From jspaleta at gmail.com Mon Feb 2 21:03:14 2009 From: jspaleta at gmail.com (Jeff Spaleta) Date: Mon, 2 Feb 2009 12:03:14 -0900 Subject: MirrorManager Analysis Proposal: Measuring aggregate adoption delay for updates Message-ID: <604aa7910902021303s6a2a3eamedf07b86ac15dd39@mail.gmail.com> Question to try to answer: How long does it take for a yum update to reach 50% and 90% adoption. Reference -devel-list discussion: https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-list/2009-Jan uary/msg01456.html Solution: Timestamp analysis of UserAgent string for mirrorlist requests matching updated yum client information after a yum update is released. Output: Histogram plot showing number of clients binned in elapsed time until first occurrence new UserAgent string detected for that IP I have the pythonic pieces in place now to do this sort of analysis in fedora infrastructure without having to personally have access to the log files. This is the first example of the type of aggregate ip address analysis that can be done quite easily so that results can be made available to contributors. Before I go off and just do it, I thought it best that there be some sort of approval step to make sure each of the new analysis efforts is something the Fedora Board feels should be produced. There are a number of things I feel would be interesting and valuable to produce as analysis products from the mirrormanager logs, but its not my decision to make as to whether or not they should be produced. I want to run by each analysis type on the advisory board list before I implement it to make sure I am not going to produce something that is harmful. -jef"hopes this is short enough for Seth"spaleta From skvidal at fedoraproject.org Mon Feb 2 21:30:04 2009 From: skvidal at fedoraproject.org (seth vidal) Date: Mon, 02 Feb 2009 16:30:04 -0500 Subject: MirrorManager Analysis Proposal: Measuring aggregate adoption delay for updates In-Reply-To: <604aa7910902021303s6a2a3eamedf07b86ac15dd39@mail.gmail.com> References: <604aa7910902021303s6a2a3eamedf07b86ac15dd39@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <1233610204.27307.13.camel@rosebud> On Mon, 2009-02-02 at 12:03 -0900, Jeff Spaleta wrote: > Question to try to answer: > How long does it take for a yum update to reach 50% and 90% adoption. > Reference -devel-list discussion: > https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-list/2009-Jan > uary/msg01456.html > Solution: > Timestamp analysis of UserAgent string for mirrorlist requests > matching updated yum client information after a yum update is > released. > Output: > Histogram plot showing number of clients binned in elapsed time > until first occurrence new UserAgent string detected for that IP My primary concern is how the ip-information is correlated and presented. Are we talking about releasing specific ip-ranges worldwide? More importantly what is it we get out of this data? I question the efficacy of this specific analysis to tell us much of anything. And before anyone suggests it: not all analysis is good. When it comes to this sort of data I'm not in favor of letting a thousand flowers bloom and cull the ones which end up being poison ivy. -sv From jspaleta at gmail.com Mon Feb 2 22:05:18 2009 From: jspaleta at gmail.com (Jeff Spaleta) Date: Mon, 2 Feb 2009 13:05:18 -0900 Subject: MirrorManager Analysis Proposal: Measuring aggregate adoption delay for updates In-Reply-To: <1233610204.27307.13.camel@rosebud> References: <604aa7910902021303s6a2a3eamedf07b86ac15dd39@mail.gmail.com> <1233610204.27307.13.camel@rosebud> Message-ID: <604aa7910902021405u3904120j7b63f4bacbf6577d@mail.gmail.com> On Mon, Feb 2, 2009 at 12:30 PM, seth vidal wrote: > My primary concern is how the ip-information is correlated and > presented. Are we talking about releasing specific ip-ranges worldwide? No. y-axis is number of unique ips or percentage of unique ips or something similar. x-axis is measurement of time > More importantly what is it we get out of this data? I question the > efficacy of this specific analysis to tell us much of anything. That sir, is an invitation for an expansive explanation...but I will resist. Was the originating question and reference devel thread not clear enough? There was a question as to how quickly yum updates are picked up. by the userbase I can give an approximate answer to that question based on mirrormanager UserAgent strings insofar as it applies to the clients which connect to mirrormanager. I'm sure other caveats apply as well which weaken this as an absolute measurement, some of which could be accounted for in the complexity of how elapsed time is established as an enhancement. -jef From skvidal at fedoraproject.org Tue Feb 3 00:03:20 2009 From: skvidal at fedoraproject.org (seth vidal) Date: Mon, 02 Feb 2009 19:03:20 -0500 Subject: MirrorManager Analysis Proposal: Measuring aggregate adoption delay for updates In-Reply-To: <604aa7910902021405u3904120j7b63f4bacbf6577d@mail.gmail.com> References: <604aa7910902021303s6a2a3eamedf07b86ac15dd39@mail.gmail.com> <1233610204.27307.13.camel@rosebud> <604aa7910902021405u3904120j7b63f4bacbf6577d@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <1233619400.27307.15.camel@rosebud> On Mon, 2009-02-02 at 13:05 -0900, Jeff Spaleta wrote: > On Mon, Feb 2, 2009 at 12:30 PM, seth vidal wrote: > > My primary concern is how the ip-information is correlated and > > presented. Are we talking about releasing specific ip-ranges worldwide? > > No. > y-axis is number of unique ips or percentage of unique ips or something similar. > x-axis is measurement of time > > > More importantly what is it we get out of this data? I question the > > efficacy of this specific analysis to tell us much of anything. > > That sir, is an invitation for an expansive explanation...but I will resist. > Was the originating question and reference devel thread not clear > enough? There was a question as to how quickly yum updates are picked > up. by the userbase As I understood the question it was how quickly do updates get picked up by the mirrors. So the user could know when to look for a new version and not waste their time and bandwidth. -sv From skvidal at fedoraproject.org Tue Feb 3 01:51:02 2009 From: skvidal at fedoraproject.org (seth vidal) Date: Mon, 02 Feb 2009 20:51:02 -0500 Subject: power savings: a goal of the fedora project Message-ID: <1233625862.27307.22.camel@rosebud> Hi, I'd like to suggest that saving power be a goal of the fedora project in its development of the fedora linux distribution. If there are settings we can set which will not deeply and adversely impact users but will conserve energy then should set them. I'd like to hear from others on this subject. -sv From jkeating at redhat.com Tue Feb 3 02:07:48 2009 From: jkeating at redhat.com (Jesse Keating) Date: Mon, 02 Feb 2009 18:07:48 -0800 Subject: power savings: a goal of the fedora project In-Reply-To: <1233625862.27307.22.camel@rosebud> References: <1233625862.27307.22.camel@rosebud> Message-ID: <1233626868.7493.67.camel@localhost.localdomain> On Mon, 2009-02-02 at 20:51 -0500, seth vidal wrote: > Hi, > I'd like to suggest that saving power be a goal of the fedora project in > its development of the fedora linux distribution. If there are settings > we can set which will not deeply and adversely impact users but will > conserve energy then should set them. > > I'd like to hear from others on this subject. Purely from a "what's it do for me?" POV, saving power makes batteries last longer, which improves the user experience. From a world POV saving power reduces the consumption of energy which is also a good thing. In the end I still feel it should be a maintainer choice, as with almost everything we do, but yes, I feel that from a project level we should prefer to save power where we can.and work toward more power savings work. -- Jesse Keating Fedora -- Freedom? is a feature! identi.ca: http://identi.ca/jkeating -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 197 bytes Desc: This is a digitally signed message part URL: From smooge at gmail.com Tue Feb 3 02:22:12 2009 From: smooge at gmail.com (Stephen John Smoogen) Date: Mon, 2 Feb 2009 19:22:12 -0700 Subject: power savings: a goal of the fedora project In-Reply-To: <1233625862.27307.22.camel@rosebud> References: <1233625862.27307.22.camel@rosebud> Message-ID: <80d7e4090902021822y281c6ea2h5c96c39c297e48ac@mail.gmail.com> On Mon, Feb 2, 2009 at 6:51 PM, seth vidal wrote: > Hi, > I'd like to suggest that saving power be a goal of the fedora project in > its development of the fedora linux distribution. If there are settings > we can set which will not deeply and adversely impact users but will > conserve energy then should set them. > > I'd like to hear from others on this subject. Well as long as the settings are clearly marked as such. What adversely affects one set of users does not mean another one. [Cluster people doing Gene analysis on a Fedora cluster have different IO/CPU/Memory needs than a mail server which is different from a desktop/laptop user.] -- Stephen J Smoogen. -- BSD/GNU/Linux How far that little candle throws his beams! So shines a good deed in a naughty world. = Shakespeare. "The Merchant of Venice" From kwade at redhat.com Tue Feb 3 08:03:42 2009 From: kwade at redhat.com (Karsten Wade) Date: Tue, 3 Feb 2009 00:03:42 -0800 Subject: Fedora Board Recap 2009-01-27 In-Reply-To: <49824187.9010604@redhat.com> References: <49824187.9010604@redhat.com> Message-ID: <20090203080342.GE7772@calliope.phig.org> On Thu, Jan 29, 2009 at 03:53:43PM -0800, John Poelstra wrote: > * Paul Frields is requesting that the Red Hat Community Architecture > Team administer this survey at all future events Sorry we weren't helpful this time; I tried to pick up the ball but quickly realized I didn't have the finger strength to keep holding. Lateral to Paul, who got it in this time. The above request is a bit wide open. Which future events? Just FUDCon or do you want something for FADs? For FADs, it's crucial that we survey at the end of the actual event. One fifteen minute form or (best!) a local web app service. What do you all want to know about the FADs? Some ideas for questions I had: * Did you have fun? - Rate fun level * Do you feel you accomplished something? - Rate accomplisment level * Did you improve your personal network, i.e., relationship with other Fedorans and general FLOSS community members? - Rate improvement level * What did you accomplish? - General area of activity list, with Other space. - Free form explanation - Relevant URLs section * What would have made your experience better? * What would have made the outcome better? * What was your favorite moment/event/outcome of the FAD? I would reckon we want something more comprehensive for the FUDCon, right? Do you want a regular review process on the questions asked? That is, at FUDCon - N days, we review via f-a-b the list of questions. We provide the survey online by the last day of the event, or just after it's over? What is the value of having the same questions in event after event? What is the value of adding, subtracting, or otherwise (re)mixing things? - Karsten -- Karsten 'quaid' Wade, Community Gardener http://quaid.fedorapeople.org AD0E0C41 -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: not available URL: From stickster at gmail.com Tue Feb 3 14:57:28 2009 From: stickster at gmail.com (Paul W. Frields) Date: Tue, 3 Feb 2009 09:57:28 -0500 Subject: Fedora Board Recap 2009-01-27 In-Reply-To: <20090203080342.GE7772@calliope.phig.org> References: <49824187.9010604@redhat.com> <20090203080342.GE7772@calliope.phig.org> Message-ID: <20090203145728.GE4852@localhost.localdomain> On Tue, Feb 03, 2009 at 12:03:42AM -0800, Karsten Wade wrote: > On Thu, Jan 29, 2009 at 03:53:43PM -0800, John Poelstra wrote: > > > * Paul Frields is requesting that the Red Hat Community Architecture > > Team administer this survey at all future events > > Sorry we weren't helpful this time; I tried to pick up the ball but > quickly realized I didn't have the finger strength to keep holding. > Lateral to Paul, who got it in this time. > > The above request is a bit wide open. > > Which future events? Just FUDCon or do you want something for FADs? I think all events deserve some sort of formal feedback mechanism. If we're spending more than $1K or $2K, a survey is a good idea. > For FADs, it's crucial that we survey at the end of the actual event. > One fifteen minute form or (best!) a local web app service. Agreed. The current FUDCon survey took me about 8 minutes at a slow, steady pace, although I didn't fill out any short answers. > What do you all want