the board does. Things I have seen come from the board: - Spins: OK pretty good idea. The tools exist. There are some pretty useful spins. Now what? (How do we prevent spin proliferation, how do we determine what really constitutes a spin we want to promote, etc). - CD sets for F9: This is good, but it's hardly something I would call "big picture". - FUDCon: IIRC, this came more from Greg than it did the board. It seems to be massively popular with those that can attend, so it's good that the board continues to have them. Eventually one will have to happen in a city away from a Red Hat main office to attract new people and prevent it from becoming "Boondoggle meet us if you can"Con. Most of the rest of the items I see the board discuss are generated by non-board members. The minutes seem to imply the board finds them interesting, chats about them a bit, and then basically waits for the originator to do something more with the idea. Which, I suppose, is often the best form of leadership. josh From mspevack at redhat.com Sat Jan 26 05:38:28 2008 From: mspevack at redhat.com (Max Spevack) Date: Sat, 26 Jan 2008 00:38:28 -0500 (EST) Subject: Requests to the board In-Reply-To: <20080125204143.5846d6fa@zod.rchland.ibm.com> References: <479A5333.1000106@fedoraproject.org> <604aa7910801251349r5c08da2bkebbc9115055e051@mail.gmail.com> <20080125204143.5846d6fa@zod.rchland.ibm.com> Message-ID: On Fri, 25 Jan 2008, Josh Boyer wrote: > I've been happy because the board hasn't really done anything that I > feel gets in the way of Fedora growing and progressing. I can't say I > honestly know what the board does exactly. Most of the meeting > minutes that come out consist of things like "$random question: > revisit later", or are so terse I've no idea what discussion could > have possibly taken place. > Most of the rest of the items I see the board discuss are generated by > non-board members. The minutes seem to imply the board finds them > interesting, chats about them a bit, and then basically waits for the > originator to do something more with the idea. Which, I suppose, is > often the best form of leadership. To an extent, this is kind of the point. The people on the Board are either (a) already very active in Fedora, or (b) active in other parts of Red Hat that need to have a better understanding of Fedora. My leadership philosophy w.r.t the Board has always been that it is our job to understand and work either individually or behind the scenes to facilitate the general "will of Fedora" and to supplement that with our own ideas when necessary. Not to dictate policy, but to delegate decisions when possible. The Boards of Directors of companies don't tell the leaders within the company what to do -- they just set the general parameters, and defend the mission to anyone who doesn't get it. In Fedora, where most of the work is done by volunteers, and when the "Fedora Project Leader" be that me or Paul doesn't even have any direct people working for them, being able to build consensus and empower folks to achieve their goals in the Fedora context is most important. The Board's job is to make sure that Fedora doesn't stray from its core mission of freedom and innovation, and to ensure that Fedora's commitment to the community is always paramount. That is why many of our topics are simply making sure that everyone understands things of interest that are going on in different parts of the project, and making sure that our Fedora community leaders have an opportunity to understand what is going on inside of RH, and when that affects Fedora, to be able to have that insight. Inside of Red Hat, there are many times when people have a question about whether or not something can/should be done in Fedora. It has become habit over the past two years that when issues like that come up, someone will say "we should ask the Fedora Board". That alone represents success -- people recognize that the Fedora Board is the leadership entity of the project. It's the Board's responsibility to continue to earn/respect the trust of the community. If the Board made a habit of issuing orders directly, then we'd be Doing it Wrong, IMHO. Have a good weekend, all. --Max From mspevack at redhat.com Sat Jan 26 05:40:29 2008 From: mspevack at redhat.com (Max Spevack) Date: Sat, 26 Jan 2008 00:40:29 -0500 (EST) Subject: Requests to the board In-Reply-To: <20080125204143.5846d6fa@zod.rchland.ibm.com> References: <479A5333.1000106@fedoraproject.org> <604aa7910801251349r5c08da2bkebbc9115055e051@mail.gmail.com> <20080125204143.5846d6fa@zod.rchland.ibm.com> Message-ID: On Fri, 25 Jan 2008, Josh Boyer wrote: > - FUDCon: IIRC, this came more from Greg than it did the board. It > seems to be massively popular with those that can attend, so it's good > that the board continues to have them. Eventually one will have to > happen in a city away from a Red Hat main office to attract new people > and prevent it from becoming "Boondoggle meet us if you can"Con. This is the year that happens. One of our big budget requests for the fiscal year starting March 1 is to enable us to take FUDCon global, and have large FUDCon events that aren't in Boston or Raleigh. Once all this budget gets finalized, we will be able to paint a picture for FAB of the many community-building activities that we plan to do this year and discuss with FAB the best way to implement them. --Max From jspaleta at gmail.com Sat Jan 26 07:15:10 2008 From: jspaleta at gmail.com (Jeff Spaleta) Date: Fri, 25 Jan 2008 22:15:10 -0900 Subject: Requests to the board In-Reply-To: <20080125204143.5846d6fa@zod.rchland.ibm.com> References: <479A5333.1000106@fedoraproject.org> <604aa7910801251349r5c08da2bkebbc9115055e051@mail.gmail.com> <20080125204143.5846d6fa@zod.rchland.ibm.com> Message-ID: <604aa7910801252315h3267111ek5cde089534ee8510@mail.gmail.com> On Jan 25, 2008 5:41 PM, Josh Boyer wrote: > Most of the rest of the items I see the board discuss are generated by > non-board members. The minutes seem to imply the board finds them > interesting, chats about them a bit, and then basically waits for the > originator to do something more with the idea. Which, I suppose, > is often the best form of leadership. I'll be the first to say that the Board does it best work when its just a rubber stamp. If everything that comes up for Board approval has been thought out so well that we are essentially just making small corrective suggestions.. then man thats a pretty smooth running ship. I do not doubt that there will be situation when the Board has to draw a hardline and say no to something or the board will have to make some sort of decree concerning a change in how things get done. But we really want those situations to be atypical and not something the Board has to do a lot. Beyond that as a group we are attempting to get ahead of things by getting stakeholders in place to build consensous on a set of activities. The rejuvenation of a marketing plan for example. We spend a lot of time coming back to this topic in discussions, and are getting the right people in place both internally and externally to take this area to the next level. Once the new marketing hotness is up and running, then we will most likely make an effort to identify the next area that needs some (re)organization. The place I'm really hoping to drive the Board is turn it into a resource recruitment engine. Because well, in my experience brick and mortar Boards for volunteer groups are basically that. We need to get things organized inside the project so that Board members can know which subgroup needs what in terms of manpower and other resources and then we go out and club people over the head and drag them back to fill those needs. -jef From kwade at redhat.com Sat Jan 26 12:42:07 2008 From: kwade at redhat.com (Karsten 'quaid' Wade) Date: Sat, 26 Jan 2008 04:42:07 -0800 Subject: Requests to the board In-Reply-To: <20080125204143.5846d6fa@zod.rchland.ibm.com> References: <479A5333.1000106@fedoraproject.org> <604aa7910801251349r5c08da2bkebbc9115055e051@mail.gmail.com> <20080125204143.5846d6fa@zod.rchland.ibm.com> Message-ID: <1201351327.9134.29.camel@calliope.phig.org> On Fri, 2008-01-25 at 20:41 -0600, Josh Boyer wrote: > On Fri, 25 Jan 2008 16:47:36 -0600 (CST) > Mike McGrath wrote: > > > > > I've been happy with the board, no need to fix something that isn't > > broken. > > Ok, so I agree with this mostly. But likely for an entirely different > reason. [Snipped observations ...] Must have been mulling on this one for a while, because this poured forth from my brain tonight: http://iquaid.org/2008/01/26/wtf-is-the-fedora-project-board/ I hadn't formulated those arguments specifically that way before, perhaps because it was obvious to me what role the Board fills. It is interesting to me that a counterpart (Josh) in Fedora leadership within the sub-projects/SIGs has a different take on it. Though ... we do appear to draw similar conclusions: > Most of the rest of the items I see the board discuss are generated by > non-board members. The minutes seem to imply the board finds them > interesting, chats about them a bit, and then basically waits for the > originator to do something more with the idea. Which, I suppose, > is often the best form of leadership. Yeah, something like that. - Karsten -- Karsten Wade, Developer Community Mgr. Dev Fu : http://developer.redhatmagazine.com Fedora : http://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 fedora at leemhuis.info Sat Jan 26 13:12:14 2008 From: fedora at leemhuis.info (Thorsten Leemhuis) Date: Sat, 26 Jan 2008 14:12:14 +0100 Subject: Requests to the board In-Reply-To: <479A5333.1000106@fedoraproject.org> References: <479A5333.1000106@fedoraproject.org> Message-ID: <479B31AE.3000404@leemhuis.info> On 25.01.2008 22:22, Rahul Sundaram wrote: > * Post a agenda and request input sometime before each meeting. > * Have a public agenda (short term and long term) of things being > considered by the board. If anything was part of the agenda but > postponed, please note that information in the meeting mins. > [...] > * If meetings are canceled or rescheduled for any reasons, do provide a > announcement. The Board did those things in the past but stopped. So let me add a request: * when realizing the above make sure this is actually done and is not forgotten again over time Cu knurd From sundaram at fedoraproject.org Sat Jan 26 17:11:06 2008 From: sundaram at fedoraproject.org (Rahul Sundaram) Date: Sat, 26 Jan 2008 22:41:06 +0530 Subject: Requests to the board In-Reply-To: References: <479A5333.1000106@fedoraproject.org> <604aa7910801251349r5c08da2bkebbc9115055e051@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <479B69AA.3010101@fedoraproject.org> Mike McGrath wrote: > > I've been happy with the board, no need to fix something that isn't > broken. It is more a question of how do you vote for someone without understanding their ideas on various decisions being made within the board? I can choose to trust certain members to do the right thing but more transparency would be helpful, I think. If others are contend with the current status, then I guess it's ok. Rahul From jkeating at redhat.com Sun Jan 27 00:33:02 2008 From: jkeating at redhat.com (Jesse Keating) Date: Sat, 26 Jan 2008 19:33:02 -0500 Subject: Requests to the board In-Reply-To: <479B69AA.3010101@fedoraproject.org> References: <479A5333.1000106@fedoraproject.org> <604aa7910801251349r5c08da2bkebbc9115055e051@mail.gmail.com> <479B69AA.3010101@fedoraproject.org> Message-ID: <20080126193302.7fcf8671@redhat.com> On Sat, 26 Jan 2008 22:41:06 +0530 Rahul Sundaram wrote: > It is more a question of how do you vote for someone without > understanding their ideas on various decisions being made within the > board? Because hopefully folks running for the board have spent some time on the other Fedora leadership groups, like a sig leader, FESCo, etc... Those logs are far more open and its a lot easier to get an idea for a person's opinions and thought processes. -- 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 jspaleta at gmail.com Sun Jan 27 00:58:22 2008 From: jspaleta at gmail.com (Jeff Spaleta) Date: Sat, 26 Jan 2008 15:58:22 -0900 Subject: Requests to the board In-Reply-To: <479B69AA.3010101@fedoraproject.org> References: <479A5333.1000106@fedoraproject.org> <604aa7910801251349r5c08da2bkebbc9115055e051@mail.gmail.com> <479B69AA.3010101@fedoraproject.org> Message-ID: <604aa7910801261658m6bd22eeaw57f1f259dde3e3d2@mail.gmail.com> On Jan 26, 2008 8:11 AM, Rahul Sundaram wrote: > It is more a question of how do