to know about the FADs? Some ideas for questions > I had: > > * Did you have fun? > - Rate fun level "Level of satisfaction," "fun," sure. I'm all for making the survey more informal as long as the questions are meaningful. > * Do you feel you accomplished something? > - Rate accomplisment level Getting warmer! Maybe a more relevant measure would be, "Do you feel you accomplished what you set out to do at this event?". > * Did you improve your personal network, i.e., relationship with other > Fedorans and general FLOSS community members? > - Rate improvement level > > * What did you accomplish? > - General area of activity list, with Other space. > - Free form explanation > - Relevant URLs section The more free form we get, the more anecdotal evidence we gather. That's good. Also, the more difficult it becomes to measure effectiveness of one event versus other similar events, unless we have enough quantitative captures. Doing both consistently makes a longer survey, so it's a bit of a balancing act if you want to hold to the <15 minute mark. > * What would have made your experience better? > > * What would have made the outcome better? > > * What was your favorite moment/event/outcome of the FAD? > > I would reckon we want something more comprehensive for the FUDCon, > right? I think there are a core set of questions that apply to any event, and we'd probably want a bit more information for FUDCon because of the much larger set of logistics we want to ensure we're carrying out correctly. > Do you want a regular review process on the questions asked? That is, > at FUDCon - N days, we review via f-a-b the list of questions. We > provide the survey online by the last day of the event, or just after > it's over? By regular, I'd say for each FUDCon, and maybe annually for FADs. We certainly don't want to set ourselves up for having to review questions for every FAD when FADs are supposed to be high-frequency events. > What is the value of having the same questions in event after event? I think that's somewhat self-explanatory -- measuring one event against another as we vary a small number of parameters. For example, did changing the schedule result in a markedly different overall satisfaction level from attendees? If we change the whole survey for every event, how can we measure events against each other? I think having a core set of questions that apply across all events makes it easier to do those sorts of comparisons. We can definitely vary things outside that core. We have the start of a core set now, and we can work on it as needed. Judging by the amount of input I got for this last survey, there aren't a whole lot of people who care deeply about how we do these surveys, which might simply mean this needn't be a tremendously drawn-out process. > What is the value of adding, subtracting, or otherwise (re)mixing > things? If events vary in some parameter, there may be a need to capture information pertinent to that variance. -- Paul W. Frields http://paul.frields.org/ gpg fingerprint: 3DA6 A0AC 6D58 FEC4 0233 5906 ACDB C937 BD11 3717 http://redhat.com/ - - - - http://pfrields.fedorapeople.org/ irc.freenode.net: stickster @ #fedora-docs, #fedora-devel, #fredlug -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: not available URL: From mmcgrath at redhat.com Tue Feb 3 16:58:29 2009 From: mmcgrath at redhat.com (Mike McGrath) Date: Tue, 3 Feb 2009 10:58:29 -0600 (CST) Subject: Fedora Board Recap 2009-01-27 In-Reply-To: <20090203080342.GE7772@calliope.phig.org> References: <49824187.9010604@redhat.com> <20090203080342.GE7772@calliope.phig.org> Message-ID: On Tue, 3 Feb 2009, Karsten Wade wrote: > > What do you all want to know about the FADs? Some ideas for questions > I had: > I started a thread about this on Infrastructure to ask for dates that would work for people to have a midwest infrastructure type FAD. It had remarkably little response. I seem to recall only 3 people responding to the thread. I can push the idea and try to get more people interested, but I was wondering if others had tried organizing one and what success they had? -Mike From stickster at gmail.com Tue Feb 3 17:03:32 2009 From: stickster at gmail.com (Paul W. Frields) Date: Tue, 3 Feb 2009 12:03:32 -0500 Subject: Fedora Board Recap 2009-01-27 In-Reply-To: References: <49824187.9010604@redhat.com> <20090203080342.GE7772@calliope.phig.org> Message-ID: <20090203170332.GL4852@localhost.localdomain> On Tue, Feb 03, 2009 at 10:58:29AM -0600, Mike McGrath wrote: > On Tue, 3 Feb 2009, Karsten Wade wrote: > > > > What do you all want to know about the FADs? Some ideas for questions > > I had: > > > > I started a thread about this on Infrastructure to ask for dates that > would work for people to have a midwest infrastructure type FAD. It had > remarkably little response. I seem to recall only 3 people responding to > the thread. > > I can push the idea and try to get more people interested, but I was > wondering if others had tried organizing one and what success they had? Karsten, Larry Cafiero, and Clint Savage (IIRC) are organizing a FAD around the SCaLE 7x conference. I know at least one of them is listening to this list and can provide feedback. :-) -- Paul W. Frields http://paul.frields.org/ gpg fingerprint: 3DA6 A0AC 6D58 FEC4 0233 5906 ACDB C937 BD11 3717 http://redhat.com/ - - - - http://pfrields.fedorapeople.org/ irc.freenode.net: stickster @ #fedora-docs, #fedora-devel, #fredlug -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: not available URL: From skvidal at fedoraproject.org Tue Feb 3 17:04:56 2009 From: skvidal at fedoraproject.org (seth vidal) Date: Tue, 03 Feb 2009 12:04:56 -0500 Subject: perfSONAR migrating from knoppix to fedora live cds Message-ID: <1233680696.3238.10.camel@rosebud> A friend of mine out at an I2-related conference in TX jabbered me this morning: http://events.internet2.edu/2009/jt-texas/sessionDetails.cfm?session=10000373&event=1019 on page 22 of the pdf mentioned on the page above it mentioned future directions to migrate from knoppix to fedora live cds. perfsonar is: http://www.perfsonar.net/ I just wanted to mention it as a nice thing. -sv From jkeating at redhat.com Tue Feb 3 17:09:39 2009 From: jkeating at redhat.com (Jesse Keating) Date: Tue, 03 Feb 2009 09:09:39 -0800 Subject: Fedora Board Recap 2009-01-27 In-Reply-To: <20090203170332.GL4852@localhost.localdomain> References: <49824187.9010604@redhat.com> <20090203080342.GE7772@calliope.phig.org> <20090203170332.GL4852@localhost.localdomain> Message-ID: <1233680979.7493.79.camel@localhost.localdomain> On Tue, 2009-02-03 at 12:03 -0500, Paul W. Frields wrote: > On Tue, Feb 03, 2009 at 10:58:29AM -0600, Mike McGrath wrote: > > On Tue, 3 Feb 2009, Karsten Wade wrote: > > > > > > What do you all want to know about the FADs? Some ideas for questions > > > I had: > > > > > > > I started a thread about this on Infrastructure to ask for dates that > > would work for people to have a midwest infrastructure type FAD. It had > > remarkably little response. I seem to recall only 3 people responding to > > the thread. > > > > I can push the idea and try to get more people interested, but I was > > wondering if others had tried organizing one and what success they had? > > Karsten, Larry Cafiero, and Clint Savage (IIRC) are organizing a FAD > around the SCaLE 7x conference. I know at least one of them is > listening to this list and can provide feedback. :-) We're also talking about a FAD at Linux Fest Northwest, which is in late April north of Seattle. -- Jesse Keating Fedora -- Freedom? is a feature! identi.ca: http://identi.ca/jkeating -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 197 bytes Desc: This is a digitally signed message part URL: From kwade at redhat.com Tue Feb 3 17:33:12 2009 From: kwade at redhat.com (Karsten Wade) Date: Tue, 3 Feb 2009 09:33:12 -0800 Subject: Fedora Board Recap 2009-01-27 In-Reply-To: <20090203170332.GL4852@localhost.localdomain> References: <49824187.9010604@redhat.com> <20090203080342.GE7772@calliope.phig.org> <20090203170332.GL4852@localhost.localdomain> Message-ID: <20090203173312.GC5166@calliope.phig.org> On Tue, Feb 03, 2009 at 12:03:32PM -0500, Paul W. Frields wrote: > On Tue, Feb 03, 2009 at 10:58:29AM -0600, Mike McGrath wrote: > > On Tue, 3 Feb 2009, Karsten Wade wrote: > > > > > > What do you all want to know about the FADs? Some ideas for questions > > > I had: > > > > > > > I started a thread about this on Infrastructure to ask for dates that > > would work for people to have a midwest infrastructure type FAD. It had > > remarkably little response. I seem to recall only 3 people responding to > > the thread. > > > > I can push the idea and try to get more people interested, but I was > > wondering if others had tried organizing one and what success they had? > > Karsten, Larry Cafiero, and Clint Savage (IIRC) are organizing a FAD > around the SCaLE 7x conference. I know at least one of them is > listening to this list and can provide feedback. :-) Before I start, I'll note that talking about this on fedora-ambassadors-list is probably the best location ultimately; that is the group most familiar with our events, large and small. As it happens, we're planning the "first FAD" for SCaLE 7x, so some of it is seat-of-the-pants on top of repeatable processes. In addition, we're not sure there are going to be more than a half-dozen of us there. We are putting out the word and contacting people and such, but if there aren't people already planning to come to the event ... This is the catch-22 of the FAD. There pretty much has to be something there to entice people to travel; unlike a FUDCon, which is an event in and of itself. Caveat -- this is North America I am talking about, where travel distances are great and public transit options are few outside of metropolitan areas. Thus you might want to find something to attach to, such as a LISA event in your area. Something Infra contributors might already attend or be able to get funds/approval from $dayjob to go. One part I'd really like to see developed is the virtual side of the FAD. Can we dial in to talk.fp.o and work via IRC with people who are not present? That might work for the FAD we have planned for SCaLE; I'm going to see if the document lead for the User Guide can be available on that day to watch our work and help guide from afar. Infrastructure seems well fit for this kind of thing. Thus you could get, I dunno, inode0 and $foo, meet at Dennis' house for BBQ, turn off the TV for the day, and do some stuff. If there are a half-dozen other people who agree to sit there on IRC all day, would that be helpful? You could do high-resolution decision making in person, then parse out tasks via IRC, etc. - Karsten -- Karsten 'quaid' Wade, Community Gardener http://quaid.fedorapeople.org AD0E0C41 -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: not available URL: From ajax at redhat.com Tue Feb 3 22:01:01 2009 From: ajax at redhat.com (Adam Jackson) Date: Tue, 03 Feb 2009 17:01:01 -0500 Subject: power savings: a goal of the fedora project In-Reply-To: <80d7e4090902021822y281c6ea2h5c96c39c297e48ac@mail.gmail.com> References: <1233625862.27307.22.camel@rosebud> <80d7e4090902021822y281c6ea2h5c96c39c297e48ac@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <1233698461.1833.41.camel@atropine.boston.devel.redhat.com> On Mon, 2009-02-02 at 19:22 -0700, Stephen John Smoogen wrote: > On Mon, Feb 2, 2009 at 6:51 PM, seth vidal wrote: > > Hi, > > I'd like to suggest that saving power be a goal of the fedora project in > > its development of the fedora linux distribution. If there are settings > > we can set which will not deeply and adversely impact users but will > > conserve energy then should set them. > > > > I'd like to hear from others on this subject. > > Well as long as the settings are clearly marked as such. What > adversely affects one set of users does not mean another one. [Cluster > people doing Gene analysis on a Fedora cluster have different > IO/CPU/Memory needs than a mail server which is different from a > desktop/laptop user.] While this is true, it's worth noting that the effective power-saving techniques are, in order: 1) Do less stuff. 2) Do it faster. 