you vote for someone without > understanding their ideas on various decisions being made within the board? Okay let's take me for example. Did you and everyone else in contributor-space have a reasonably good idea of what sort of things I was interested in before I even stood for election? Do you doubt for a second that I would stop championing the same sort of things now that I have ultimate power at the cost of sitting in on a phone call once a week? As far as I'm concerning being on the board hasn't bought me any more access that I haven't already earned with indvidual people inside the community I need to interact with. The people who didn't find me a useful resource before aren't going to magically start giving me more attention because other people voted for me. If anything being voted might have hardened already poor opinions of me. All being on the board has really done is given me a credible title to hang off of my name, so when I can interact with people outside our community, it buys me about 2 minutes of their time before they write me off as a crazy. > I can choose to trust certain members to do the right thing but more > transparency would be helpful, I think. If others are contend with the > current status, then I guess it's ok. If you need to ask how someone personally feels about a subject, just ask. I personally hate dragging out disagreements into the open if it can be helped, whether its on the board or in some other subgroup. Everybody should know I'm just as much of a fan of talking one-on-one with someone to make sure positive things get done, as I am discussing things in a town hall mailinglist. If I haven't had a sidebar conversation with you in the last couple of years, you either aren't on my personal radar, or I don't have a way to positively impact what you are trying to accomplish. -jef From sundaram at fedoraproject.org Sun Jan 27 01:32:58 2008 From: sundaram at fedoraproject.org (Rahul Sundaram) Date: Sun, 27 Jan 2008 07:02:58 +0530 Subject: Requests to the board In-Reply-To: <604aa7910801261658m6bd22eeaw57f1f259dde3e3d2@mail.gmail.com> References: <479A5333.1000106@fedoraproject.org> <604aa7910801251349r5c08da2bkebbc9115055e051@mail.gmail.com> <479B69AA.3010101@fedoraproject.org> <604aa7910801261658m6bd22eeaw57f1f259dde3e3d2@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <479BDF4A.1050701@fedoraproject.org> Jeff Spaleta wrote: > On Jan 26, 2008 8:11 AM, Rahul Sundaram wrote: >> It is more a question of how do you vote for someone without >> understanding their ideas on various decisions being made within the board? > > Okay let's take me for example. Did you and everyone else in > contributor-space have a reasonably good idea of what sort of things I > was interested in before I even stood for election? To some extend, yes. A platform for debates like http://www.mail-archive.com/foundation-list at gnome.org/msg02497.html might be useful here. > Do you doubt for a second that I would stop championing the same sort > of things now that I have ultimate power at the cost of sitting in on > a phone call once a week? I might not. Others might. Nobody outside the board has much insight into what individual people within feel about specific issues. I don't think asking them all whenever decisions are made scales well. When I make specific requests to the board, I don't really know who is supporting my viewpoints or what they are disagreeing on if they do. Rahul From vnk at mkc.co.nz Sun Jan 27 01:37:04 2008 From: vnk at mkc.co.nz (Vladimir Kosovac) Date: Sun, 27 Jan 2008 14:37:04 +1300 Subject: Requests to the board In-Reply-To: <479BDF4A.1050701@fedoraproject.org> References: <479A5333.1000106@fedoraproject.org> <604aa7910801251349r5c08da2bkebbc9115055e051@mail.gmail.com> <479B69AA.3010101@fedoraproject.org> <604aa7910801261658m6bd22eeaw57f1f259dde3e3d2@mail.gmail.com> <479BDF4A.1050701@fedoraproject.org> Message-ID: <479BE040.3030701@mkc.co.nz> Rahul Sundaram wrote: > Jeff Spaleta wrote: >> On Jan 26, 2008 8:11 AM, Rahul Sundaram wrote: >>> It is more a question of how do you vote for someone without >>> understanding their ideas on various decisions being made within the >>> board? >> >> Okay let's take me for example. Did you and everyone else in >> contributor-space have a reasonably good idea of what sort of things I >> was interested in before I even stood for election? > > To some extend, yes. A platform for debates like > http://www.mail-archive.com/foundation-list at gnome.org/msg02497.html > might be useful here. > >> Do you doubt for a second that I would stop championing the same sort >> of things now that I have ultimate power at the cost of sitting in on >> a phone call once a week? > > I might not. Others might. Nobody outside the board has much insight > into what individual people within feel about specific issues. I don't > think asking them all whenever decisions are made scales well. When I > make specific requests to the board, I don't really know who is > supporting my viewpoints or what they are disagreeing on if they do. > Aren't mailing lists/blogs/individual contacts providing enough insight? I know you are keeping an eye on them, as should everybody else who cares. Vladimir > Rahul > > _______________________________________________ > fedora-advisory-board mailing list > fedora-advisory-board at redhat.com > http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-advisory-board > -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 251 bytes Desc: OpenPGP digital signature URL: From sundaram at fedoraproject.org Sun Jan 27 01:49:15 2008 From: sundaram at fedoraproject.org (Rahul Sundaram) Date: Sun, 27 Jan 2008 07:19:15 +0530 Subject: Requests to the board In-Reply-To: <479BE040.3030701@mkc.co.nz> References: <479A5333.1000106@fedoraproject.org> <604aa7910801251349r5c08da2bkebbc9115055e051@mail.gmail.com> <479B69AA.3010101@fedoraproject.org> <604aa7910801261658m6bd22eeaw57f1f259dde3e3d2@mail.gmail.com> <479BDF4A.1050701@fedoraproject.org> <479BE040.3030701@mkc.co.nz> Message-ID: <479BE31B.8070604@fedoraproject.org> Vladimir Kosovac wrote: >> > Aren't mailing lists/blogs/individual contacts providing enough insight? > I know you are keeping an eye on them, as should everybody else who cares. I wouldn't be asking if it did. Rahul From vnk at mkc.co.nz Sun Jan 27 02:34:29 2008 From: vnk at mkc.co.nz (Vladimir Kosovac) Date: Sun, 27 Jan 2008 15:34:29 +1300 Subject: Requests to the board In-Reply-To: <479BE31B.8070604@fedoraproject.org> References: <479A5333.1000106@fedoraproject.org> <604aa7910801251349r5c08da2bkebbc9115055e051@mail.gmail.com> <479B69AA.3010101@fedoraproject.org> <604aa7910801261658m6bd22eeaw57f1f259dde3e3d2@mail.gmail.com> <479BDF4A.1050701@fedoraproject.org> <479BE040.3030701@mkc.co.nz> <479BE31B.8070604@fedoraproject.org> Message-ID: <479BEDB5.7030309@mkc.co.nz> Rahul Sundaram wrote: > Vladimir Kosovac wrote: >>> >> Aren't mailing lists/blogs/individual contacts providing enough >> insight? I know you are keeping an eye on them, as should everybody >> else who cares. > > I wouldn't be asking if it did. > What you said so far implies that voting for board members is or should be based on their take on individual issues rather than their ability to direct the project in a right way, including the vision to initiate and lead the project evolution, of which Fedora is a bright example. That ability is more or less easily provable by people's previous involvement at the project level or their contributions to SIGs/subprojects, which is open to all through said lists and blogs. Vladimir > Rahul > > _______________________________________________ > fedora-advisory-board mailing list > fedora-advisory-board at redhat.com > http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-advisory-board > -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 251 bytes Desc: OpenPGP digital signature URL: From sundaram at fedoraproject.org Sun Jan 27 02:57:01 2008 From: sundaram at fedoraproject.org (Rahul Sundaram) Date: Sun, 27 Jan 2008 08:27:01 +0530 Subject: Requests to the board In-Reply-To: <479BEDB5.7030309@mkc.co.nz> References: <479A5333.1000106@fedoraproject.org> <604aa7910801251349r5c08da2bkebbc9115055e051@mail.gmail.com> <479B69AA.3010101@fedoraproject.org> <604aa7910801261658m6bd22eeaw57f1f259dde3e3d2@mail.gmail.com> <479BDF4A.1050701@fedoraproject.org> <479BE040.3030701@mkc.co.nz> <479BE31B.8070604@fedoraproject.org> <479BEDB5.7030309@mkc.co.nz> Message-ID: <479BF2FD.8050605@fedoraproject.org> Vladimir Kosovac wrote: > What you said so far implies that voting for board members is or should > be based on their take on individual issues rather than their ability to > direct the project in a right way, including the vision to initiate and > lead the project evolution, of which Fedora is a bright example. They are very much interrrelated. Leading a project involves making decisions and what opinions and decisions everyone hold on individual issues are also important. Rahul From jspaleta at gmail.com Sun Jan 27 04:27:07 2008 From: jspaleta at gmail.com (Jeff Spaleta) Date: Sat, 26 Jan 2008 19:27:07 -0900 Subject: Requests to the board In-Reply-To: <479BDF4A.1050701@fedoraproject.org> References: <479A5333.1000106@fedoraproject.org> <604aa7910801251349r5c08da2bkebbc9115055e051@mail.gmail.com> <479B69AA.3010101@fedoraproject.org> <604aa7910801261658m6bd22eeaw57f1f259dde3e3d2@mail.gmail.com> <479BDF4A.1050701@fedoraproject.org> Message-ID: <604aa7910801262027u7d7bc9a0y8c9cf18a6797faf7@mail.gmail.com> On Jan 26, 2008 4:32 PM, Rahul Sundaram wrote: > To some extend, yes. A platform for debates like > http://www.mail-archive.com/foundation-list at gnome.org/msg02497.html > might be useful here. I like the idea of having a set of common questions that form the basis of a dialog between a candidate and voters. I very very much dislike using the term "debate" because its very much tied up with arguing and "opposing" something. I really don't like "opposing" things. I love discussing things, I like crafting consensus and when that fails, experimentation. That being said... I oppose the use of the word "debate" > I might not. Others might. Nobody outside the board has much insight > into what individual people within feel about specific issues. Let me repeat what I said. If you want to know where a specific individual stands on something, ask that specific individual. They will answer you as they see fit on their personal take on any situation. > I don't think asking them all whenever decisions are made scales well. So you don't want to treat them as individuals anymore because they sit on a phone call together? Do you want all the members of fesco, or the packaging committee, to give you detailed opinion statements as to where they stand on each and every decision that comes up? > When I make specific requests to the board, I don't really know who is > supporting my viewpoints or what they are disagreeing on if they do. Isn't this what the fab list is for? Aren't you keeping notes as to who is communicating with you on fab? -jef From sundaram at fedoraproject.org Sun Jan 27 08:07:33 2008 From: sundaram at fedoraproject.org (Rahul Sundaram) Date: Sun, 27 Jan 2008 13:37:33 +0530 Subject: Requests to the board In-Reply-To: <604aa7910801262027u7d7bc9a0y8c9cf18a6797faf7@mail.gmail.com> References: <479A5333.1000106@fedoraproject.org> <604aa7910801251349r5c08da2bkebbc9115055e051@mail.gmail.com> <479B69AA.3010101@fedoraproject.org> <604aa7910801261658m6bd22eeaw57f1f259dde3e3d2@mail.gmail.com> <479BDF4A.1050701@fedoraproject.org> <604aa7910801262027u7d7bc9a0y8c9cf18a6797faf7@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <479C3BC5.3080207@fedoraproject.org> Jeff Spaleta wrote: > >> I don't think asking them all whenever decisions are made scales well. > > So you don't want to treat them as individuals anymore because they > sit on a phone call together? Do you want all the members of fesco, > or the packaging committee, to give you detailed opinion statements as > to where they stand on each and every decision that comes up? FESCo or packaging committee have public voting in irc. So their situation is not comparable. I think your line of questioning has turned argumentative now and I will stop. Rahul From jspaleta at gmail.com Sun Jan 27 08:13:03 2008 From: jspaleta at gmail.com (Jeff Spaleta) Date: Sat, 26 Jan 2008 23:13:03 -0900 Subject: Requests to the board In-Reply-To: <479C3BC5.3080207@fedoraproject.org> References: <479A5333.1000106@fedoraproject.org> <604aa7910801251349r5c08da2bkebbc9115055e051@mail.gmail.com> <479B69AA.3010101@fedoraproject.org> <604aa7910801261658m6bd22eeaw57f1f259dde3e3d2@mail.gmail.com> <479BDF4A.1050701@fedoraproject.org> <604aa7910801262027u7d7bc9a0y8c9cf18a6797faf7@mail.gmail.com> <479C3BC5.3080207@fedoraproject.org> Message-ID: <604aa7910801270013p2a4a8072l501219310c6e2b47@mail.gmail.com> On Jan 26, 2008 11:07 PM, Rahul Sundaram wrote: > FESCo or packaging committee have public voting in irc. So their > situation is not comparable. I think your line of questioning has turned > argumentative now and I will stop. Are you looking just for a break down of the votes? I think for things that make the summaries and actually come to a vote, that could probably be made available. If its unanimous, then we'll just say that in the summary. -jef From mmcgrath at redhat.com Mon Jan 28 05:13:40 2008 From: mmcgrath at redhat.com (Mike McGrath) Date: Sun, 27 Jan 2008 23:13:40 -0600 (CST) Subject: Requests to the board In-Reply-To: <479B69AA.3010101@fedoraproject.org> References: <479A5333.1000106@fedoraproject.org> <604aa7910801251349r5c08da2bkebbc9115055e051@mail.gmail.com> <479B69AA.3010101@fedoraproject.org> Message-ID: On Sat, 26 Jan 2008, Rahul Sundaram wrote: > Mike McGrath wrote: > > > > I've been happy with the board, no need to fix something that isn't > > broken. > > It is more a question of how do you vote for someone without understanding > their ideas on various decisions being made within the board? > Well, each individual is up on their own to decide who to vote for but I vote for the person. In this last election I voted for Domsch, even though I was running (didn't feel right voting for myself and its a community seat and really should go to a community member). So why Domsch? Well, I've worked with him on a number of items and I use a lot of Dell servers (which work with Linux in no small part because of him and the Dell team). Those two things combined make him someone I want to keep on the board. It's a trust thing, I trust his decision making. Such things do not work in large environments like say... a United States government. But work well in a meritocracy, You vote for the people that have the merit to claim your vote. -Mike From sundaram at fedoraproject.org Mon Jan 28 09:44:55 2008 From: sundaram at fedoraproject.org (Rahul Sundaram) Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2008 15:14:55 +0530 Subject: Requests to the board In-Reply-To: <604aa7910801270013p2a4a8072l501219310c6e2b47@mail.gmail.com> References: <479A5333.1000106@fedoraproject.org> <604aa7910801251349r5c08da2bkebbc9115055e051@mail.gmail.com> <479B69AA.3010101@fedoraproject.org> <604aa7910801261658m6bd22eeaw57f1f259dde3e3d2@mail.gmail.com> <479BDF4A.1050701@fedoraproject.org> <604aa7910801262027u7d7bc9a0y8c9cf18a6797faf7@mail.gmail.com> <479C3BC5.3080207@fedoraproject.org> <604aa7910801270013p2a4a8072l501219310c6e2b47@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <479DA417.3050504@fedoraproject.org> Jeff Spaleta wrote: > On Jan 26, 2008 11:07 PM, Rahul Sundaram wrote: >> FESCo or packaging committee have public voting in irc. So their >> situation is not comparable. I think your line of questioning has turned >> argumentative now and I will stop. > > > Are you looking just for a break down of the votes? I think for > things that make the summaries and actually come to a vote, that could > probably be made available. If its unanimous, then we'll just say > that in the summary. That would be useful. Rahul From ansilva at redhat.com Sat Jan 26 18:30:51 2008 From: ansilva at redhat.com (Anderson Silva) Date: Sat, 26 Jan 2008 13:30:51 -0500 Subject: [Fwd: Re: Eeedora (Fedora + Eee PC) - hosting question?] Message-ID: <479B7C5B.2070007@redhat.com> Someone from memo-list told me to email the board about eeedora. The following is the email I sent out to red hat's memo list: -------------- next part -------------- An embedded message was scrubbed... From: Rahul Sundaram Subject: Re: Eeedora (Fedora + Eee PC) - hosting question? Date: Sat, 26 Jan 2008 22:52:59 +0530 Size: 2388 URL: From ivazqueznet at gmail.com Mon Jan 28 16:26:22 2008 From: ivazqueznet at gmail.com (Ignacio Vazquez-Abrams) Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2008 11:26:22 -0500 Subject: [Fwd: Re: Eeedora (Fedora + Eee PC) - hosting question?] In-Reply-To: <479B7C5B.2070007@redhat.com> References: <479B7C5B.2070007@redhat.com> Message-ID: <1201537582.28780.1.camel@ignacio.lan> On Sat, 2008-01-26 at 13:30 -0500, Anderson Silva wrote: > Someone from memo-list told me to email the board about eeedora. The > following is the email I sent out to red hat's memo list: Do we know what the differences between Eeedora and Fedora are? -- Ignacio Vazquez-Abrams From blizzard at 0xdeadbeef.com Mon Jan 28 16:27:10 2008 From: blizzard at 0xdeadbeef.com (Christopher Blizzard) Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2008 08:27:10 -0800 Subject: [Fwd: Re: Eeedora (Fedora + Eee PC) - hosting question?] In-Reply-To: <479B7C5B.2070007@redhat.com> References: <479B7C5B.2070007@redhat.com> Message-ID: Yeah, I always thought that the eeedora stuff + the work that rahul and denis are doing for a smallish xfce image was pretty neat. Would love to have a small image out there for people to play with. --Chris From blizzard at 0xdeadbeef.com Mon Jan 28 16:27:10 2008 From: blizzard at 0xdeadbeef.com (Christopher Blizzard) Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2008 08:27:10 -0800 Subject: [Fwd: Re: Eeedora (Fedora + Eee PC) - hosting question?] In-Reply-To: <479B7C5B.2070007@redhat.com> References: <479B7C5B.2070007@redhat.com> Message-ID: Yeah, I always thought that the eeedora stuff + the work that rahul and denis are doing for a smallish xfce image was pretty neat. Would love to have a small image out there for people to play with. --Chris From ivazqueznet at gmail.com Mon Jan 28 16:34:00 2008 From: ivazqueznet at gmail.com (Ignacio Vazquez-Abrams) Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2008 11:34:00 -0500 Subject: [Fwd: Re: Eeedora (Fedora + Eee PC) - hosting question?] In-Reply-To: <1201537582.28780.1.camel@ignacio.lan> References: <479B7C5B.2070007@redhat.com> <1201537582.28780.1.camel@ignacio.lan> Message-ID: <1201538040.28780.5.camel@ignacio.lan> On Mon, 2008-01-28 at 11:26 -0500, Ignacio Vazquez-Abrams wrote: > Do we know what the differences between Eeedora and Fedora are? Blech. Google (no pun intended) first, ask later. http://code.google.com/p/eeedora/ Short answer: Ethernet and WLAN modules, and XFCE. -- Ignacio Vazquez-Abrams From jkeating at redhat.com Mon Jan 28 16:38:51 2008 From: jkeating at redhat.com (Jesse Keating) Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2008 11:38:51 -0500 Subject: [Fwd: Re: Eeedora (Fedora + Eee PC) - hosting question?] In-Reply-To: <1201538040.28780.5.camel@ignacio.lan> References: <479B7C5B.2070007@redhat.com> <1201537582.28780.1.camel@ignacio.lan> <1201538040.28780.5.camel@ignacio.lan> Message-ID: <20080128113851.4ff8479c@redhat.com> On Mon, 28 Jan 2008 11:34:00 -0500 Ignacio Vazquez-Abrams wrote: > Blech. Google (no pun intended) first, ask later. > > http://code.google.com/p/eeedora/ > > Short answer: Ethernet and WLAN modules, and XFCE. This is where we really really really need a more relaxed trademark policy, so that we can put out something like this for the Eee under the Fedora name, with Fedora branding, etc.. -- 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 Jan 28 16:47:31 2008 From: tcallawa at redhat.com (Tom "spot" Callaway) Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2008 11:47:31 -0500 Subject: [Fwd: Re: Eeedora (Fedora + Eee PC) - hosting question?] In-Reply-To: <20080128113851.4ff8479c@redhat.com> References: <479B7C5B.2070007@redhat.com> <1201537582.28780.1.camel@ignacio.lan> <1201538040.28780.5.camel@ignacio.lan> <20080128113851.4ff8479c@redhat.com> Message-ID: <1201538851.3363.12.camel@dhcp83-155.boston.redhat.com> On Mon, 2008-01-28 at 11:38 -0500, Jesse Keating wrote: > On Mon, 28 Jan 2008 11:34:00 -0500 > Ignacio Vazquez-Abrams wrote: > > > Blech. Google (no pun intended) first, ask later. > > > > http://code.google.com/p/eeedora/ > > > > Short answer: Ethernet and WLAN modules, and XFCE. > > This is where we really really really need a more relaxed trademark > policy, so that we can put out something like this for the Eee under > the Fedora name, with Fedora branding, etc.. Alternately, why aren't those kernel modules in Fedora? If they were using all Fedora packages, then they _could_ use the Fedora name. ~spot From jkeating at redhat.com Mon Jan 28 16:49:29 2008 From: jkeating at redhat.com (Jesse Keating) Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2008 11:49:29 -0500 Subject: [Fwd: Re: Eeedora (Fedora + Eee PC) - hosting question?] In-Reply-To: <1201538851.3363.12.camel@dhcp83-155.boston.redhat.com> References: <479B7C5B.2070007@redhat.com> <1201537582.28780.1.camel@ignacio.lan> <1201538040.28780.5.camel@ignacio.lan> <20080128113851.4ff8479c@redhat.com> <1201538851.3363.12.camel@dhcp83-155.boston.redhat.com> Message-ID: <20080128114929.10b02788@redhat.com> On Mon, 28 Jan 2008 11:47:31 -0500 "Tom \"spot\" Callaway" wrote: > Alternately, why aren't those kernel modules in Fedora? If they were > using all Fedora packages, then they _could_ use the Fedora name. Likely because they're not upstream yet, and nobody has asked davej nicely to include them in our kernel builds. -- 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 ivazqueznet at gmail.com Mon Jan 28 16:53:08 2008 From: ivazqueznet at gmail.com (Ignacio Vazquez-Abrams) Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2008 11:53:08 -0500 Subject: [Fwd: Re: Eeedora (Fedora + Eee PC) - hosting question?] In-Reply-To: <1201538851.3363.12.camel@dhcp83-155.boston.redhat.com> References: <479B7C5B.2070007@redhat.com> <1201537582.28780.1.camel@ignacio.lan> <1201538040.28780.5.camel@ignacio.lan> <20080128113851.4ff8479c@redhat.com> <1201538851.3363.12.camel@dhcp83-155.boston.redhat.com> Message-ID: <1201539188.28780.13.camel@ignacio.lan> On Mon, 2008-01-28 at 11:47 -0500, Tom "spot" Callaway wrote: > On Mon, 2008-01-28 at 11:38 -0500, Jesse Keating wrote: > > On Mon, 28 Jan 2008 11:34:00 -0500 > > Ignacio Vazquez-Abrams wrote: > > > > > Blech. Google (no pun intended) first, ask later. > > > > > > http://code.google.com/p/eeedora/ > > > > > > Short answer: Ethernet and WLAN modules, and XFCE. > > > > This is where we really really really need a more relaxed trademark > > policy, so that we can put out something like this for the Eee under > > the Fedora name, with Fedora branding, etc.. > > Alternately, why aren't those kernel modules in Fedora? If they were > using all Fedora packages, then they _could_ use the Fedora name. csnook is working on getting atl2/atlx upstream, and ath5k is being hammered on by someone as we speak, I'm sure. http://people.redhat.com/csnook/atl2/ -- Ignacio Vazquez-Abrams From sundaram at fedoraproject.org Mon Jan 28 17:04:44 2008 From: sundaram at fedoraproject.org (Rahul Sundaram) Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2008 22:34:44 +0530 Subject: [Fwd: Re: Eeedora (Fedora + Eee PC) - hosting question?] In-Reply-To: <20080128114929.10b02788@redhat.com> References: <479B7C5B.2070007@redhat.com> <1201537582.28780.1.camel@ignacio.lan> <1201538040.28780.5.camel@ignacio.lan> <20080128113851.4ff8479c@redhat.com> <1201538851.3363.12.camel@dhcp83-155.boston.redhat.com> <20080128114929.10b02788@redhat.com> Message-ID: <479E0B2C.3010107@fedoraproject.org> Jesse Keating wrote: > On Mon, 28 Jan 2008 11:47:31 -0500 > "Tom \"spot\" Callaway" wrote: > >> Alternately, why aren't those kernel modules in Fedora? If they were >> using all Fedora packages, then they _could_ use the Fedora name. > > Likely because they're not upstream yet, and nobody has asked davej > nicely to include them in our kernel builds. Someone should contact the folks behind eeedora and see if we can coordinate and merge back changes. Anyone interested? Rahul From jwboyer at gmail.com Mon Jan 28 17:01:54 2008 From: jwboyer at gmail.com (Josh Boyer) Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2008 11:01:54 -0600 Subject: [Fwd: Re: Eeedora (Fedora + Eee PC) - hosting question?] In-Reply-To: <479B7C5B.2070007@redhat.com> References: <479B7C5B.2070007@redhat.com> Message-ID: <20080128110154.787d3ff8@zod.rchland.ibm.com> On Sat, 26 Jan 2008 13:30:51 -0500 Anderson Silva wrote: > Someone from memo-list told me to email the board about eeedora. The > following is the email I sent out to red hat's memo list: Are the changes