3) Use less power when idle. - ajax -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 197 bytes Desc: This is a digitally signed message part URL: From stickster at gmail.com Tue Feb 3 22:34:30 2009 From: stickster at gmail.com (Paul W. Frields) Date: Tue, 3 Feb 2009 17:34:30 -0500 Subject: Fedora Board Recap 2009-01-27 In-Reply-To: <20090203173312.GC5166@calliope.phig.org> References: <49824187.9010604@redhat.com> <20090203080342.GE7772@calliope.phig.org> <20090203170332.GL4852@localhost.localdomain> <20090203173312.GC5166@calliope.phig.org> Message-ID: <20090203223430.GK28565@localhost.localdomain> On Tue, Feb 03, 2009 at 09:33:12AM -0800, Karsten Wade wrote: > On Tue, Feb 03, 2009 at 12:03:32PM -0500, Paul W. Frields wrote: > > On Tue, Feb 03, 2009 at 10:58:29AM -0600, Mike McGrath wrote: > > > On Tue, 3 Feb 2009, Karsten Wade wrote: > > > > > > > > What do you all want to know about the FADs? Some ideas for questions > > > > I had: > > > > > > > > > > I started a thread about this on Infrastructure to ask for dates that > > > would work for people to have a midwest infrastructure type FAD. It had > > > remarkably little response. I seem to recall only 3 people responding to > > > the thread. > > > > > > I can push the idea and try to get more people interested, but I was > > > wondering if others had tried organizing one and what success they had? > > > > Karsten, Larry Cafiero, and Clint Savage (IIRC) are organizing a FAD > > around the SCaLE 7x conference. I know at least one of them is > > listening to this list and can provide feedback. :-) > > Before I start, I'll note that talking about this on > fedora-ambassadors-list is probably the best location ultimately; that > is the group most familiar with our events, large and small. > > As it happens, we're planning the "first FAD" for SCaLE 7x, so some of > it is seat-of-the-pants on top of repeatable processes. > > In addition, we're not sure there are going to be more than a > half-dozen of us there. We are putting out the word and contacting > people and such, but if there aren't people already planning to come > to the event ... > > This is the catch-22 of the FAD. There pretty much has to be > something there to entice people to travel; unlike a FUDCon, which is > an event in and of itself. [...snip...] Marketing FADs to area LUGs might be a great way to find interested attendees, if the purpose of the FAD is to provide some primer material for potential new contributors. If the targets for the FAD require more esoteric Fedora knowledge, this strategy might not prove as useful, though. -- Paul W. Frields http://paul.frields.org/ gpg fingerprint: 3DA6 A0AC 6D58 FEC4 0233 5906 ACDB C937 BD11 3717 http://redhat.com/ - - - - http://pfrields.fedorapeople.org/ irc.freenode.net: stickster @ #fedora-docs, #fedora-devel, #fredlug -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: not available URL: From poelstra at redhat.com Tue Feb 3 23:04:10 2009 From: poelstra at redhat.com (John Poelstra) Date: Tue, 03 Feb 2009 15:04:10 -0800 Subject: Fedora Board Meeting Recap 2009-02-03 Message-ID: <4988CD6A.7010304@redhat.com> Recap and full IRC transcripts for the moderated and public channels are here: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Board/Meetings/2009-02-03 Please make corrections and clarifications to the wiki page. == Board Questions & Answers == * See the log for detailed answers * What is Fedora? ** More discussion on this topic at the Board's next meeting * What is the news on the 'incident' last year, and when can we hear more? * Is Red Hat ever going to do main stream ads for Fedora (like on TV or Radio)? * Why will there be no FUDCon associated with the Red Hat Summit in Chicago in September 2009? * Why don't we replace the offical GA release with an updated one from Fedora Unity and archive the GA release when they have released an updated GA release ? * Is cowsay code or content? ... the question really is how can I look at a package and classify it as code or content? * Now with the ability to create a "live" cd shouldn't Fedora stop officially site with a specific DE ( Now it's Gnome ) and allow all DE to compete on a fair ground and all reference to "Desktop" would strictly be a generic one ( containing a just a list of all the DE's that Fedora offers ) ? * What key strategic initiatives is the board pursuing for 2009? ** glezos would like to see this question discussed in more detail on a Board phone meeting and come up with more specific and consistent answers * Have we identified target groups to seek out as contributors? Or are we content with a walk-in only approach to recruitment? * Could the board collect some questions in advance of these meetings so more thought could be given to them before the board discusses them? * Is the Desktop SIG a Gnome Desktop SIG or is that SIG made up of members from other *DE SIG's? == #fedora-board-meeting == From smooge at gmail.com Wed Feb 4 00:20:06 2009 From: smooge at gmail.com (Stephen John Smoogen) Date: Tue, 3 Feb 2009 17:20:06 -0700 Subject: Fedora Board Recap 2009-01-27 In-Reply-To: <20090203080342.GE7772@calliope.phig.org> References: <49824187.9010604@redhat.com> <20090203080342.GE7772@calliope.phig.org> Message-ID: <80d7e4090902031620m15693e29y3618a4fd58f684b3@mail.gmail.com> On Tue, Feb 3, 2009 at 1:03 AM, Karsten Wade wrote: > On Thu, Jan 29, 2009 at 03:53:43PM -0800, John Poelstra wrote: > >> * Paul Frields is requesting that the Red Hat Community Architecture >> Team administer this survey at all future events > > Sorry we weren't helpful this time; I tried to pick up the ball but > quickly realized I didn't have the finger strength to keep holding. > Lateral to Paul, who got it in this time. > > The above request is a bit wide open. > > Which future events? Just FUDCon or do you want something for FADs? > > For FADs, it's crucial that we survey at the end of the actual event. > One fifteen minute form or (best!) a local web app service. What is a FAD? Sorry ... I think it is something regional.. but no idea. -- Stephen J Smoogen. -- BSD/GNU/Linux How far that little candle throws his beams! So shines a good deed in a naughty world. = Shakespeare. "The Merchant of Venice" From jwboyer at gmail.com Wed Feb 4 00:48:09 2009 From: jwboyer at gmail.com (Josh Boyer) Date: Tue, 3 Feb 2009 19:48:09 -0500 Subject: Fedora Board Recap 2009-01-27 In-Reply-To: <80d7e4090902031620m15693e29y3618a4fd58f684b3@mail.gmail.com> References: <49824187.9010604@redhat.com> <20090203080342.GE7772@calliope.phig.org> <80d7e4090902031620m15693e29y3618a4fd58f684b3@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <20090204004809.GA20142@yoda.jdub.homelinux.org> On Tue, Feb 03, 2009 at 05:20:06PM -0700, Stephen John Smoogen wrote: >On Tue, Feb 3, 2009 at 1:03 AM, Karsten Wade wrote: >> On Thu, Jan 29, 2009 at 03:53:43PM -0800, John Poelstra wrote: >> >>> * Paul Frields is requesting that the Red Hat Community Architecture >>> Team administer this survey at all future events >> >> Sorry we weren't helpful this time; I tried to pick up the ball but >> quickly realized I didn't have the finger strength to keep holding. >> Lateral to Paul, who got it in this time. >> >> The above request is a bit wide open. >> >> Which future events? Just FUDCon or do you want something for FADs? >> >> For FADs, it's crucial that we survey at the end of the actual event. >> One fifteen minute form or (best!) a local web app service. > >What is a FAD? Sorry ... I think it is something regional.. but no idea. Fedora Activity Day. josh From dennis at ausil.us Wed Feb 4 01:04:39 2009 From: dennis at ausil.us (Dennis Gilmore) Date: Tue, 3 Feb 2009 19:04:39 -0600 Subject: Fedora Board Recap 2009-01-27 In-Reply-To: References: <49824187.9010604@redhat.com> <20090203080342.GE7772@calliope.phig.org> Message-ID: <200902031904.40153.dennis@ausil.us> On Tuesday 03 February 2009 10:58:29 am Mike McGrath wrote: > On Tue, 3 Feb 2009, Karsten Wade wrote: > > What do you all want to know about the FADs? Some ideas for questions > > I had: > > I started a thread about this on Infrastructure to ask for dates that > would work for people to have a midwest infrastructure type FAD. It had > remarkably little response. I seem to recall only 3 people responding to > the thread. > > I can push the idea and try to get more people interested, but I was > wondering if others had tried organizing one and what success they had? All the options worked for me so i did not chime in. but if there were a FAD in the midwest somewhere. I would be there. Dennis From larry.cafiero at gmail.com Wed Feb 4 01:10:30 2009 From: larry.cafiero at gmail.com (Larry Cafiero) Date: Tue, 3 Feb 2009 17:10:30 -0800 Subject: Fedora Board Recap 2009-01-27 In-Reply-To: <20090204004809.GA20142@yoda.jdub.homelinux.org> References: <49824187.9010604@redhat.com> <20090203080342.GE7772@calliope.phig.org> <80d7e4090902031620m15693e29y3618a4fd58f684b3@mail.gmail.com> <20090204004809.GA20142@yoda.jdub.homelinux.org> Message-ID: <7a0d56080902031710o349f9eb6o4903edce7a84fe6b@mail.gmail.com> On Tue, Feb 3, 2009 at 4:48 PM, Josh Boyer wrote: > On Tue, Feb 03, 2009 at 05:20:06PM -0700, Stephen John Smoogen wrote: > > >What is a FAD? Sorry ... I think it is something regional.. but no idea. > > Fedora Activity Day. https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_Activity_Day_-_FAD (For those of you keeping score at home . . . ) Larry Cafiero -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From kanarip at kanarip.com Wed Feb 4 03:33:51 2009 From: kanarip at kanarip.com (Jeroen van Meeuwen) Date: Wed, 04 Feb 2009 04:33:51 +0100 Subject: Spins SIG Vote: Allow squashfs >4GB? Message-ID: <49890C9F.8090500@kanarip.com> Hey there, Since I did not want to cross-post over too many lists I did not send a message about a vote the Spins SIG has going on right now concerning the 4GB filesize limit of squashfs image files on live media. Anyway, since we span multiple groups, I wanted to let you all know there's a vote going on in this thread: http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/fedora-spins/2009-February/000437.html Kind regards, Jeroen van Meeuwen -kanarip From mspevack at redhat.com Thu Feb 5 13:22:48 2009 From: mspevack at redhat.com (Max Spevack) Date: Thu, 5 Feb 2009 14:22:48 +0100 (CET) Subject: What is a FAD (was Re: Fedora Board Recap 2009-01-27) In-Reply-To: <80d7e4090902031620m15693e29y3618a4fd58f684b3@mail.gmail.com> References: <49824187.9010604@redhat.com> <20090203080342.GE7772@calliope.phig.org> <80d7e4090902031620m15693e29y3618a4fd58f684b3@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: On Tue, 3 Feb 2009, Stephen John Smoogen wrote: > What is a FAD? Sorry ... I think it is something regional.. but no > idea. http://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-advisory-board/2008-December/msg00077.html "(2) Create a second kind of Fedora-centric event that can complement FUDCons, and allow folks like me, Paul, or regional Ambassador leaders to create the sorts of events that are most useful to their region. To that end, I would like to re-brand the idea of "Fedora Ambassador Day" to "Fedora Activity Day" (still keeping the FAD acronym). The idea of the new FAD is to bring smaller groups of people in a region (I'm picturing 5-20) together for day-long or weekend-long sessions that focus on one or two specific Fedora topics, and also include some sort of social event, or interesting location. I'm picturing bringing a bunch of packagers together for a weekend and giving them the resources they need to knock one or two things off their agenda, or bringing a couple of people who are working on a particular feature to the same place and enabling them to have a code sprint. Little "Fedora summits", all over the place, focusing on whatever piece of Fedora is interesting to a group of contributors who want to come together. The model the Fedora Ambassadors have been using -- bringing the regional leaders together for a weekend to plan the next 6-12 month strategy -- is also a good example. Smaller, contributor-focused events that have specific goals, and can be organized by whoever is interested in putting them together, wherever they are in the world. These events complement FUDCons, and allow us to mix FUDCons and FADs together in different regions of the world with more flexibility and modularity." ========== https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/FAD "The Fedora Activity Day (FAD) is a regional event (either one-day or a multi-day) that allows Fedora contributors to gather together in order to work on specific tasks related to the Fedora Project. Originally, these meetings were used for local Fedora Ambassador groups to make their plans for the coming year, but the idea is being expanded to bring local contributors together in order to work on any projects related to Fedora, and (if so desired) to organize some sort of social event or to hold the event in an interesting location." From inode0 at gmail.com Fri Feb 6 03:59:41 2009 From: inode0 at gmail.com (inode0) Date: Thu, 5 Feb 2009 21:59:41 -0600 