needed to get it working in the packages in Fedora CVS? If not, I'd say work with the package owners to get those changes in first, then worry about hosting. josh From jwboyer at gmail.com Mon Jan 28 17:03:20 2008 From: jwboyer at gmail.com (Josh Boyer) Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2008 11:03:20 -0600 Subject: [Fwd: Re: Eeedora (Fedora + Eee PC) - hosting question?] In-Reply-To: <479E0B2C.3010107@fedoraproject.org> References: <479B7C5B.2070007@redhat.com> <1201537582.28780.1.camel@ignacio.lan> <1201538040.28780.5.camel@ignacio.lan> <20080128113851.4ff8479c@redhat.com> <1201538851.3363.12.camel@dhcp83-155.boston.redhat.com> <20080128114929.10b02788@redhat.com> <479E0B2C.3010107@fedoraproject.org> Message-ID: <20080128110320.65f86d08@zod.rchland.ibm.com> On Mon, 28 Jan 2008 22:34:44 +0530 Rahul Sundaram wrote: > Jesse Keating wrote: > > On Mon, 28 Jan 2008 11:47:31 -0500 > > "Tom \"spot\" Callaway" wrote: > > > >> Alternately, why aren't those kernel modules in Fedora? If they were > >> using all Fedora packages, then they _could_ use the Fedora name. > > > > Likely because they're not upstream yet, and nobody has asked davej > > nicely to include them in our kernel builds. > > Someone should contact the folks behind eeedora and see if we can > coordinate and merge back changes. Anyone interested? It should be the other way around really. josh From kanarip at kanarip.com Mon Jan 28 19:44:40 2008 From: kanarip at kanarip.com (Jeroen van Meeuwen) Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2008 20:44:40 +0100 Subject: [Fwd: Re: Eeedora (Fedora + Eee PC) - hosting question?] In-Reply-To: <20080128110320.65f86d08@zod.rchland.ibm.com> References: <479B7C5B.2070007@redhat.com> <1201537582.28780.1.camel@ignacio.lan> <1201538040.28780.5.camel@ignacio.lan> <20080128113851.4ff8479c@redhat.com> <1201538851.3363.12.camel@dhcp83-155.boston.redhat.com> <20080128114929.10b02788@redhat.com> <479E0B2C.3010107@fedoraproject.org> <20080128110320.65f86d08@zod.rchland.ibm.com> Message-ID: <479E30A8.9060202@kanarip.com> Josh Boyer wrote: > On Mon, 28 Jan 2008 22:34:44 +0530 > Rahul Sundaram wrote: > >> Jesse Keating wrote: >>> On Mon, 28 Jan 2008 11:47:31 -0500 >>> "Tom \"spot\" Callaway" wrote: >>> >>>> Alternately, why aren't those kernel modules in Fedora? If they were >>>> using all Fedora packages, then they _could_ use the Fedora name. >>> Likely because they're not upstream yet, and nobody has asked davej >>> nicely to include them in our kernel builds. >> Someone should contact the folks behind eeedora and see if we can >> coordinate and merge back changes. Anyone interested? > > It should be the other way around really. > +1, fwiw -Jeroen From jspaleta at gmail.com Mon Jan 28 19:45:17 2008 From: jspaleta at gmail.com (Jeff Spaleta) Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2008 10:45:17 -0900 Subject: [Fwd: Re: Eeedora (Fedora + Eee PC) - hosting question?] In-Reply-To: <20080128110320.65f86d08@zod.rchland.ibm.com> References: <479B7C5B.2070007@redhat.com> <1201537582.28780.1.camel@ignacio.lan> <1201538040.28780.5.camel@ignacio.lan> <20080128113851.4ff8479c@redhat.com> <1201538851.3363.12.camel@dhcp83-155.boston.redhat.com> <20080128114929.10b02788@redhat.com> <479E0B2C.3010107@fedoraproject.org> <20080128110320.65f86d08@zod.rchland.ibm.com> Message-ID: <604aa7910801281145w7416bbb7y3383632b6623d723@mail.gmail.com> On Jan 28, 2008 8:03 AM, Josh Boyer wrote: > > Someone should contact the folks behind eeedora and see if we can > > coordinate and merge back changes. Anyone interested? > > It should be the other way around really. I think its useful to have communications go both ways. Sitting back and waiting for people to integrate their kickass ideas into our project, isn't always going to be good enough. It may help quite a bit to go to eeedora developers and communicate our policies and our desire to see this folded into the larger umbrella project by getting the necessary bits in place. It does no good to hold our breath and expect people to come to us everytime they have a good idea. We have to be ready to meet them halfway.. and if possible bring fedora community people willing to help with the integration work to them to help get there. But since i don't even own an eee, I'm not sure I'm the best fedora community rep to jump into eeedora and start helping them integrate back with us. Any takers out there for being a liason to eeedora development with the goal of getting the technical bits back into fedora proper so we can target eee? -jef From fedora at leemhuis.info Mon Jan 28 20:11:52 2008 From: fedora at leemhuis.info (Thorsten Leemhuis) Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2008 21:11:52 +0100 Subject: [Fwd: Re: Eeedora (Fedora + Eee PC) - hosting question?] In-Reply-To: <479E30A8.9060202@kanarip.com> References: <479B7C5B.2070007@redhat.com> <1201537582.28780.1.camel@ignacio.lan> <1201538040.28780.5.camel@ignacio.lan> <20080128113851.4ff8479c@redhat.com> <1201538851.3363.12.camel@dhcp83-155.boston.redhat.com> <20080128114929.10b02788@redhat.com> <479E0B2C.3010107@fedoraproject.org> <20080128110320.65f86d08@zod.rchland.ibm.com> <479E30A8.9060202@kanarip.com> Message-ID: <479E3708.9070105@leemhuis.info> On 28.01.2008 20:44, Jeroen van Meeuwen wrote: > Josh Boyer wrote: >> On Mon, 28 Jan 2008 22:34:44 +0530 >> Rahul Sundaram wrote: >>> Someone should contact the folks behind eeedora and see if we can >>> coordinate and merge back changes. Anyone interested? >> It should be the other way around really. > +1, fwiw -1, fwiw Sure, agreed, in a ideal world it would be the other way around. But this is no ideal world and "just doing you own thing/fork" is a lot easier and gives you all the credit. But that's what lead to > 500 linux distributions instead of four of five distributions flavors (like RH/Fedora/Centos, Novell, Debian/Ubuntu, Something, Else) doing things right and in a flexible way. If we want Fedora to run on most modern systems and the "Eee PCs" (do we?) then we need to help those people finding their way into the Fedora project to get their improvements back upsteam (upstream being us in this case). That helps both sides and leads to a better product and less work for everyone in the end. In my experience it only works "the other way around" if the hurdles to give improvements back are dead low -- like the are in wikipedia for example. And face it, we have high hurdles for new contributers. Without help from existing and well known long Fedora contributers its likely totally impossible to get non-upstream drivers into our kernel packages (and this is actually needed in this case). Thus someone IHO needs to do a hand holding job here, like Rahul suggested. Cu knurd From gdk at redhat.com Mon Jan 28 20:28:49 2008 From: gdk at redhat.com (Greg DeKoenigsberg) Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2008 15:28:49 -0500 (EST) Subject: [Fwd: Re: Eeedora (Fedora + Eee PC) - hosting question?] In-Reply-To: <479E3708.9070105@leemhuis.info> References: <479B7C5B.2070007@redhat.com> <1201537582.28780.1.camel@ignacio.lan> <1201538040.28780.5.camel@ignacio.lan> <20080128113851.4ff8479c@redhat.com> <1201538851.3363.12.camel@dhcp83-155.boston.redhat.com> <20080128114929.10b02788@redhat.com> <479E0B2C.3010107@fedoraproject.org> <20080128110320.65f86d08@zod.rchland.ibm.com> <479E30A8.9060202@kanarip.com> <479E3708.9070105@leemhuis.info> Message-ID: On Mon, 28 Jan 2008, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote: > In my experience it only works "the other way around" if the hurdles to > give improvements back are dead low -- like the are in wikipedia for > example. And face it, we have high hurdles for new contributers. Without > help from existing and well known long Fedora contributers its likely > totally impossible to get non-upstream drivers into our kernel packages > (and this is actually needed in this case). Thus someone IHO needs to do > a hand holding job here, like Rahul suggested. No more calls, we have a winner. I'm sure that The New Boss will be making lots of inroads 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 mspevack at redhat.com Mon Jan 28 21:35:32 2008 From: mspevack at redhat.com (Max Spevack) Date: Mon, 28 Jan 2008 16:35:32 -0500 (EST) Subject: summary of internal RH changes that impact Fedora Message-ID: This is a bit long, but I hope it will be useful to folks. If there are things that are unclear, please ask, and assume that I left something out or didn't explain it well rather than any sort of malice. :) ==== Inside of Red Hat, March 1 is always a magical date, because that represents the beginning of a new budget year. Part of the preparation that has been going on with regard to that in the Fedora space has been: (1) Establishing Paul Frields as the new FPL. (2) Establishing Tom Callaway as the Fedora Engineering Manager. (3) Setting up a "Community Architecture" team inside of Red Hat. (4) Having a solid budget for Fedora Engineering and also for Community Architecture. The first three things have been completed -- Paul's first official day at Red Hat is next Monday, and the Community Architecture stuff is pretty much all set (more on that later). The fourth is pseudo-complete, pending approval of all the budgets and such that will be happening in the next month, but I am optimistic. The success that Fedora has achieved in the past two years has made the case for increased Red Hat investment in Fedora a (comparatively) easy sell. ==== It is important that the Fedora community has an idea of how things are laid out in Red Hat's organizational hierarchy. Before I say anything else, I want to make one point INCREDIBLY CLEAR: *************** There is a lot of overlap in Fedora in terms of roles, responsibilities, etc. We are interested more than anything in simply GETTING STUFF DONE. Within Red Hat, the people who are paid to spend their days on Fedora are all catalysts and community builders. But while Fedora itself has a relatively loose organizational structure, Red Hat is a company, and people all have to be slotted somewhere. The people who work 100% on Fedora are not the gatekeepers -- we don't want or need to be "authority figures" on the work that people are doing. It is about ACCOUNTABILITY rather than RESPONSIBILITY. We don't do everything ourselves, but we are accountable for making sure that certain things get done. The Fedora Way dictates that we do this by being transparent, open, and building communities around different tasks. *************** Both Paul and Spot are part of the engineering department. In the Fedora space, this also includes lots of the "usual" names that you expect like Jeremy, Bill, Toshio, Seth, Luke, the kernel guys, etc. So for the most part, the Fedora engineering guys are all collected together. Paul's role as FPL obviously gives him the ability (and mandate) to reach into any part of the Fedora organization that he likes, but organizationally it was determined that it made most sense to have him in engineering. ==== Separate from that is Red Hat's Corporate Marketing department, and this is where the Community Architecture team is being created. This is a new name to an old idea -- with Greg doing what he has always done, me in need of a new job, and Jack coming on full time in a community-building position, it made sense to formalize ourselves. The Community Architecture team is responsible for all of Red Hat's community efforts, and to achieve its goals by encouraging and developing new leadership within the Fedora community. By its nature, most of this work will take place directly in Fedora, and therefore we "report" to the Fedora Board, but we will also be responsible for community related activities that are within Red Hat's scope, but outside of Fedora's. The details of my own role are still being worked out, but that is a side point, and when there is more to say, I will say it. ==== We are committed to making sure that Fedora Board and Fedora Advisory Board know what we are up to, what we are working on, etc. Additionally, by discussing our objectives and goals in public, we hope to be able to build on the work that others are doing, and to allow folks anywhere in the Fedora community to help us out. NOTE: by its very nature, the community goals that we have require us to *work with and build community* while we achieve them. That is implicit in all of this. In some cases, the goals that we list are already in progress elsewhere. The names that we put next to them simply reflect the *Red Hat employee who will be held accountable for