Subject: Fedora Board Meeting Recap 2009-02-03 In-Reply-To: <4988CD6A.7010304@redhat.com> References: <4988CD6A.7010304@redhat.com> Message-ID: On Tue, Feb 3, 2009 at 5:04 PM, John Poelstra wrote: > Recap and full IRC transcripts for the moderated and public channels are > here: > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Board/Meetings/2009-02-03 > > Please make corrections and clarifications to the wiki page. > > == Board Questions & Answers == > * See the log for detailed answers > ... > * Is cowsay code or content? ... the question really is how can I look at a > package and classify it as code or content? This question was not addressed by the board in a serious way. More context perhaps would have been better than less. Let me add a little more here. I would like to know what board members think. It may be something decided by FESCO on a case by case basis, but the board members still have opinions and those are what I am interested in hearing. f13 said "you don't read cowsay contents in another application" but you actually do or nothing happens. cowsay is a perl script and a library of cow files. Most innocent observers I think would say that cowsay is code, but most would say it is code with or without the presence of perl in Fedora. The packaging guidelines are not clear to me about whether cowsay is or isn't code. They also aren't clear to me about whether OVM is or isn't code. Judging from the FESCO minutes I would hazard a guess that it wasn't entirely clear to them as a body either. Is it clear to board members whether cowsay and/or OVM are code or content? The distinction matters because content has additional requirements beyond what is required of code to be included according to the guidelines. Whether the FESCO decision with respect to OVM was correct or not, the process made this onlooker feel uncomfortable as the distinction between code and content in some cases is so fuzzy that it appears to be decided by whimsy. I know FESCO is a serious body. I know they take their work seriously. I also know there are some hard feelings, those happen from time to time. I am sure I am not the only one who finds this decision baffling. Even when I ask is OVM code or content, I get both answers. When I weigh the potential benefit of OVM with, say, the hello package I can't help but wonder if including in OVM a silly little program that can be compiled on Fedora but does nothing useful would allow it in under the guidelines. And if so, isn't that preposterous? John From tcallawa at redhat.com Sat Feb 7 06:13:53 2009 From: tcallawa at redhat.com (Tom "spot" Callaway) Date: Sat, 07 Feb 2009 01:13:53 -0500 Subject: Fedora Board Meeting Recap 2009-02-03 In-Reply-To: References: <4988CD6A.7010304@redhat.com> Message-ID: <498D26A1.8080104@redhat.com> On 2009-02-05 at 22:59:41 -0500, inode0 wrote: > The packaging guidelines are not clear to me about whether cowsay is > or isn't code. They also aren't clear to me about whether OVM is or > isn't code. Judging from the FESCO minutes I would hazard a guess that > it wasn't entirely clear to them as a body either. Is it clear to > board members whether cowsay and/or OVM are code or content? Well, lets start with this: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#Code_Vs_Content Ultimately, there are two arbiters as to whether something is Code or Content, FESCo and Fedora Legal. The unspoken rules that I use (which I should probably write down are): A) Does this thing need to be executed to be functional? If yes, it is code. If not, goto B. (Catches non-compiled code) B) Does this thing need to be compiled to be functional? If yes, it is code. If not, goto B. (Catches anything which is only useful when compiled, datasets in functions, etc) C) Is it useful in a standalone state? If yes, it is probably content. Look further and make recommendation to FESCo if it is at all unclear. If no, it may still be content, but we may not want it in Fedora. As to cowsay, it falls out of that logic path at A, it is clearly an executable script, thus, code. ~spot From jonstanley at gmail.com Sat Feb 7 09:40:20 2009 From: jonstanley at gmail.com (Jon Stanley) Date: Sat, 7 Feb 2009 04:40:20 -0500 Subject: Fedora Board Meeting Recap 2009-02-03 In-Reply-To: References: <4988CD6A.7010304@redhat.com> Message-ID: On Thu, Feb 5, 2009 at 10:59 PM, inode0 wrote: > The packaging guidelines are not clear to me about whether cowsay is > or isn't code. They also aren't clear to me about whether OVM is or > isn't code. Judging from the FESCO minutes I would hazard a guess that > it wasn't entirely clear to them as a body either. Is it clear to > board members whether cowsay and/or OVM are code or content? OVM was brought to FESCo as content, and that classification seemed to be appropriate - per spot's definition later in this thread, OVM *is* useful in a standalone state - as input to a SystemVerilog interpreter and/or compiler. However, the only thing that it's useful to is a proprietary SystemVerilog interpreter - there is no free consumer for this (as per the previous definition) content. > The distinction matters because content has additional requirements > beyond what is required of code to be included according to the > guidelines. Whether the FESCO decision with respect to OVM was correct > or not, the process made this onlooker feel uncomfortable as the > distinction between code and content in some cases is so fuzzy that it > appears to be decided by whimsy. I don't think that it's quite whimsy. As I discussed with you at length on IRC, this is no different than me submitting a freely licensed C# library without the free mono interpreter in Fedora - it's useless without it. > I know FESCO is a serious body. I know they take their work seriously. > I also know there are some hard feelings, those happen from time to > time. I am sure I am not the only one who finds this decision > baffling. Even when I ask is OVM code or content, I get both answers. I admit to an onlooker that it could be a baffling decision, however it was not random or without careful deliberation (and to be clear, all deliberation took place in public - either via fedora-devel or in the meeting). After the submitter disagreed with our decision, we decided to take it up again, and came up with the identical decision - that while we were quite enthusiastic about OVM, we couldn't allow it in without a free method to use this content. > When I weigh the potential benefit of OVM with, say, the hello package > I can't help but wonder if including in OVM a silly little program > that can be compiled on Fedora but does nothing useful would allow it > in under the guidelines. And if so, isn't that preposterous? I agree that the benefit of OVM is greater than that of hello (or cowsay, which for the record I maintain for EPEL), however, the guidelines are fairly clear here - Fedora Legal brought it to FESCo as doubtful content, and FESCo made a decision on that (and for the record, spot was in favor of this content being included per the review request). I realize that there were hard feelings hare, but those happen, and the most important thing here is that none were intended by any party. At times, FESCo is required to take a 50,000 foot view of things. From that vantage point, this wasn't a precedent that we (or at least I personally, I'll let other members speak for themselves) were willing to set. From inode0 at gmail.com Sat Feb 7 17:21:37 2009 From: inode0 at gmail.com (inode0) Date: Sat, 7 Feb 2009 11:21:37 -0600 Subject: Fedora Board Meeting Recap 2009-02-03 In-Reply-To: <498D26A1.8080104@redhat.com> References: <4988CD6A.7010304@redhat.com> <498D26A1.8080104@redhat.com> Message-ID: On Sat, Feb 7, 2009 at 12:13 AM, Tom spot Callaway wrote: > On 2009-02-05 at 22:59:41 -0500, inode0 wrote: >> The packaging guidelines are not clear to me about whether cowsay is >> or isn't code. They also aren't clear to me about whether OVM is or >> isn't code. Judging from the FESCO minutes I would hazard a guess that >> it wasn't entirely clear to them as a body either. Is it clear to >> board members whether cowsay and/or OVM are code or content? > > Well, lets start with this: > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#Code_Vs_Content > > Ultimately, there are two arbiters as to whether something is Code or > Content, FESCo and Fedora Legal. > > The unspoken rules that I use (which I should probably write down are): > > A) Does this thing need to be executed to be functional? If yes, it is > code. If not, goto B. (Catches non-compiled code) > B) Does this thing need to be compiled to be functional? If yes, it is > code. If not, goto B. (Catches anything which is only useful when > compiled, datasets in functions, etc) If not, goto C? > C) Is it useful in a standalone state? If yes, it is probably content. > Look further and make recommendation to FESCo if it is at all unclear. > If no, it may still be content, but we may not want it in Fedora. > > As to cowsay, it falls out of that logic path at A, it is clearly an > executable script, thus, code. Thanks Tom. May I ask two follow-up questions to clarify less obvious cases? 1. Assume perl is free software but is not distributed by Fedora. Is cowsay still considered code under these guidelines or do we goto C? 2. Assume perl is non-free software available to run on Fedora from a 3rd party. Is cowsay still considered code under these guidelines or do we goto C? The answers to these questions will clarify things greatly for me in the general case (and I'll stop picking on cowsay). There seem to be reasonable arguments both ways and I don't intend to argue it should be one way or the other. I just want to know which way it is now. Thanks, John From tcallawa at redhat.com Sat Feb 7 19:19:56 2009 From: tcallawa at redhat.com (Tom "spot" Callaway) Date: Sat, 07 Feb 2009 14:19:56 -0500 Subject: Fedora Board Meeting Recap 2009-02-03 In-Reply-To: References: <4988CD6A.7010304@redhat.com> <498D26A1.8080104@redhat.com> Message-ID: <498DDEDC.7030707@redhat.com> On 2009-02-07 at 12:21:37 -0500, inode0 wrote: > If not, goto C? Yes, sorry. :) >> C) Is it useful in a standalone state? If yes, it is probably content. >> Look further and make recommendation to FESCo if it is at all unclear. >> If no, it may still be content, but we may not want it in Fedora. >> >> As to cowsay, it falls out of that logic path at A, it is clearly an >> executable script, thus, code. > > Thanks Tom. May I ask two follow-up questions to clarify less obvious cases? > > 1. Assume perl is free software but is not distributed by Fedora. Is > cowsay still considered code under these guidelines or do we goto C? Yes, but it wouldn't be permissable until perl was added to Fedora. Non-functional code is a no-go. > 2. Assume perl is non-free software available to run on Fedora from a > 3rd party. Is cowsay still considered code under these guidelines or > do we goto C? Code that we have no possible way to execute, thus no-go. This is a logical extension of: "Packages which require non-open source components to build are also not permitted (e.g. proprietary compiler required).": https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#No_inclusion_of_pre-built_binaries_or_libraries Hope that helps, ~spot From inode0 at gmail.com Sun Feb 8 07:06:33 2009 From: inode0 at gmail.com (inode0) Date: Sun, 8 Feb 2009 01:06:33 -0600 Subject: Fedora Board Meeting Recap 2009-02-03 In-Reply-To: References: <4988CD6A.7010304@redhat.com> Message-ID: On Sat, Feb 7, 2009 at 3:40 AM, Jon Stanley wrote: > On Thu, Feb 5, 2009 at 10:59 PM, inode0 wrote: > >> The packaging guidelines are not clear to me about whether cowsay is >> or isn't code. They also aren't clear to me about whether OVM is or >> isn't code. Judging from the FESCO minutes I would hazard a guess that >> it wasn't entirely clear to them as a body either. Is it clear to >> board members whether cowsay and/or OVM are code or content? > > OVM was brought to FESCo as content, and that classification seemed to > be appropriate - per spot's definition later in this thread, OVM *is* > useful in a standalone state - as input to a SystemVerilog interpreter > and/or compiler. Ok. I don't know how OVM became content in the discussion, it seems from the explanation spot has given here that it is code and can reasonably be excluded at this time for lacking a compiler available in Fedora. > However, the only thing that it's useful to is a proprietary > SystemVerilog interpreter - there is no free consumer for this (as per > the previous definition) content. This view is very code-centric. When I look at other content included in Fedora most of it only needs to be viewable by the user (and meet other requirements of course). If OVM is viewed as content its usefulness likely needs to be judged differently. Do users benefit from being able to read it? Do developers benefit from having access to a reference implementation of a standard used in this field? When viewed in this way as content there are free consumers in Fedora. >> The distinction matters because content has additional requirements >> beyond what is required of code to be included according to the >> guidelines. Whether the FESCO decision with respect to OVM was correct >> or not, the process made this onlooker feel uncomfortable as the >> distinction between code and content in some cases is so fuzzy that it >> appears to be decided by whimsy. > > I don't think that it's quite whimsy. As I discussed with you at > length on IRC, this is no different than me submitting a freely > licensed C# library without the free mono interpreter in Fedora - it's > useless without it. Again you are talking about code. >> I know FESCO is a serious body. I know they take their work seriously. >> I also know there are some hard feelings, those happen from time to >> time. I am sure I am not the only one who finds this decision >> baffling. Even when I ask is OVM code or content, I get both answers. > > I admit to an onlooker that it could be a baffling decision, however > it was not random or without careful deliberation (and to be clear, > all deliberation took place in public - either via fedora-devel or in > the meeting). After the submitter disagreed with our decision, we > decided to take it up again, and came up with the identical decision - > that while we were quite enthusiastic about OVM, we couldn't allow it > in without a free method to use this content. Quoting myself above: "I know FESCO is a serious body. I know they take their work seriously." I'm honestly not questioning the seriousness or the deliberation given to this by FESCo. >> When I weigh the potential benefit of OVM with, say, the hello package >> I can't help but wonder if including in OVM a silly little program >> that can be compiled on Fedora but does nothing useful would allow it >> in under the guidelines. And if so, isn't that preposterous? > > I agree that the benefit of OVM is greater than that of hello (or > cowsay, which for the record I maintain for EPEL), however, the > guidelines are fairly clear here - Fedora Legal brought it to FESCo as > doubtful content, and FESCo made a decision on that (and for the > record, spot was in favor of this content being included per the > review request). I realize that there were hard feelings hare, but > those happen, and the most important thing here is that none were > intended by any party. I will admit I'm now baffled by spot's position expressed in the BZ. If it is code, and I don't see why it is any different than cowsay without a free perl in that respect, then it should be rejected for the reasons spot gave here. > At times, FESCo is required to take a 50,000 foot view of things. From > that vantage point, this wasn't a precedent that we (or at least I > personally, I'll let other members speak for themselves) were willing > to set. My issue wasn't with the outcome (although I do admit my instincts are to allow it as content) so much as it was with not being able to fully understand the reasoning behind it. And to be honest, I think the reasoning behind it is treating it as code and not as content. The emphasis, which now seems unnecessary, on the packaging guideline section on code vs. content seems a diversion that only added to the confusion. Unless I'm still confused and we probably should just accept that as my fate now if I still am. Thanks for the discussion, I do feel more comfortable now with the principles behind the decision. I do appreciate the efforts made here to help me understand this issue better. John From tcallawa at redhat.com Sun Feb 8 07:17:34 2009 From: tcallawa at redhat.com (Tom "spot" Callaway) Date: Sun, 08 Feb 2009 02:17:34 -0500 Subject: Fedora Board Meeting Recap 2009-02-03 In-Reply-To: References: <4988CD6A.7010304@redhat.com> Message-ID: <498E870E.5040501@redhat.com> On 2009-02-08 at 2:06:33 -0500, inode0 wrote: > I will admit I'm now baffled by spot's position expressed in the BZ. > If it is code, and I don't see why it is any different than cowsay > without a free perl in that respect, then it should be rejected for > the reasons spot gave here. Well, OVM doesn't execute. It doesn't need to be compiled into anything. It's really content. Think of it as a .png file. It's obviously content, because it doesn't execute, nor does it need to be compiled into anything, but for it to be used, something has to be able to parse the PNG format. We judge content on whether it enhances the user experience. I'd argue that the OVM content does enhance the experience for an Electronics Lab User, but FESCo disagrees. That's why they get to make the ultimate call. :) ~spot From vwfoxguru at gmail.com Mon Feb 9 04:14:28 2009 From: vwfoxguru at gmail.com (Scott Williams) Date: Sun, 8 Feb 2009 23:14:28 -0500 Subject: "Fedora" in a domain name Message-ID: <5216be500902082014wb12243bo6d0113ff36351714@mail.gmail.com> I'm starting a project to package security updates for EOL versions of Fedora and was interested in possibly using the word "Fedora" within the domain URL. I intend to carefully follow the guidelines in http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Legal/TrademarkGuidelines and am seeking the consent of the Fedora board before registering any URLs. Thanks, Scott Williams (vwbusguy) From sundaram at fedoraproject.org Mon Feb 9 04:16:49 2009 From: sundaram at fedoraproject.org (Rahul Sundaram) Date: Mon, 09 Feb 2009 09:46:49 +0530 Subject: "Fedora" in a domain name In-Reply-To: <5216be500902082014wb12243bo6d0113ff36351714@mail.gmail.com> References: <5216be500902082014wb12243bo6d0113ff36351714@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <498FAE31.9020601@fedoraproject.org> Scott Williams wrote: > I'm starting a project to package security updates for EOL versions of > Fedora and was interested in possibly using the word "Fedora" within > the domain URL. I intend to carefully follow the guidelines in > http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Legal/TrademarkGuidelines and am seeking > the consent of the Fedora board before registering any URLs. > Can't use fedoralegacy.org for this? I think Jesse Keating still owns it. What name are you planning to use for the project? Rahul From vwfoxguru at gmail.com Mon Feb 9 04:28:22 2009 From: vwfoxguru at gmail.com (Scott Williams) Date: Sun, 8 Feb 2009 23:28:22 -0500 Subject: "Fedora" in a domain name Message-ID: <5216be500902082028j4164763dpb368b5cb1592d1a7@mail.gmail.com> Rahul, Jesse Keating still owns fedoralegacy.org and so far has requested we not use that name. Tentatively looking at FedoraForever.org. We would like to use Fedora in the domain name since we will be packaging security updates explicitly for EOL Fedora versions. I have also looked into working under Fedora Unity, but at this time we will remain separate projects. ~Scott From matt at domsch.com Mon Feb 9 05:08:46 2009 From: matt at domsch.com (Matt Domsch) Date: Sun, 8 Feb 2009 23:08:46 -0600 Subject: "Fedora" in a domain name In-Reply-To: <5216be500902082028j4164763dpb368b5cb1592d1a7@mail.gmail.com> References: <5216be500902082028j4164763dpb368b5cb1592d1a7@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <20090209050845.GA13842@domsch.com> On Sun, Feb 08, 2009 at 11:28:22PM -0500, Scott Williams wrote: > Rahul, > > Jesse Keating still owns fedoralegacy.org and so far has requested we > not use that name. Tentatively looking at FedoraForever.org. We > would like to use Fedora in the domain name since we will be packaging > security updates explicitly for EOL Fedora versions. I have also > looked into working under Fedora Unity, but at this time we will > remain separate projects. Any reason why a separate domain name is needed? Why not something like eol-security.fedoraproject.org for a server name, which FI can redirect to your hosting service? While I like the alliteration of FedoraForever, are you really planning on posting security updates for all Fedora releases forever? :-) Sounds like an insanely daunting task to me. Trademark-wise, we're looking at encouraging would-be domain purchasers to instead ask the Fedora Project to buy the domain on their behalf, and simply point DNS at the subproject's hosting service. Among other things, this would let Fedora maintain ultimate control over the domain (and thus the Fedora trademark). Paul is working with legal to understand what kind of budget we might have/need to offer this ability. Thanks, Matt From jwboyer at gmail.com Mon Feb 9 12:40:10 2009 From: jwboyer at gmail.com (Josh Boyer) Date: Mon, 9 Feb 2009 07:40:10 -0500 Subject: "Fedora" in a domain name In-Reply-To: <20090209050845.GA13842@domsch.com> References: <5216be500902082028j4164763dpb368b5cb1592d1a7@mail.gmail.com> <20090209050845.GA13842@domsch.com> Message-ID: <20090209123948.GA2297@yoda.jdub.homelinux.org> On Sun, Feb 08, 2009 at 11:08:46PM -0600, Matt Domsch wrote: >On Sun, Feb 08, 2009 at 11:28:22PM -0500, Scott Williams wrote: >> Rahul, >> >> Jesse Keating still owns fedoralegacy.org and so far has requested we >> not use that name. Tentatively looking at FedoraForever.org. We >> would like to use Fedora in the domain name since we will be packaging >> security updates explicitly for EOL Fedora versions. I have also >> looked into working under Fedora Unity, but at this time we will >> remain separate projects. > >Any reason why a separate domain name is needed? Why not something >like eol-security.fedoraproject.org for a server name, which FI can >redirect to your hosting service? Because that has the implication that it's part of the fedora project, which I don't think is the case here. At least not yet. josh From matt at domsch.com Mon Feb 9 13:28:14 2009 From: matt at domsch.com (Matt Domsch) Date: Mon, 9 Feb 2009 07:28:14 -0600 Subject: "Fedora" in a domain name In-Reply-To: <20090209123948.GA2297@yoda.jdub.homelinux.org> References: <5216be500902082028j4164763dpb368b5cb1592d1a7@mail.gmail.com> <20090209050845.GA13842@domsch.com> <20090209123948.GA2297@yoda.jdub.homelinux.org> Message-ID: <20090209132814.GB13842@domsch.com> On Mon, Feb 09, 2009 at 07:40:10AM -0500, Josh Boyer wrote: > On Sun, Feb 08, 2009 at 11:08:46PM -0600, Matt Domsch wrote: > >On Sun, Feb 08, 2009 at 11:28:22PM -0500, Scott Williams wrote: > >> Rahul, > >> > >> Jesse Keating still owns fedoralegacy.org and so far has requested we > >> not use that name. Tentatively looking at FedoraForever.org. We > >> would like to use Fedora in the domain name since we will be packaging > >> security updates explicitly for EOL Fedora versions. I have also > >> looked into working under Fedora Unity, but at this time we will > >> remain separate projects. > > > >Any reason why a separate domain name is needed? Why not something > >like eol-security.fedoraproject.org for a server name, which FI can > >redirect to your hosting service? > > Because that has the implication that it's part of the fedora project, > which I don't think is the case here. At least not yet. Yeah, but I tend to dislike the practice of forcing a new idea/subproject to have to distinguish (at a domain level) it's place in the Fedora universe. Seems like it adds a lot of overhead to push past the status quo. Can't we, with website verbage, control the message we want end users to understand? If not, is another domain really going to make that much of a difference in that message being understood? From jwboyer at gmail.com Mon Feb 9 13:32:27 2009 From: jwboyer at gmail.com (Josh Boyer) Date: Mon, 9 Feb 2009 08:32:27 -0500 Subject: "Fedora" in a domain name In-Reply-To: <20090209132814.GB13842@domsch.com> References: <5216be500902082028j4164763dpb368b5cb1592d1a7@mail.gmail.com> <20090209050845.GA13842@domsch.com> <20090209123948.GA2297@yoda.jdub.homelinux.org> <20090209132814.GB13842@domsch.com> Message-ID: <20090209133227.GB2297@yoda.jdub.homelinux.org> On Mon, Feb 09, 2009 at 07:28:14AM -0600, Matt Domsch wrote: >On Mon, Feb 09, 2009 at 07:40:10AM -0500, Josh Boyer wrote: >> On Sun, Feb 08, 2009 at 11:08:46PM -0600, Matt Domsch wrote: >> >On Sun, Feb 08, 2009 at 11:28:22PM -0500, Scott Williams wrote: >> >> Rahul, >> >> >> >> Jesse Keating still owns fedoralegacy.org and so far has requested we >> >> not use that name. Tentatively looking at FedoraForever.org. We >> >> would like to use Fedora in the