the result or lack thereof*. For example, on our list of goals is "mini-FUDCon at LinuxTag". Gerold Kassube has ben (and still is) the point person for LinuxTag. But Max's name is next to it. That simply means that Max is accountable by Red Hat for the end result. The best way Max can be successful is to work with Gerold and give him everything that he needs. Similarly, there are some "Fedora Marketing" related goals. Karsten and Colby Hoke have been doing a lot of work in this area... they are leaders in the effort, but we still need a name of someone whose job it is to make sure that the leadership continues, thrives, etc. ==== This email is just a really long way of pointing you here: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/CommunityArchitecture None of the stuff on here is necessarily *new* -- it's pretty much business as usual. It is simply an attempt to formalize some of the things that we have always done, and in so formalizing them, be able to justify significantly higher budget (and therefore responsibility/accountability) than we previously had. Welcome your comments, questions, etc. --Max, Lame Duck Fedora Project Leader From matt at domsch.com Tue Jan 29 12:49:48 2008 From: matt at domsch.com (Matt Domsch) Date: Tue, 29 Jan 2008 06:49:48 -0600 Subject: summary of internal RH changes that impact Fedora In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20080129124947.GA2828@domsch.com> On Mon, Jan 28, 2008 at 04:35:32PM -0500, Max Spevack wrote: > This email is just a really long way of pointing you here: > > http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/CommunityArchitecture and now picked up by LWN. http://lwn.net/Articles/266911 From foss.mailinglists at gmail.com Tue Jan 29 13:11:16 2008 From: foss.mailinglists at gmail.com (Sankarshan Mukhopadhyay) Date: Tue, 29 Jan 2008 18:41:16 +0530 Subject: summary of internal RH changes that impact Fedora In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <479F25F4.6090608@gmail.com> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Max Spevack wrote: | Separate from that is Red Hat's Corporate Marketing department, and this | is where the Community Architecture team is being created. This is a | new name to an old idea -- with Greg doing what he has always done, me | in need of a new job, and Jack coming on full time in a | community-building position, it made sense to formalize ourselves. Awesomeness :) ~sankarshan - -- http://www.gutenberg.net - Fine literature digitally re-published http://www.plos.org - Public Library of Science http://www.creativecommons.org - Flexible copyright for creative work -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.7 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Fedora - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFHnyX0XQZpNTcrCzMRArOxAJ95P4Q9mgn/2KP51M9NbYi4AZ0/vQCfa00i lsQoeXgnD8XYwZvYtEpm4Cc= =S4IX -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From mspevack at redhat.com Tue Jan 29 22:58:22 2008 From: mspevack at redhat.com (Max Spevack) Date: Tue, 29 Jan 2008 17:58:22 -0500 (EST) Subject: draft proposal for large additions of code into Fedora Message-ID: We already have a process in place for how to get a brand new package into Fedora. This email is not about that. This email is about putting in place some basic guidelines for a large amount of code to come into Fedora and carry the Fedora name. It is hypothetical -- imagine the following scenario: We go back in time to the day when Red Hat acquired the Directory Server product from Netscape. Red Hat's intention was to (1) open source all the code and (2) create the Fedora directory server. There wasn't really any guideline in place for any of that. Things have turned out ok a few years later, but we should try to learn from the past. What if this were happening today? How would we want it done? ==== 1. The upstream should be somewhere public (Sourceforge, Fedora Hosted, etc.) 2. All the code is under a license that is Fedora-compliant. 3. There is a public roadmap showing the packaging strategy and how that code will be brought into Koji and the Fedora repositories. 4. The maintainers of the code have Fedora accounts. 5. The Board says yes (to allowing something to have the Fedora name). ==== What else? Is the objective that I'm looking for clear? --Max From kwade at redhat.com Tue Jan 29 23:21:35 2008 From: kwade at redhat.com (Karsten 'quaid' Wade) Date: Tue, 29 Jan 2008 15:21:35 -0800 Subject: privacy policy resolved Message-ID: <1201648895.5621.250.camel@calliope.phig.org> In the Board call today we discussed the Fedora privacy policy. This question had been sent up to Red Hat Legal to discuss, and they presented a sensible answer. We're to use the redhat.com privacy policy: http://www.redhat.com/legal/privacy_statement.html In my experience, this works well. The privacy policy is well vetted and it keeps Fedora from having to maintain a stand-alone, one-off version. All the protections we require are there. I updated these page to reflect the usage: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Legal http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Legal/PrivacyPolicy Thanks to the folks who did the original work to put together a stand-alone version for Fedora; hope that you understand why this is a better and easier solution. ;-D - Karsten -- Karsten Wade, Developer Community Mgr. Dev Fu : http://developer.redhatmagazine.com Fedora : http://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 mspevack at redhat.com Wed Jan 30 00:29:12 2008 From: mspevack at redhat.com (Max Spevack) Date: Tue, 29 Jan 2008 19:29:12 -0500 (EST) Subject: draft proposal for large additions of code into Fedora In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Tue, 29 Jan 2008, Max Spevack wrote: > We go back in time to the day when Red Hat acquired the Directory > Server product from Netscape. Red Hat's intention was to (1) open > source all the code and (2) create the Fedora directory server. Keep in mind as you think about this: this is just an example to give context for the discussion. The point is not to revisit anything that was or was not done a few years ago with DS, but rather to give context for the sort of use case that we are trying to plan for. --Max From jkeating at redhat.com Wed Jan 30 01:52:51 2008 From: jkeating at redhat.com (Jesse Keating) Date: Tue, 29 Jan 2008 20:52:51 -0500 Subject: draft proposal for large additions of code into Fedora In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20080129205251.02550003@redhat.com> On Tue, 29 Jan 2008 17:58:22 -0500 (EST) Max Spevack wrote: > What else? Is the objective that I'm looking for clear? There should be a very compelling reason to call it "Fedora". Because of our draconian trademark policy it becomes rather hard to rid the distro of the term "Fedora", and once you apply the Fedora name to something, they'll likely want to use the logo, and then we run into logo issues, etc, etc... I'd really like to hear a strong compelling reason to apply the term Fedora to a set of code, which by all rights we should be trying to get used in other distributions. -- 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 jwboyer at gmail.com Wed Jan 30 02:13:27 2008 From: jwboyer at gmail.com (Josh Boyer) Date: Tue, 29 Jan 2008 20:13:27 -0600 Subject: draft proposal for large additions of code into Fedora In-Reply-To: <20080129205251.02550003@redhat.com> References: <20080129205251.02550003@redhat.com> Message-ID: <20080129201327.7c964109@zod.rchland.ibm.com> On Tue, 29 Jan 2008 20:52:51 -0500 Jesse Keating wrote: > On Tue, 29 Jan 2008 17:58:22 -0500 (EST) > Max Spevack wrote: > > > What else? Is the objective that I'm looking for clear? > > There should be a very compelling reason to call it "Fedora". Because > of our draconian trademark policy it becomes rather hard to rid the > distro of the term "Fedora", and once you apply the Fedora name to > something, they'll likely want to use the logo, and then we run into > logo issues, etc, etc... > > I'd really like to hear a strong compelling reason to apply the term > Fedora to a set of code, which by all rights we should be trying to get > used in other distributions. +1 josh From smooge at gmail.com Wed Jan 30 02:35:28 2008 From: smooge at gmail.com (Stephen John Smoogen) Date: Tue, 29 Jan 2008 19:35:28 -0700 Subject: draft proposal for large additions of code into Fedora In-Reply-To: <20080129205251.02550003@redhat.com> References: <20080129205251.02550003@redhat.com> Message-ID: <80d7e4090801291835p733a9fe8oe009291c5114f613@mail.gmail.com> On Jan 29, 2008 6:52 PM, Jesse Keating wrote: > On Tue, 29 Jan 2008 17:58:22 -0500 (EST) > Max Spevack wrote: > > > What else? Is the objective that I'm looking for clear? > > There should be a very compelling reason to call it "Fedora". Because > of our draconian trademark policy it becomes rather hard to rid the > distro of the term "Fedora", and once you apply the Fedora name to > something, they'll likely want to use the logo, and then we run into > logo issues, etc, etc... > > I'd really like to hear a strong compelling reason to apply the term > Fedora to a set of code, which by all rights we should be trying to get > used in other distributions. > Yeah respins and downstreams become a complete pain in the arse. The issue would be that if you came up with an alternative name to help keep things in check as in 'bowler-directory-server', 'bowler-images' does someone then say it need to be trademarked etc etc. Actually maybe for Fedora X we can have a set of 'official' alternative packages called bowler-X, so that respins would be able to use them without incurring the Wrath of K'lawyer. -- Stephen J Smoogen. -- CSIRT/Linux System Administrator How far that little candle throws his beams! So shines a good deed in a naughty world. = Shakespeare. "The Merchant of Venice" From mspevack at redhat.com Wed Jan 30 02:48:07 2008 From: mspevack at redhat.com (Max Spevack) Date: Tue, 29 Jan 2008 21:48:07 -0500 (EST) Subject: draft proposal for large additions of code into Fedora In-Reply-To: <20080129201327.7c964109@zod.rchland.ibm.com> References: <20080129205251.02550003@redhat.com> <20080129201327.7c964109@zod.rchland.ibm.com> Message-ID: On Tue, 29 Jan 2008, Josh Boyer wrote: >> There should be a very compelling reason to call it "Fedora". >> Because of our draconian trademark policy it becomes rather hard to >> rid the distro of the term "Fedora", and once you apply the Fedora >> name to something, they'll likely want to use the logo, and then we >> run into logo issues, etc, etc... >> >> I'd really like to hear a strong compelling reason to apply the term >> Fedora to a set of code, which by all rights we should be trying to >> get used in other distributions. > > +1 To me, this last requirement falls into "The Fedora Board has to think it's a good idea." Maybe that should simply be step 1 in the process, to save potentially wasting other people's time/effort. --Max From smooge at gmail.com Wed Jan 30 02:55:47 2008 From: smooge at gmail.com (Stephen John Smoogen) Date: Tue, 29 Jan 2008 19:55:47 -0700 Subject: draft proposal for large additions of code into Fedora In-Reply-To: References: <20080129205251.02550003@redhat.com> <20080129201327.7c964109@zod.rchland.ibm.com> Message-ID: <80d7e4090801291855g5f5dca06h5df06a3cd49cd791@mail.gmail.com> On Jan 29, 2008 7:48 PM, Max Spevack wrote: > On Tue, 29 Jan 2008, Josh Boyer wrote: > > >> There should be a very compelling reason to call it "Fedora". > >> Because of our draconian trademark policy it becomes rather hard to > >> rid the distro of the term "Fedora", and once you apply the Fedora > >> name to something, they'll likely want to use the logo, and then we > >> run into logo issues, etc, etc... > >> > >> I'd really like to hear a strong compelling reason to apply the term > >> Fedora to a set of code, which by all rights we should be trying to > >> get used in other distributions. > > > > +1 > > To me, this last requirement falls into "The Fedora Board has to think > it's a good idea." Maybe that should simply be step 1 in the process, > to save potentially wasting other people's time/effort. > Well actually steps 1-4 look to be what would be needed for something that doesnt need a fedora name but is a large import. The other big thing that I can see needing is a training/mentoring process on step 4. Some tutorials on how the Fedora politics works, how the patch system works, what the 6-7 month timeline is like and how the project needs to be aware of that... etc. -- Stephen J Smoogen. -- CSIRT/Linux System Administrator How far that little candle throws his beams! So shines a good deed in a naughty world. = Shakespeare. "The Merchant of Venice" From vnk at mkc.co.nz Wed Jan 30 03:12:31 2008 From: vnk at mkc.co.nz (Vladimir Kosovac) Date: Wed, 30 Jan 2008 16:12:31 +1300 Subject: One Summary outline draft In-Reply-To: <1201641982.5621.205.camel@calliope.phig.org> References: <1201641982.5621.205.camel@calliope.phig.org> Message-ID: <479FEB1F.7050101@mkc.co.nz> Karsten 'quaid' Wade wrote: > How does this outline look? > > http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/KarstenWade/Drafts/OneSummary > > ... in trying to be inclusive for all the parts of the Project. > > Apologies for cross-posting but I'd like to try to tie together some ideas that have been floating around the fab and docs lists. Is it feasible to start looking at the Release Notes / Release Summary and some issues with timely production of those, mentioned in FDSCo meeting[2] today, through the spectacles of Mr Spaleta's post [1] and his rainbow diagram[3]? There seems to be a good cross-section of FP subprojects involved in a production of release notes and summaries, all of which could benefit from the better co-ordination of the effort: * Maintainers/Packagers * Testers/Bug Triagers * Beats and Docs writers / Translators * Artists * Marketing Being inventive (not!), I thought something like RelNotes SIG, acting as an umbrella for all of the * above might achieve this better co-ordination. Immediate and a very visible benefit would be accurate Release Notes produced on time throughout the dev-cycle (and Rahul and others relieved of beyond-human effort during the last 48 hrs before the mirrors open every 6-7 months). The other, less visible benefit, is the possibility (there was a bit of a talk about it within docs team, too) to use this road to attract new contributors and get them started on smaller, less intimidating pieces of the project. Is there anything fundamentally wrong with this? Cheers, Vladimir --------------------- [1] https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-advisory-board/2008-January/msg00248.html [2] http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/DocsProject/SteeringCommittee/Meetings/Minutes/IRCLog20080129#preview [3] http://fedorapeople.org/~jspaleta/role-based-sigs/sig-teams.png -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 251 bytes Desc: OpenPGP digital signature URL: From notting at redhat.com Wed Jan 30 03:19:25 2008 From: notting at redhat.com (Bill Nottingham) Date: Tue, 29 Jan 2008 22:19:25 -0500 Subject: draft proposal for large additions of code into Fedora In-Reply-To: <80d7e4090801291835p733a9fe8oe009291c5114f613@mail.gmail.com> References: <20080129205251.02550003@redhat.com> <80d7e4090801291835p733a9fe8oe009291c5114f613@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <20080130031925.GB29121@nostromo.devel.redhat.com> Stephen John Smoogen (smooge at gmail.com) said: > Actually maybe for Fedora X we can have a set of 'official' > alternative packages called bowler-X, so that respins would be able to > use them without incurring the Wrath of K'lawyer. See the 'generic-logos' package. Bill From jspaleta at gmail.com Wed Jan 30 03:40:07 2008 From: jspaleta at gmail.com (Jeff Spaleta) Date: Tue, 29 Jan 2008 18:40:07 -0900 Subject: One Summary outline draft In-Reply-To: <479FEB1F.7050101@mkc.co.nz> References: <1201641982.5621.205.camel@calliope.phig.org> <479FEB1F.7050101@mkc.co.nz> Message-ID: <604aa7910801291940u73b9195ckc00f0314cd340e95@mail.gmail.com> On Jan 29, 2008 6:12 PM, Vladimir Kosovac wrote: > There seems to be a good cross-section of FP subprojects involved in a > production of release notes and summaries, all of which could benefit > from the better co-ordination of the effort: > > * Maintainers/Packagers > * Testers/Bug Triagers > * Beats and Docs writers / Translators > * Artists > * Marketing > > Being inventive (not!), I thought something like RelNotes SIG, acting as > an umbrella for all of the * above might achieve this better co-ordination. > > Immediate and a very visible benefit would be accurate Release Notes > produced on time throughout the dev-cycle (and Rahul and others relieved > of beyond-human effort during the last 48 hrs before the mirrors open > every 6-7 months). > > The other, less visible benefit, is the possibility (there was a bit of > a talk about it within docs team, too) to use this road to attract new > contributors and get them started on smaller, less intimidating pieces > of the project. > > Is there anything fundamentally wrong with this? There's nothing specifically wrong with this... In fact Release Note Beat writers are essentially that coordinating SIG. The issue is, we need to generate beat writers in different areas. And the only way I can see to do that effectively is to organize a SIG for each "area" and have a documentor role in each SIG team. But how do we inject those people into the work flow of package related SIGs? My rainbow diagram tries to explain that. We need to organize the concept of the SIG as a team of people who are responsible for a set of packages. Not the art, or documentation or triage or whatever.... SIGs need to equal responsibility for ALL the tasks associated with a chunk of the package space that needs care in feeding. We group those tasks into roles and encourage each SIG to have someone commit to a role. We organize those roles into support groups that are made up of people filling that role in each sig, as well as floating experts to provide high skill support for everyone in that role. We dont call them SIGs, we call them something else.. in my diagram I called then Interface Specialists. But the idea is these are the umbrella groups that bring people from different corners of the package space together to deal with common tasks. We need to build a template and get a few of the more higher profile SIGs (KDE im looking at you!!!!) to try a role based approach. We need to build out baseline training for these roles...for example triage. If the new triage initiative can build out a baseline training program for new contributors who want to help by being triagers...and we can have individual SIGs carve out a role for a triager in their group.. then we can dedicate a week where we train up a group of triagers, and then hand them off to SIGs looking for triagers..in a way where we aren't burdening the other SIG members into trying to train up the new guys in an area that none of the other SIG members are experts in. We can do it with triage....and we can do it with documentation people. We dont ask the package maintainers or the developers to train up a decent triager or documenter. We do that project wide, and then the SIGs take them in and incorporate them into how that SIG does its day to day business. -jef From vnk at mkc.co.nz Wed Jan 30 07:40:55 2008 From: vnk at mkc.co.nz (Vladimir Kosovac) Date: Wed, 30 Jan 2008 20:40:55 +1300 Subject: One Summary outline draft In-Reply-To: <604aa7910801291940u73b9195ckc00f0314cd340e95@mail.gmail.com> References: <1201641982.5621.205.camel@calliope.phig.org> <479FEB1F.7050101@mkc.co.nz> <604aa7910801291940u73b9195ckc00f0314cd340e95@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <47A02A07.8000203@mkc.co.nz> Jeff Spaleta wrote: > On Jan 29, 2008 6:12 PM, Vladimir Kosovac wrote: > > There's nothing specifically wrong with this... In fact Release Note > Beat writers are essentially that coordinating SIG. The issue is, we > need to generate beat writers in different areas. And the only way I > can see to do that effectively is to organize a SIG for each "area" > and have a documentor role in each SIG team. But how do we inject > those people into the work flow of package related SIGs? My rainbow > diagram tries to explain that. > > We need to organize the concept of the SIG as a team of people who are > responsible for a set of packages. I was indeed thinking of a RelNotes SIG at the 'set of packages' level - that set being "accepted features" for a new release. There is obviously a core group of developers/packagers built-in, so we ask for volunteers from docs/arts/bugtriagers/...(?) groups. From time to time, some large packages (or package groups) will be introduced as accepted features, such as the case with KDE4 now. These big ones warrant separate SIGs due to their size/complexity and the fact that they are flagged for inclusion in release notes for every release, regardless of them being either major or minor update. These large SIGs also advertise for volunteers. The 'docs/release notes' part of such a large SIG is then co-ordinated with RelNotes SIG and everybody is happy. Other large SIGs do the same, regardless of whether their set of packages is relevant for the current version of release notes - they do it for the sake of having decent documentation. Come the release time, it's trivial to build rel. notes from such docs and people are already trained on how to produce the notes in acceptable format. Now, I'm looking at all this mostly from the 'textmonkey' perspective but there's no reason why similar couldn't be applied for others, including the appropriate training. Not the art, or documentation or > triage or whatever.... SIGs need to equal responsibility for ALL the > tasks associated with a chunk of the package space that needs care in > feeding. We group those tasks into roles and encourage each SIG to > have someone commit to a role. > > We organize those roles into support groups that are made up of people > filling that role in each sig, as well as floating experts to provide > high skill support for everyone in that role. > We dont call them SIGs, we call them something else.. in my diagram I > called then Interface Specialists. But the idea is these are the > umbrella groups that bring people from different corners of the > package space together to deal with common tasks. > I agree but I think that we can look at the RelNotes SIG as something half way between the two. This one might be a good pilot group, working in reverse: the core group of writers/designers/bugzappers... etc, is there to accept the new code-monkeys group and new contributors, too. Maintainers of new features don't have to worry about recruiting volunteers from other groups at that point - more time to code and test. New volunteers get to start on smaller papers/sets of documents. Everybody works on new stuff all the time and nobody gets bored, including bug triagers, who don't get bored, anyway. Plus nothing stops people (that's again me from a docs project point of view) to start writing 'real docs' about 'accepted features' or for other, established SIGs at the same time. > We need to build a template and get a few of the more higher profile > SIGs (KDE im looking at you!!!!) to try a role based approach. We > need to build out baseline training for these roles...for example > triage. If the new triage initiative can build out a baseline training > program for new contributors who want to help by being triagers...and > we can have individual SIGs carve out a role for a triager in their > group.. then we can dedicate a week where we train up a group of > triagers, and then hand them off to SIGs looking for triagers..in a > way where we aren't burdening the other SIG members into trying to > train up the new guys in an area that none of the other SIG members > are experts in. Again, 'accepted features' package set + Mr Stanley's input seems ideal for this. In general, new features appear in Fedora from a better starting point, with more bugs ironed out and likely better docs to start with (I'm hoping that notes writers will eventually get exited about some new stuff and expand on release notes later on). > > We can do it with triage....and we can do it with documentation > people. We dont ask the package maintainers or the developers to > train up a decent triager or documenter. We do that project wide, and > then the SIGs take them in and incorporate them into how that SIG does > its day to day business. > The one show stopper I can see with this is a chronic short-handedness. I guess it is up to SIGs to lure people in but if RelNotes appears to be good entry point and a way to get more new contributors properly trained and made re-assignable (MyFedora looks promising as an ad-service on that end), we could have a source to fill the needs of individual packages and less visible SIGs, who will always have this problem. Vladimir > -jef > > _______________________________________________ > fedora-advisory-board mailing list > fedora-advisory-board at redhat.com > http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-advisory-board > -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 251 bytes Desc: OpenPGP digital signature URL: From mspevack at redhat.com Wed Jan 30 18:44:02 2008 From: mspevack at redhat.com (Max Spevack) Date: Wed, 30 Jan 2008 13:44:02 -0500 (EST) Subject: draft proposal for large additions of code into Fedora In-Reply-To: <20080129201327.7c964109@zod.rchland.ibm.com> References: <20080129205251.02550003@redhat.com> <20080129201327.7c964109@zod.rchland.ibm.com> Message-ID: On Tue, 29 Jan 2008, Josh Boyer wrote: >> There should be a very compelling reason to call it "Fedora". >> Because of our draconian trademark policy it becomes rather hard to >> rid the distro of the term "Fedora", and once you apply the Fedora >> name to something, they'll likely want to use the logo, and then we >> run into logo issues, etc, etc... >> >> I'd really like to hear a strong compelling reason to apply the term >> Fedora to a set of code, which by all rights we should be trying to >> get used in other distributions. > > +1 I have taken some of the suggestions that came up on the list and put together a draft. Feel free to review/modify/etc. http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/MaxSpevack/Foo --Max From katzj at redhat.com Wed Jan 30 18:45:45 2008 From: katzj at redhat.com (Jeremy Katz) Date: Wed, 30 Jan 2008 13:45:45 -0500 Subject: draft proposal for large additions of code into Fedora In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <1201718745.17781.0.camel@aglarond.local> On Tue, 2008-01-29 at 17:58 -0500, Max Spevack wrote: > We go back in time to the day when Red Hat acquired the Directory Server > product from Netscape. Red Hat's intention was to (1) open source all > the code and (2) create the Fedora directory server. > > There wasn't really any guideline in place for any of that. Things have > turned out ok a few years later, but we should try to learn from the > past. Honestly, I stand by what I thought at the time -- branding the Directory Server as Fedora wasn't the best idea. It's somewhat (but not really, because DS has a pretty low awareness level) confused the "Fedora as an OS" message. I think it's also had a negative impact on FDS being included in other distros, although that's harder to verify. Also, given Fedora's trademark guidelines, it's a little funky having some random software project named Fedora Foo. I'm not really sure how it starts to factor in when people start patching, etc. But if we ignore that and just go with the questions... :-) > 1. The upstream should be somewhere public (Sourceforge, Fedora Hosted, > etc.) Fedora Hosted (or, more accurately, hosted on Fedora infrastructure) > 2. All the code is under a license that is Fedora-compliant. This one's a no-brainer > 3. There is a public roadmap showing the packaging strategy and how > that code will be brought into Koji and the Fedora repositories. I'm less convinced this would be a real requirement, but it'd be a nice to have > 4. The maintainers of the code have Fedora accounts. Or are willing to get one. Since all access to source hosting is controlled via Fedora accounts > 5. The Board says yes (to allowing something to have the Fedora name). Obviously. Jeremy From jspaleta at gmail.com Wed Jan 30 18:58:48 2008 From: jspaleta at gmail.com (Jeff Spaleta) Date: Wed, 30 Jan 2008 09:58:48 -0900 Subject: draft proposal for large additions of code into Fedora In-Reply-To: <1201718745.17781.0.camel@aglarond.local> References: <1201718745.17781.0.camel@aglarond.local> Message-ID: <604aa7910801301058t25fbde85yfd0edb9918b85d68@mail.gmail.com> On Jan 30, 2008 9:45 AM, Jeremy Katz wrote: > Honestly, I stand by what I thought at the time -- branding the > Directory Server as Fedora wasn't the best idea. It's somewhat (but not > really, because DS has a pretty low awareness level) confused the > "Fedora as an OS" message. I think it's also had a negative impact on > FDS being included in other distros, although that's harder to verify. > > Also, given Fedora's trademark guidelines, it's a little funky having > some random software project named Fedora Foo. I'm not really sure how > it starts to factor in when people start patching, etc. > Is there another namespace...non-trademarked space..that we can suggest people use for this sort of thing? I think you might be right in that Fedora should be reserved for integration efforts that look and feel like functional operating systems or branded online services, and not component bits which we want other people to pick up and use. For the same reasons that I'd love to get fedora's brand into components that other distros consume, other people would shy away from consuming those components. So overall I think its a detriment to allow software projects to use the Fedora brand. We want upstream codebases to leverage Fedora to help with their development, but we explicitly don't want to be the sole provider of that technology, that isn't our goal. Perhaps its a simple as requiring projects have a existing brand neutral project name, but we allow them to use a tag like: "Brought to you by the Fedora project", or "A Fedora Project snafu" -jef From katzj at redhat.com Wed Jan 30 19:07:29 2008 From: katzj at redhat.com (Jeremy Katz) Date: Wed, 30 Jan 2008 14:07:29 -0500 Subject: draft proposal for large additions of code into Fedora In-Reply-To: <604aa7910801301058t25fbde85yfd0edb9918b85d68@mail.gmail.com> References: <1201718745.17781.0.camel@aglarond.local> <604aa7910801301058t25fbde85yfd0edb9918b85d68@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <1201720049.17781.2.camel@aglarond.local> On Wed, 2008-01-30 at 09:58 -0900, Jeff Spaleta wrote: > On Jan 30, 2008 9:45 AM, Jeremy Katz wrote: > > Honestly, I stand by what I thought at the time -- branding the > > Directory Server as Fedora wasn't the best idea. It's somewhat (but not > > really, because DS has a pretty low awareness level) confused the > > "Fedora as an OS" message. I think it's also had a negative impact on > > FDS being included in other distros, although that's harder to verify. > > > > Also, given Fedora's trademark guidelines, it's a little funky having > > some random software project named Fedora Foo. I'm not really sure how > > it starts to factor in when people start patching, etc. > > Is there another namespace...non-trademarked space..that we can > suggest people use for this sort of thing? Not that I know of. And therein lies the problem. Product naming is Hard (tm). [snip] > Perhaps its a simple as requiring projects have a existing brand > neutral project name, but we allow them to use a tag like: > "Brought to you by the Fedora project", or "A Fedora Project snafu" *shrug* if someone wants to point out that the project is hosted/supported/driven forward by work within Fedora, that's fine, but I'm not sure what a "brought to you by Fedora" really brings. But I could just be missing something Jeremy From caillon at redhat.com Wed Jan 30 19:51:56 2008 From: caillon at redhat.com (Christopher Aillon) Date: Wed, 30 Jan 2008 14:51:56 -0500 Subject: draft proposal for large additions of code into Fedora In-Reply-To: <1201720049.17781.2.camel@aglarond.local> References: <1201718745.17781.0.camel@aglarond.local> <604aa7910801301058t25fbde85yfd0edb9918b85d68@mail.gmail.com> <1201720049.17781.2.camel@aglarond.local> Message-ID: <47A0D55C.50800@redhat.com> On 01/30/2008 02:07 PM, Jeremy Katz wrote: > On Wed, 2008-01-30 at 09:58 -0900, Jeff Spaleta wrote: >> Perhaps its a simple as requiring projects have a existing brand >> neutral project name, but we allow them to use a tag like: >> "Brought to you by the Fedora project", or "A Fedora Project snafu" > > *shrug* if someone wants to point out that the project is > hosted/supported/driven forward by work within Fedora, that's fine, but > I'm not sure what a "brought to you by Fedora" really brings. But I > could just be missing something It really doesn't. If people patch our stuff, it's really not brought to you by the letters F-E-D-O-R-A anymore. From matt at domsch.com Wed Jan 30 20:17:58 2008 From: matt at domsch.com (Matt Domsch) Date: Wed, 30 Jan 2008 14:17:58 -0600 Subject: draft proposal for large additions of code into Fedora In-Reply-To: <47A0D55C.50800@redhat.com> References: <1201718745.17781.0.camel@aglarond.local> <604aa7910801301058t25fbde85yfd0edb9918b85d68@mail.gmail.com> <1201720049.17781.2.camel@aglarond.local> <47A0D55C.50800@redhat.com> Message-ID: <20080130201758.GB7141@domsch.com> On Wed, Jan 30, 2008 at 02:51:56PM -0500, Christopher Aillon wrote: > On 01/30/2008 02:07 PM, Jeremy Katz wrote: > >On Wed, 2008-01-30 at 09:58 -0900, Jeff Spaleta wrote: > >>Perhaps its a simple as requiring projects have a existing brand > >>neutral project name, but we allow them to use a tag like: > >> "Brought to you by the Fedora project", or "A Fedora Project snafu" > > > >*shrug* if someone wants to point out that the project is > >hosted/supported/driven forward by work within Fedora, that's fine, but > >I'm not sure what a "brought to you by Fedora" really brings. But I > >could just be missing something > > It really doesn't. If people patch our stuff, it's really not brought > to you by the letters F-E-D-O-R-A anymore. This is the whole Mozilla / IceWeazel fight all over again. What's the benefit to the software packages to being called "Fedora Whatever"? Usually looking to achieve quicker status / recognition, and maybe wider adoption, by piggybacking on the status of the Fedora brand. In most cases, that's not justifiable. What's the benefit to the Fedora Project of that thing being called "Fedora Whatever"? Looking to demonstrate that more software originates from Fedora I suppose... That's tenuous - look at 'Oracle Enterprise Linux, now with improved code from Red Hat Enterprise Linux and Xen (enhance by us) by Citrix/XenSource, made by ex-Novell gurus'. How much of those other name are mentioned (or legally can be mentioned)? None. Implementations of projects for Fedora, such as "Fedora MirrorManager" make sense. Branding the software as such, instead of just "MirrorManager", doesn't make sense. -Matt From laroche at redhat.com Thu Jan 31 09:25:29 2008 From: laroche at redhat.com (Florian La Roche) Date: Thu, 31 Jan 2008 10:25:29 +0100 Subject: draft proposal for large additions of code into Fedora In-Reply-To: <20080130201758.GB7141@domsch.com> References: <1201718745.17781.0.camel@aglarond.local> <604aa7910801301058t25fbde85yfd0edb9918b85d68@mail.gmail.com> <1201720049.17781.2.camel@aglarond.local> <47A0D55C.50800@redhat.com> <20080130201758.GB7141@domsch.com> Message-ID: <20080131092529.GA4610@dudweiler.stuttgart.redhat.com> > Implementations of projects for Fedora, such as "Fedora MirrorManager" > make sense. Branding the software as such, instead of just > "MirrorManager", doesn't make sense. Hello Matt, I do see value to review software with the Fedora packaging guidelines and also then checking on how it integrates into the full Fedora stack. This allows Fedora to grow. I am not sure if something new besides Fedora-development should be created as I think the Fedora software should be able to cope with the fast pace of development we are doing on the HEAD branch. regards, Florian La Roche From kwade at redhat.com Thu Jan 31 16:34:27 2008 From: kwade at redhat.com (Karsten 'quaid' Wade) Date: Thu, 31 Jan 2008 08:34:27 -0800 Subject: redefining SIGs (old and new) Message-ID: <1201797267.26432.43.camel@calliope.phig.org> Jef has some hot ideas here so I'm OK with him co-opting the SIG usage/namespace. However, it has had a historical meaning in Fedora and what do we replace that with? SIG has meant, a group starting around something that wasn't ready to go through the formal project process: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/DefiningProjects "A SIG earns official project status through successful accomplishment of objectives that warrant more prominence in the Fedora Project. If contributors request it, the parent project or the Fedora Project Board will evaluate the SIG's progress reports and make a determination of readiness for this stage. At this point, it may be branded with the Fedora name and promoted to the full status of a Fedora project. It can join the ranks of the most valuable initiatives currently leading the Fedora Project." What do we call that incubation stage? I ask because we just voted yesterday to form the Marketing