domain name since we will be packaging >> >> security updates explicitly for EOL Fedora versions. I have also >> >> looked into working under Fedora Unity, but at this time we will >> >> remain separate projects. >> > >> >Any reason why a separate domain name is needed? Why not something >> >like eol-security.fedoraproject.org for a server name, which FI can >> >redirect to your hosting service? >> >> Because that has the implication that it's part of the fedora project, >> which I don't think is the case here. At least not yet. > >Yeah, but I tend to dislike the practice of forcing a new >idea/subproject to have to distinguish (at a domain level) it's place >in the Fedora universe. Seems like it adds a lot of overhead to push >past the status quo. > >Can't we, with website verbage, control the message we want end users >to understand? If not, is another domain really going to make that >much of a difference in that message being understood? We could try, but people hardly ever read that stuff. My primary concern is getting bugs/requests for packages in the main Fedora bugzilla and lists for stuff that is EOL. We have an EOL for a reason. That's possible whether a new domain is created or not. I'm just wondering if it would exacerbate the situation even more if it was just a sub-domain of fp.o josh From mspevack at redhat.com Mon Feb 9 14:15:18 2009 From: mspevack at redhat.com (Max Spevack) Date: Mon, 9 Feb 2009 15:15:18 +0100 (CET) Subject: "Fedora" in a domain name In-Reply-To: <5216be500902082014wb12243bo6d0113ff36351714@mail.gmail.com> References: <5216be500902082014wb12243bo6d0113ff36351714@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: On Sun, 8 Feb 2009, Scott Williams wrote: > I'm starting a project to package security updates for EOL versions of > Fedora and was interested in possibly using the word "Fedora" within > the domain URL. I intend to carefully follow the guidelines in > http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Legal/TrademarkGuidelines and am seeking > the consent of the Fedora board before registering any URLs. I'm not particularly interested in debating the domain name question, because Paul and the rest of the FPB have taken care of that. What I am curious to know, Scott, is what you think has changed in the community or in the scope of what you want to do w/ EOL security updates that will make this project more compelling for participation than Fedora Legacy. Fedora Legacy was successful for quite a while, and its shutdown was not a failure on its part, but rather a realization of two key points: (1) It was in the better interest of the larger Fedora Project to have the talents that were doing Fedora Legacy more focused on the new stuff happening in Rawhide or in other parts of the Project. The opportunity cost of Fedora Legacy was quite high. (2) For people who wanted the legacy support, an enterprise distro, which already had process and infrastructure to provide that longer suppot was a more efficient choice. In other words, Fedora's niche, combined with the larger Red Hat Enterprise (and rebuilds) ecosystem around it, meant that folks were spending a ton of time on Fedora legacy work for not a whole lot of payoff. I'm not trying to discourage you. I'm simply trying to get a sense as to whether you think some of these points have changed, or perhaps are no longer valid. ===== I'm curious how much further you are going to try to extend the life of older Fedora distros via security updates. What are you starting with? --Max From stickster at gmail.com Mon Feb 9 14:32:37 2009 From: stickster at gmail.com (Paul W. Frields) Date: Mon, 9 Feb 2009 09:32:37 -0500 Subject: "Fedora" in a domain name In-Reply-To: <20090209133227.GB2297@yoda.jdub.homelinux.org> References: <5216be500902082028j4164763dpb368b5cb1592d1a7@mail.gmail.com> <20090209050845.GA13842@domsch.com> <20090209123948.GA2297@yoda.jdub.homelinux.org> <20090209132814.GB13842@domsch.com> <20090209133227.GB2297@yoda.jdub.homelinux.org> Message-ID: <20090209143237.GB8694@localhost.localdomain> On Mon, Feb 09, 2009 at 08:32:27AM -0500, Josh Boyer wrote: > On Mon, Feb 09, 2009 at 07:28:14AM -0600, Matt Domsch wrote: > >On Mon, Feb 09, 2009 at 07:40:10AM -0500, Josh Boyer wrote: > >> On Sun, Feb 08, 2009 at 11:08:46PM -0600, Matt Domsch wrote: > >> >On Sun, Feb 08, 2009 at 11:28:22PM -0500, Scott Williams wrote: > >> >> Rahul, > >> >> > >> >> Jesse Keating still owns fedoralegacy.org and so far has requested we > >> >> not use that name. Tentatively looking at FedoraForever.org. We > >> >> would like to use Fedora in the domain name since we will be packaging > >> >> security updates explicitly for EOL Fedora versions. I have also > >> >> looked into working under Fedora Unity, but at this time we will > >> >> remain separate projects. > >> > > >> >Any reason why a separate domain name is needed? Why not something > >> >like eol-security.fedoraproject.org for a server name, which FI can > >> >redirect to your hosting service? > >> > >> Because that has the implication that it's part of the fedora project, > >> which I don't think is the case here. At least not yet. > > > >Yeah, but I tend to dislike the practice of forcing a new > >idea/subproject to have to distinguish (at a domain level) it's place > >in the Fedora universe. Seems like it adds a lot of overhead to push > >past the status quo. > > > >Can't we, with website verbage, control the message we want end users > >to understand? If not, is another domain really going to make that > >much of a difference in that message being understood? > > We could try, but people hardly ever read that stuff. My primary > concern is getting bugs/requests for packages in the main Fedora > bugzilla and lists for stuff that is EOL. We have an EOL for a reason. > > That's possible whether a new domain is created or not. I'm just > wondering if it would exacerbate the situation even more if it was > just a sub-domain of fp.o We recently purchased the "fedoracommunity.org" domain, and I think that would be a good place to establish this effort -- in other words, "eol.fedoracommunity.org" or some similar URL. It makes clear that the project is part of a community effort as opposed to being part of the official "fedoraproject.org" domain. I'm not going to short-circuit the discussion of the value or scope of this project, just wanted to clarify that we do have an appropriate domain available. Does this sound amenable? -- Paul W. Frields http://paul.frields.org/ gpg fingerprint: 3DA6 A0AC 6D58 FEC4 0233 5906 ACDB C937 BD11 3717 http://redhat.com/ - - - - http://pfrields.fedorapeople.org/ irc.freenode.net: stickster @ #fedora-docs, #fedora-devel, #fredlug -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: not available URL: From stickster at gmail.com Mon Feb 9 14:36:56 2009 From: stickster at gmail.com (Paul W. Frields) Date: Mon, 9 Feb 2009 09:36:56 -0500 Subject: "Fedora" in a domain name In-Reply-To: <20090209050845.GA13842@domsch.com> References: <5216be500902082028j4164763dpb368b5cb1592d1a7@mail.gmail.com> <20090209050845.GA13842@domsch.com> Message-ID: <20090209143656.GC8694@localhost.localdomain> On Sun, Feb 08, 2009 at 11:08:46PM -0600, Matt Domsch wrote: > On Sun, Feb 08, 2009 at 11:28:22PM -0500, Scott Williams wrote: > > Rahul, > > > > Jesse Keating still owns fedoralegacy.org and so far has requested we > > not use that name. Tentatively looking at FedoraForever.org. We > > would like to use Fedora in the domain name since we will be packaging > > security updates explicitly for EOL Fedora versions. I have also > > looked into working under Fedora Unity, but at this time we will > > remain separate projects. > > Any reason why a separate domain name is needed? Why not something > like eol-security.fedoraproject.org for a server name, which FI can > redirect to your hosting service? > > While I like the alliteration of FedoraForever, are you really > planning on posting security updates for all Fedora releases forever? > :-) Sounds like an insanely daunting task to me. > > Trademark-wise, we're looking at encouraging would-be domain > purchasers to instead ask the Fedora Project to buy the domain on > their behalf, and simply point DNS at the subproject's hosting > service. Among other things, this would let Fedora maintain ultimate > control over the domain (and thus the Fedora trademark). Paul is > working with legal to understand what kind of budget we might > have/need to offer this ability. I think that with our purchase of "fedoracommunity.org," we have a fairly flexible solution now. We can manage the subdomains as we like, and I've asked the Infrastructure team to tell us how they would like requests to flow, so they can manage and prioritize their workload appropriately. https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-infrastructure-list/2009-February/msg00053.html Note that Fedora Infrastructure is not currently offering hosting for this domain -- only managing the DNS on behalf of the community. -- Paul W. Frields http://paul.frields.org/ gpg fingerprint: 3DA6 A0AC 6D58 FEC4 0233 5906 ACDB C937 BD11 3717 http://redhat.com/ - - - - http://pfrields.fedorapeople.org/ irc.freenode.net: stickster @ #fedora-docs, #fedora-devel, #fredlug -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: not available URL: From sundaram at fedoraproject.org Mon Feb 9 14:46:40 2009 From: sundaram at fedoraproject.org (Rahul Sundaram) Date: Mon, 09 Feb 2009 20:16:40 +0530 Subject: "Fedora" in a domain name In-Reply-To: <5216be500902082028j4164763dpb368b5cb1592d1a7@mail.gmail.com> References: <5216be500902082028j4164763dpb368b5cb1592d1a7@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <499041D0.20407@fedoraproject.org> Scott Williams wrote: > Rahul, > > Jesse Keating still owns fedoralegacy.org and so far has requested we > not use that name. Tentatively looking at FedoraForever.org. We > would like to use Fedora in the domain name since we will be packaging > security updates explicitly for EOL Fedora versions. I have also > looked into working under Fedora Unity, but at this time we will > remain separate projects. When Fedora Legacy shut down, a thread on reviving it earlier had a lot of people expressing their desire to have a better name. So perhaps it is wise not to reuse it but I don't think Fedora Forever gives the right idea. Maybe "extended community updates (ECU)" for Fedora? Rahul From vwfoxguru at gmail.com Mon Feb 9 15:07:52 2009 From: vwfoxguru at gmail.com (Scott Williams) Date: Mon, 9 Feb 2009 10:07:52 -0500 Subject: "Fedora" in a domain name Message-ID: <5216be500902090707p66c2f845n78f036c3a7a68565@mail.gmail.com> [Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index] Re: "Fedora" in a domain name * From: "Paul W. Frields" * To: fedora-advisory-board redhat com * Subject: Re: "Fedora" in a domain name * Date: Mon, 9 Feb 2009 09:36:56 -0500 On Sun, Feb 08, 2009 at 11:08:46PM -0600, Matt Domsch wrote: > On Sun, Feb 08, 2009 at 11:28:22PM -0500, Scott Williams wrote: > > Rahul, > > > > Jesse Keating still owns fedoralegacy.org and so far has requested we > > not use that name. Tentatively looking at FedoraForever.org. We > > would like to use Fedora in the domain name since we will be packaging > > security updates explicitly for EOL Fedora versions. I have also > > looked into working under Fedora Unity, but at this time we will > > remain separate projects. > > Any reason why a separate domain name is needed? Why not something > like eol-security.fedoraproject.org for a server name, which FI can > redirect to your hosting service? > > While I like the alliteration of FedoraForever, are you really > planning on posting security updates for all Fedora releases forever? > :-) Sounds like an insanely daunting task to me. > > Trademark-wise, we're looking at encouraging would-be domain > purchasers to instead ask the Fedora Project to buy the domain on > their behalf, and simply point DNS at the subproject's hosting > service. Among other things, this would let Fedora maintain ultimate > control over the domain (and thus the Fedora trademark). Paul is > working with legal to understand what kind of budget we might > have/need to offer this ability. I think that with our purchase of "fedoracommunity.org," we have a fairly flexible solution now. We can manage the subdomains as we like, and I've asked the Infrastructure team to tell us how they would like requests to flow, so they can manage and prioritize their workload appropriately. https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-infrastructure-list/2009-February/msg00053.html Note that Fedora Infrastructure is not currently offering hosting for this domain -- only managing the DNS on behalf of the community. -- Paul W. Frields http://paul.frields.org/ ---------------------------------------------------- Part of my intention for a separate domain is to keep as distinguished as possible from fp.o. In short, to allow this project to be tested on it's own merits, and also to avoid end user confusion. A distinct domain, in my opinion, is the best solution for that. Ultimately, I would welcome this project's full absorption into Fedora project, but in the meantime I would like to remain as independent as possible. Although I trust this would likely not to be the issue, but if the domain is owned by Fedora, what would keep Fedora from shutting us down at will, and forcing us to get a new domain? With my pledge to strictly follow the Trademark guidelines as set forth by Legal in the wiki, I would like to register a domain in my own name for now: FedoraForever.{com,net,org}. I also intend to use licenses, such as OPL, to allow compatibility with fp.o in foresight of potential future collaboration. Scott Williams (vwbusguy) From sundaram at fedoraproject.org Mon Feb 9 15:20:14 2009 From: sundaram at fedoraproject.org (Rahul Sundaram) Date: Mon, 09 Feb 2009 20:50:14 +0530 Subject: "Fedora" in a domain name In-Reply-To: <5216be500902090707p66c2f845n78f036c3a7a68565@mail.gmail.com> References: <5216be500902090707p66c2f845n78f036c3a7a68565@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <499049AE.70504@fedoraproject.org> Hi [ Please quote properly. Writing under the footer makes your mail almost invisible to many clients and makes it difficult to quote] > Part of my intention for a separate domain is to keep as distinguished > as possible from fp.o. In short, to allow this project to be tested > on it's own merits, and also to avoid end user confusion. A distinct > domain, in my opinion, is the best solution for that. Ultimately, I > would welcome this project's full absorption into Fedora project, but > in the meantime I would like to remain as independent as possible. > Although I trust this would likely not to be the issue, but if the > domain is owned by Fedora, what would keep Fedora from shutting us > down at will, and forcing us to get a new domain? This is a very flimsy argument. If you register a domain under a trademark license from Fedora Project, Fedora can ask you not use the name anymore at any point and you are back to where you fear you would be. If this is a serious concern, your domain should simply not contain Fedora at all. Rahul From inode0 at gmail.com Mon Feb 9 15:45:05 2009 From: inode0 at gmail.com (inode0) Date: Mon, 9 Feb 2009 09:45:05 -0600 Subject: Fedora Board Meeting Recap 2009-02-03 In-Reply-To: <498E870E.5040501@redhat.com> References: <4988CD6A.7010304@redhat.com> <498E870E.5040501@redhat.com> Message-ID: On Sun, Feb 8, 2009 at 1:17 AM, Tom spot Callaway wrote: > On 2009-02-08 at 2:06:33 -0500, inode0 wrote: >> I will admit I'm now baffled by spot's position expressed in the BZ. >> If it is code, and I don't see why it is any different than cowsay >> without a free perl in that respect, then it should be rejected for >> the reasons spot gave here. > > Well, OVM doesn't execute. It doesn't need to be compiled into anything. > It's really content. Ok, I guess OVM being characterized as source code and a class library (and it looks like it is exactly that) and the thing FESCo requested to be added calling itself a compiler and simulator made me think it was code that needed to be compiled. But we aren't using the code -> compile -> execute model in this area. So maybe it is code but it isn't executable code and thus falls into content. So OVM might be closer to just an rpm containing a library of cow files in the absence of the program cowsay needed to interpret/manipulate/display them?! The cow library can be thought of as source code but it never becomes executable, it is just a language only cowsay with as assist from perl understands how to use. > Think of it as a .png file. It's obviously content, because it doesn't > execute, nor does it need to be compiled into anything, but for it to be > used, something has to be able to parse the PNG format. > > We judge content on whether it enhances the user experience. I'd argue > that the OVM content does enhance the experience for an Electronics Lab > User, but FESCo disagrees. That's why they get to make the ultimate call. :) Thanks again spot for helping me sort this out. While I think I understand the distinctions being made here perhaps we should stop. :) John From vwfoxguru at gmail.com Mon Feb 9 15:45:23 2009 From: vwfoxguru at gmail.com (Scott Williams) Date: Mon, 9 Feb 2009 10:45:23 -0500 Subject: "Fedora" in a domain name Message-ID: <5216be500902090745s43e6dcb2od4925668f37c26f0@mail.gmail.com> > > > Part of my intention for a separate domain is to keep as distinguished > > as possible from fp.o. In short, to allow this project to be tested > > on it's own merits, and also to avoid end user confusion. A distinct > > domain, in my opinion, is the best solution for that. Ultimately, I > > would welcome this project's full absorption into Fedora project, but > > in the meantime I would like to remain as independent as possible. > > Although I trust this would likely not to be the issue, but if the > > domain is owned by Fedora, what would keep Fedora from shutting us > > down at will, and forcing us to get a new domain? > > This is a very flimsy argument. If you register a domain under a trademark > license from Fedora Project, Fedora can ask you not use the name anymore at > any point and you are back to where you fear you would be. If this is a > serious concern, your domain should simply not contain Fedora at all. > > Rahul > Rahul, That is a very good point. In the same, I see no compelling reason for Fedora to hold the domain. We will meet all the criteria in http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Legal/TrademarkGuidelines#Web_sites. This will be a site put on by community members for the benefit of the Fedora community, and since Fedora would have the ability to request a takedown for trademark violation if those guidelines are no longer met, then Fedora should have nothing to fear with another party holding the domain. ~Scott -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From sundaram at fedoraproject.org Mon Feb 9 15:56:47 2009 From: sundaram at fedoraproject.org (Rahul Sundaram) Date: Mon, 09 Feb 2009 21:26:47 +0530 Subject: "Fedora" in a domain name In-Reply-To: <5216be500902090745s43e6dcb2od4925668f37c26f0@mail.gmail.com> References: <5216be500902090745s43e6dcb2od4925668f37c26f0@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <4990523F.2070908@fedoraproject.org> Scott Williams wrote: > Rahul, > > That is a very good point. In the same, I see no compelling reason for > Fedora to hold the domain. We will meet all the criteria in > http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Legal/TrademarkGuidelines#Web_sites. This > will be a site put on by community members for the benefit of the Fedora > community, and since Fedora would have the ability to request a takedown > for trademark violation if those guidelines are no longer met, then > Fedora should have nothing to fear with another party holding the domain. It isn't fear. It is about what is convenient from a legal and community perspective. It would merely be easier if we avoid round trips to Red Hat Legal since Red Hat doesn't have a huge legal team and there is usually a large pile of issues including Fedora ones (thanks Spot!). If you really want a separate domain, that is certainly a choice for you to make. It is all explained in http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Local_community_domains However note that the trademark guidelines you are referring to as well as the page above is still a draft and needs vetting from Red Hat Legal. Rahul From jwboyer at gmail.com Mon Feb 9 16:03:14 2009 From: jwboyer at gmail.com (Josh Boyer) Date: Mon, 9 Feb 2009 11:03:14 -0500 Subject: "Fedora" in a domain name In-Reply-To: <20090209143237.GB8694@localhost.localdomain> References: <5216be500902082028j4164763dpb368b5cb1592d1a7@mail.gmail.com> <20090209050845.GA13842@domsch.com> <20090209123948.GA2297@yoda.jdub.homelinux.org> <20090209132814.GB13842@domsch.com> <20090209133227.GB2297@yoda.jdub.homelinux.org> <20090209143237.GB8694@localhost.localdomain> Message-ID: <20090209160314.GC2297@yoda.jdub.homelinux.org> On Mon, Feb 09, 2009 at 09:32:37AM -0500, Paul W. Frields wrote: >On Mon, Feb 09, 2009 at 08:32:27AM -0500, Josh Boyer wrote: >> On Mon, Feb 09, 2009 at 07:28:14AM -0600, Matt Domsch wrote: >> >On Mon, Feb 09, 2009 at 07:40:10AM -0500, Josh Boyer wrote: >> >> On Sun, Feb 08, 2009 at 11:08:46PM -0600, Matt Domsch wrote: >> >> >On Sun, Feb 08, 2009 at 11:28:22PM -0500, Scott Williams wrote: >> >> >> Rahul, >> >> >> >> >> >> Jesse Keating still owns fedoralegacy.org and so far has requested we >> >> >> not use that name. Tentatively looking at FedoraForever.org. We >> >> >> would like to use Fedora in the domain name since we will be packaging >> >> >> security updates explicitly for EOL Fedora versions. I have also >> >> >> looked into working under Fedora Unity, but at this time we will >> >> >> remain separate projects. >> >> > >> >> >Any reason why a separate domain name is needed? Why not something >> >> >like eol-security.fedoraproject.org for a server name, which FI can >> >> >redirect to your hosting service? >> >> >> >> Because that has the implication that it's part of the fedora project, >> >> which I don't think is the case here. At least not yet. >> > >> >Yeah, but I tend to dislike the practice of forcing a new >> >idea/subproject to have to distinguish (at a domain level) it's place >> >in the Fedora universe. Seems like it adds a lot of overhead to push >> >past the status quo. >> > >> >Can't we, with website verbage, control the message we want end users >> >to understand? If not, is another domain really going to make that >> >much of a difference in that message being understood? >> >> We could try, but people hardly ever read that stuff. My primary >> concern is getting bugs/requests for packages in the main Fedora >> bugzilla and lists for stuff that is EOL. We have an EOL for a reason. >> >> That's possible whether a new domain is created or not. I'm just >> wondering if it would exacerbate the situation even more if it was >> just a sub-domain of fp.o > >We recently purchased the "fedoracommunity.org" domain, and I think >that would be a good place to establish this effort -- in other words, >"eol.fedoracommunity.org" or some similar URL. It makes clear that >the project is part of a community effort as opposed to being part of >the official "fedoraproject.org" domain. > >I'm not going to short-circuit the discussion of the value or scope of >this project, just wanted to clarify that we do have an appropriate >domain available. Does this sound amenable? To me, yes. Thanks Paul. josh From vwfoxguru at gmail.com Mon Feb 9 16:02:59 2009 From: vwfoxguru at gmail.com (Scott Williams) Date: Mon, 9 Feb 2009 11:02:59 -0500 Subject: "Fedora" in a domain name Message-ID: <5216be500902090802l409b37e8ueb2798bfd213f63a@mail.gmail.com> > > It isn't fear. It is about what is convenient from a legal and community > perspective. It would merely be easier if we avoid round trips to Red Hat > Legal since Red Hat doesn't have a huge legal team and there is usually a > large pile of issues including Fedora ones (thanks Spot!). If you really > want a separate domain, that is certainly a choice for you to make. It is > all explained in > > http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Local_community_domains > > However note that the trademark guidelines you are referring to as well as > the page above is still a draft and needs vetting from Red Hat Legal. > > Rahul > Rahul, Thanks for the information. We have a meeting scheduled for tonight, so I will bring this up at the meeting and then reply back to the board. I appreciate the input from the board on this. Thanks, Scott -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From sundaram at fedoraproject.org Mon Feb 9 16:09:20 2009 From: sundaram at fedoraproject.org (Rahul Sundaram) Date: Mon, 09 Feb 2009 21:39:20 +0530 Subject: "Fedora" in a domain name In-Reply-To: <5216be500902090802l409b37e8ueb2798bfd213f63a@mail.gmail.com> References: <5216be500902090802l409b37e8ueb2798bfd213f63a@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <49905530.6050209@fedoraproject.org> Scott Williams wrote: > Rahul, > > Thanks for the information. We have