SIG, but Jef is reasonably arguing that Docs, Marketing, etc. are support services in his new SIG model. OTOH, I'm sure that if, at this stage, we had to follow all the project definition rules to get an official "Marketing Project", we'd bury half the interested people and lose a lot of momentum. - Karsten -- Karsten Wade, Developer Community Mgr. Dev Fu : http://developer.redhatmagazine.com Fedora : http://quaid.fedorapeople.org gpg key : AD0E0C41 From gdk at redhat.com Thu Jan 31 16:43:26 2008 From: gdk at redhat.com (Greg DeKoenigsberg) Date: Thu, 31 Jan 2008 11:43:26 -0500 (EST) Subject: redefining SIGs (old and new) In-Reply-To: <1201797267.26432.43.camel@calliope.phig.org> References: <1201797267.26432.43.camel@calliope.phig.org> Message-ID: On Thu, 31 Jan 2008, Karsten 'quaid' Wade wrote: > Jef has some hot ideas here so I'm OK with him co-opting the SIG > usage/namespace. > > However, it has had a historical meaning in Fedora and what do we > replace that with? > > SIG has meant, a group starting around something that wasn't ready to go > through the formal project process: > > http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/DefiningProjects > > "A SIG earns official project status through successful accomplishment > of objectives that warrant more prominence in the Fedora Project. If > contributors request it, the parent project or the Fedora Project Board > will evaluate the SIG's progress reports and make a determination of > readiness for this stage. At this point, it may be branded with the > Fedora name and promoted to the full status of a Fedora project. It can > join the ranks of the most valuable initiatives currently leading the > Fedora Project." > > What do we call that incubation stage? > > I ask because we just voted yesterday to form the Marketing SIG, but Jef > is reasonably arguing that Docs, Marketing, etc. are support services in > his new SIG model. OTOH, I'm sure that if, at this stage, we had to > follow all the project definition rules to get an official "Marketing > Project", we'd bury half the interested people and lose a lot of > momentum. Why? Marketing has a ton of tasks and some leadership. Why can't we set up governance for the Marketing group? What hurdles are there to clear? --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 jspaleta at gmail.com Thu Jan 31 17:30:22 2008 From: jspaleta at gmail.com (jspaleta at gmail.com) Date: Thu, 31 Jan 2008 08:30:22 -0900 Subject: redefining SIGs (old and new) In-Reply-To: References: <1201797267.26432.43.camel@calliope.phig.org> Message-ID: <604aa7910801310930t38fcf419u8b05bd8bf28fd329@mail.gmail.com> have you seen my rainbow chart? http://jspaleta.fedorapeople.org/role-based-sigs/sig-teams.png there's an svg in there as well if you want to do your own strawman. Let me boil it down for you... I want to organize role based teamwork around...packages. End of the day, as a project packages are a clear deliverable and focus. Other things while very important are support services to make us more effective at deliverying packages. So I want to organize work that makes all the crap that needs to get done in relationship to a chunk of the package repository. I want a role based team model. All of it from front line user help, to documenting features, to triage, to maintaining and developing. For each role on such a team, there is a support group that handles the policy around the tasks associated with that area. So triage would have a support group, made up of triagers from each package oriented SIG as well as floating experts. That support group deals with triage policy, tools, and recruitment and training for new triagers to fill roles in SIGs that need help in that area. And so on and so on for different roles There will of course need to be other support groups that don't have a definable role in a packaging SIG...yet. Marketting for example, very not package oriented yet. But as it develops it could very well end up with some packagespace related tasking, similar to beat writing for the release notes. The point is to put a little more structure into how we organize people. My proposal would have two basic structures. Role based packaging SIGs that do all the tasks associated with chunk of packagespace, and support groups organized around a role area. In my strawman rainbow chart of love, those support groups are called interface specialists... because they are the interfaces where different packaging SIGs meet. Right now our Marketing and Documentation SIGs are good examples of what interface groups are. And I'm not looking to experiment with role assignments in these support groups. I am looking to affect change in how packaging SIGs are put together. right now the only team structure we have is a SIG, so i've reused the name. I frankly don't care what its called. I'm just trying to organize things differently so we can have role oriented support groups, in the hopes of driving recruitment and specialized training to help packaging SIGs become more effective at what they do. We need documenters and triagers and what not to be working directly with maintainers. We don't really want maintainers to train up those people. it takes... different roles..different roles..different roles to move the bits -jef"Would it be wrong to delibrately create a hardware failure situation, such that I could fly back out here to King Salmon.. in the summer...and actually enjoy the trip?"spaleta On 1/31/08, Greg DeKoenigsberg wrote: > On Thu, 31 Jan 2008, Karsten 'quaid' Wade wrote: > > > Jef has some hot ideas here so I'm OK with him co-opting the SIG > > usage/namespace. > > > > However, it has had a historical meaning in Fedora and what do we > > replace that with? > > > > SIG has meant, a group starting around something that wasn't ready to go > > through the formal project process: > > > > http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/DefiningProjects > > > > "A SIG earns official project status through successful accomplishment > > of objectives that warrant more prominence in the Fedora Project. If > > contributors request it, the parent project or the Fedora Project Board > > will evaluate the SIG's progress reports and make a determination of > > readiness for this stage. At this point, it may be branded with the > > Fedora name and promoted to the full status of a Fedora project. It can > > join the ranks of the most valuable initiatives currently leading the > > Fedora Project." > > > > What do we call that incubation stage? > > > > I ask because we just voted yesterday to form the Marketing SIG, but Jef > > is reasonably arguing that Docs, Marketing, etc. are support services in > > his new SIG model. OTOH, I'm sure that if, at this stage, we had to > > follow all the project definition rules to get an official "Marketing > > Project", we'd bury half the interested people and lose a lot of > > momentum. > > Why? > > Marketing has a ton of tasks and some leadership. Why can't we set up > governance for the Marketing group? What hurdles are there to clear? > > --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" > > _______________________________________________ > fedora-advisory-board mailing list > fedora-advisory-board at redhat.com > http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-advisory-board > From jspaleta at gmail.com Thu Jan 31 18:23:59 2008 From: jspaleta at gmail.com (Jeff Spaleta) Date: Thu, 31 Jan 2008 09:23:59 -0900 Subject: redefining SIGs (old and new) In-Reply-To: <604aa7910801310930t38fcf419u8b05bd8bf28fd329@mail.gmail.com> References: <1201797267.26432.43.camel@calliope.phig.org> <604aa7910801310930t38fcf419u8b05bd8bf28fd329@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <604aa7910801311023u1eb0e6d8y3094a84eed0fcb93@mail.gmail.com> On Jan 31, 2008 8:30 AM, wrote: > right now the only team structure we have is a SIG, so i've reused the > name. I frankly don't care what its called. And with that being said... perhaps I've abused the SIG term in my strawman too severely. I should be punished. Perhaps my strawman should lay it out like this. Leave the SIG definition as is, and (re)organize a role based Packaging SIG. In such a strawman, groups focusing on packaging such as the Astronomy, Games, and KDE SIGs would be reformulated under the new role based thing (if they wanted to try out my idea). I'm at a loss as to what to call the reformulated groups..confederacy of allied packagers (CAPs)? They would define what part of the packagespace they take stewardship over (overlap is fine), and define roles internally for all tasking related to that space. In parallel other existing SIGs like Documentation would choose to prep training and build policy meant to be used to support a role, in each area of the packagespace. So in this strawman, let's say the current KDE SIG decided to play ball with my idea. They would reformulate as a CAP under the Packaging SIG, and would identify a set of task based roles on their team, among them a documenter role. Documentation SIG, would find a way to create training aimed at a group of new "documenters" to help them get started doing documentation tasks for the CAP they are assigned to. Training on things like release note beat writing, how to work with the doctools, maybe its information on how to identify and track "feature" hotness. Documentation things that the package maintainers and developers who drive KDE packages forward aren't going to be experts at. I then lead a recruitment drive to get interested people into a documenter training session. At the end of that training period (however its laid out), some of the people will wander away, and some of them will take an assignment. Once trained the new documenters are assigned to a CAP and are integrated into that groups work. We assess how people feel about the role they are in each release cycle. And perhaps make a large recruitment push for a different role each release cycle. -jef From loupgaroublond at gmail.com Thu Jan 31 18:37:11 2008 From: loupgaroublond at gmail.com (Yaakov Nemoy) Date: Thu, 31 Jan 2008 13:37:11 -0500 Subject: redefining SIGs (old and new) In-Reply-To: <1201797267.26432.43.camel@calliope.phig.org> References: <1201797267.26432.43.camel@calliope.phig.org> Message-ID: <7f692fec0801311037u1343b0b2r9ac0ac9866b84043@mail.gmail.com> On Jan 31, 2008 11:34 AM, Karsten 'quaid' Wade wrote: > "A SIG earns official project status through successful accomplishment > of objectives that warrant more prominence in the Fedora Project. If > contributors request it, the parent project or the Fedora Project Board > will evaluate the SIG's progress reports and make a determination of > readiness for this stage. At this point, it may be branded with the > Fedora name and promoted to the full status of a Fedora project. It can > join the ranks of the most valuable initiatives currently leading the > Fedora Project." > > What do we call that incubation stage? Incubated you say? How about an EGG. An Evolving Growth Group. -Yaakov From gdk at redhat.com Thu Jan 31 18:43:31 2008 From: gdk at redhat.com (Greg DeKoenigsberg) Date: Thu, 31 Jan 2008 13:43:31 -0500 (EST) Subject: redefining SIGs (old and new) In-Reply-To: <7f692fec0801311037u1343b0b2r9ac0ac9866b84043@mail.gmail.com> References: <1201797267.26432.43.camel@calliope.phig.org> <7f692fec0801311037u1343b0b2r9ac0ac9866b84043@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: On Thu, 31 Jan 2008, Yaakov Nemoy wrote: > On Jan 31, 2008 11:34 AM, Karsten 'quaid' Wade wrote: >> "A SIG earns official project status through successful accomplishment >> of objectives that warrant more prominence in the Fedora Project. If >> contributors request it, the parent project or the Fedora Project Board >> will evaluate the SIG's progress reports and make a determination of >> readiness for this stage. At this point, it may be branded with the >> Fedora name and promoted to the full status of a Fedora project. It can >> join the ranks of the most valuable initiatives currently leading the >> Fedora Project." >> >> What do we call that incubation stage? > > Incubated you say? How about an EGG. An Evolving Growth Group. This is clever, and would be great if SIGs didn't exist -- but they do. Again, I prefer simplicity. "SIG" = a loose group of folks trying to solve a problem. "Project" = a formalized team of people who are accountable to The Board for solving a particular problem. Seems to me that the "Packaging SIG" is really a "Packaging Project" by these guidelines. --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"