a meeting scheduled for tonight, so > I will bring this up at the meeting and then reply back to the board. I > appreciate the input from the board on this. Note that I am no longer a board member and all my opinions are just that. My suggestion is that you define goals, pick a name, get community participation and get the project going a bit before settling on a domain in that order. Domain names are probably in the bottom list of concerns for this proposal. Rahul From vwfoxguru at gmail.com Mon Feb 9 16:26:33 2009 From: vwfoxguru at gmail.com (Scott Williams) Date: Mon, 9 Feb 2009 11:26:33 -0500 Subject: Fedora EOL Security Updates Message-ID: <5216be500902090826y31d9af9eo8ec570b719aac1ae@mail.gmail.com> Correction, meeting will be at 01:00 UTC, which is 8pm Eastern time, in #Fedora-meeting. Thanks, Scott -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From stickster at gmail.com Mon Feb 9 16:29:25 2009 From: stickster at gmail.com (Paul W. Frields) Date: Mon, 9 Feb 2009 11:29:25 -0500 Subject: "Fedora" in a domain name In-Reply-To: <5216be500902090707p66c2f845n78f036c3a7a68565@mail.gmail.com> References: <5216be500902090707p66c2f845n78f036c3a7a68565@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <20090209162925.GH8694@localhost.localdomain> On Mon, Feb 09, 2009 at 10:07:52AM -0500, Scott Williams wrote: > Part of my intention for a separate domain is to keep as distinguished > as possible from fp.o. In short, to allow this project to be tested > on it's own merits, and also to avoid end user confusion. A distinct > domain, in my opinion, is the best solution for that. Ultimately, I > would welcome this project's full absorption into Fedora project, but > in the meantime I would like to remain as independent as possible. > Although I trust this would likely not to be the issue, but if the > domain is owned by Fedora, what would keep Fedora from shutting us > down at will, and forcing us to get a new domain? Well, I would hope that the time you've spent in Fedora would make it clear that we *don't* want to shut community domains down which are trying new things. There is, after all, a very wide stretch between not wanting to devote project hosting and resources to some specific experiment, and trying to prevent the community from running it independently! :-) In fact, that's why, in part, we established the "fedoracommunity.org" domain -- because that way we can offer a domain to local or specific Fedora-related communities, and for which the communities don't have to pay out of pocket. That aside, I'm not sure how any domain with the word "Fedora" in it is any more removed than any other. In other words, "fedoraforever" is no more removed than "fedoracommunity" in my estimation. Nevertheless, we've set out that local communities can establish these domains with a proper license agreement, and I for one am happy to follow through. > With my pledge to strictly follow the Trademark guidelines as set > forth by Legal in the wiki, I would like to register a domain in my > own name for now: FedoraForever.{com,net,org}. I also intend to use > licenses, such as OPL, to allow compatibility with fp.o in foresight > of potential future collaboration. Speaking purely from one contributor to another, and in the interest of not having you be unhappy in the long run, I'd recommend that before you invest out of pocket for domains, you have other details of your project nailed down. If you find that participation isn't there, for some reason, it would be a shame to have paid in advance for the domains. That having been said, if you're dead-set on registering this domain regardless, I'll be happy to add this to the Board's agenda for this week and get back with you right afterward. You should wait to register until you hear back from the Board. -- Paul W. Frields http://paul.frields.org/ gpg fingerprint: 3DA6 A0AC 6D58 FEC4 0233 5906 ACDB C937 BD11 3717 http://redhat.com/ - - - - http://pfrields.fedorapeople.org/ irc.freenode.net: stickster @ #fedora-docs, #fedora-devel, #fredlug -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: not available URL: From tcallawa at redhat.com Tue Feb 10 15:30:58 2009 From: tcallawa at redhat.com (Tom "spot" Callaway) Date: Tue, 10 Feb 2009 10:30:58 -0500 Subject: Fedora Board Meeting Recap 2009-02-03 In-Reply-To: References: <4988CD6A.7010304@redhat.com> <498E870E.5040501@redhat.com> Message-ID: <49919DB2.5070904@redhat.com> On 2009-02-09 at 10:45:05 -0500, inode0 wrote: > Thanks again spot for helping me sort this out. While I think I > understand the distinctions being made here perhaps we should stop. :) I spoke to Chitlesh a bit at FOSDEM about this, and he made an additional point that is worth noting: In the Semi-conductor industry, the OVM is not simply used in the code or even content sense, but it is also used as reference documentation. Just to further complicate things. It seems like this is an area where a free software implementation that leverages the OVM would be a welcome addition to the toolchest. Google Summer of Code anyone? :) ~spot From poelstra at redhat.com Tue Feb 10 21:32:16 2009 From: poelstra at redhat.com (John Poelstra) Date: Tue, 10 Feb 2009 13:32:16 -0800 Subject: Fedora Board Recap 2009-02-10 Message-ID: <4991F260.7060101@redhat.com> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Board/Meetings/2009-02-10 == Roll Call == * Board Members: Bill Nottingham, Paul Frields, Harald Hoyer, Seth Vidal, Chris Tyler, Chris Aillon, Jesse Keating, Dimitris Glezos, and Spot Callaway * Special guest: Max Spevack * Secretary: John Poelstra * Regrets: Matt Domsch == Links to last meetings == * https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Board/Meetings/2009-02-03 * https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Board/Meetings/2009-01-27 == Follow-up To Previous Business == * "What is Fedora?" discussion * Paul drafting framework to decide process to arrive at == Max Spevack Update == * Max hijacked the entire agenda and kept the Board on the call 15 extra minutes! Who does he think he is? === Fedora Store in EMEA === * Looking for a way to distribute goods in an efficient manner * Hard to find good quality and distribution networks * Looking for board approval to move forward with linux-onlineshop.de ** Customized skinned Fedora store ** Built on FOSS ** Custom fedora URL ** Will handle warehouse space and shipping ** Individual sales subsidize further Fedora related activities via Fedora EMEA ** Board would like more information into: *** What are the margins the vendor makes on these goods? *** Quality of goods and sustainability of this business *** Where/how (country and conditions) are the goods being produced? * ACTIONS: Max to followup on questions and get back to the board === Denoting Fedora sponsorship === * http://fedoraproject.org/en/sponsors * We do not have existing guidelines around receiving goods or services from sponsors and what is provided in return * How do we give Red Hat reasonable credit for sponsoring Fedora? ** Is there a special category for Red Hat? * hardware, hosting/services, and events are forms of sponsorship Fedora is able to presently accept * ACTIONS--Spot will lead investigation of ways to: *# give recognition to Red Hat *# recognize other sponsors *# design presentation === Community Architecture & LXDE In Fedora === * Looking for ways to promote LXDE and help them move forward * Max met with president of LXDE Foundation at FOSDEM * Can Fedora endorse LXDE in a certain way? * Dimitris reports that conversations are underway to use Transifex in LXDE * BOARD RESPONSE: ** A custom LXDE spin easily addresses this request ** We encourage all desktops to participate in this way === FUDCon LATAM 2009 and FUDCon EMEA 2009 plans === * Rodrigo Padula (recently hired by Red Hat) is helping to coordinate FUDCon at FISL * Community Architecture team is funding FUDCon at FISL [http://www.fisl.org.br/] & LinuxTag [http://www.linuxtag.org/2009/] * Hoping to have FUDCon in conjunction with LinuxTag ** 10,000+ people at LinuxTag ** FUDCon would be co-located and integrated with LinuxTag (unlike Red Hat Summit 2008) * Community Architecture brings this issue forward because the result is that funding would not be available for a North America FUDCon until September 2009 at the earliest * BOARD RESPONSE: Fully support these events and use of funds. Max & Community team to continue working on these events. == Future Business == * Trademark & domain name registration matters * "What Is Fedora?" discussion * Goals & objectives of the board * Status of security policies From kevin at tummy.com Wed Feb 11 19:50:38 2009 From: kevin at tummy.com (Kevin Fenzi) Date: Wed, 11 Feb 2009 12:50:38 -0700 Subject: Fedora Board Meeting Recap 2009-02-03 In-Reply-To: <49919DB2.5070904@redhat.com> References: <4988CD6A.7010304@redhat.com> <498E870E.5040501@redhat.com> <49919DB2.5070904@redhat.com> Message-ID: <20090211125038.7d07049e@ohm.scrye.com> On Tue, 10 Feb 2009 10:30:58 -0500 "Tom \"spot\" Callaway" wrote: > On 2009-02-09 at 10:45:05 -0500, inode0 wrote: > > Thanks again spot for helping me sort this out. While I think I > > understand the distinctions being made here perhaps we should > > stop. :) > > I spoke to Chitlesh a bit at FOSDEM about this, and he made an > additional point that is worth noting: In the Semi-conductor industry, > the OVM is not simply used in the code or even content sense, but it > is also used as reference documentation. I was wondering if that might be the case. I specifically asked if there was some other use for this package, but got no answer. ;( I'm not sure it could be packaged in a way that made clear that it was documentation, but yet was still usable to those that had the non free tool to use it. If that could be made to happen, I would probably support it's inclusion. > Just to further complicate things. > > It seems like this is an area where a free software implementation > that leverages the OVM would be a welcome addition to the toolchest. > Google Summer of Code anyone? :) Yes, that would be great! > ~spot kevin -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 197 bytes Desc: not available URL: From lyos.gemininorezel at gmail.com Thu Feb 12 21:50:33 2009 From: lyos.gemininorezel at gmail.com (Lyos Gemini Norezel) Date: Thu, 12 Feb 2009 16:50:33 -0500 Subject: power savings: a goal of the fedora project In-Reply-To: <1233625862.27307.22.camel@rosebud> References: <1233625862.27307.22.camel@rosebud> Message-ID: <499499A9.2010401@gmail.com> seth vidal wrote: > Hi, > I'd like to suggest that saving power be a goal of the fedora project in > its development of the fedora linux distribution. If there are settings > we can set which will not deeply and adversely impact users but will > conserve energy then should set them. > > I'd like to hear from others on this subject. > > -sv > I know I'm late on this one... but I'll throw in my 2 cents anyway. The only semi-serious issue with this that I can see... is a possible adverse affect on BOINC users. Perhaps such a feature could include an auto-detect mechanism to prevent any adverse affect when BOINC is running? Lyos Gemini Norezel From mostafa.daneshvar at gmail.com Sat Feb 14 23:04:21 2009 From: mostafa.daneshvar at gmail.com (Mostafa Daneshvar) Date: Sun, 15 Feb 2009 02:34:21 +0330 Subject: requesting a trademark license for our community Message-ID: <1234652661.17658.3.camel@localhost.localdomain> Dear Board; We, as Iranian community, want your permission to use "fedoraproject.ir".One of our members registered it without considering related regulations mentioned in "http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Legal/". within these few months this community attracted a lot of users,nearly 510 registered. According to logs our website approximately has 5000 pages view each day. Our forum has 5500 posts (up to now). Considering our efforts within this time, we need your license to continue our efforts. We need to grant us to use Fedora logo in our website. We should be thankful for your immediate response In behalf of Iranian community; Mostafa Daneshvar http://mostafadaneshvar.com -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 197 bytes Desc: This is a digitally signed message part URL: From jbwillia at math.vt.edu Mon Feb 16 18:27:06 2009 From: jbwillia at math.vt.edu (ben) Date: Mon, 16 Feb 2009 13:27:06 -0500 Subject: Fedora Unity Announces Fedora 10 Re-spins Message-ID: <4999AFFA.9080903@math.vt.edu> *The Fedora Unity Project is proud to announce the release of new ISO Re-Spins of Fedora 10.* These Re-Spin ISOs are based on the officially released Fedora 10 installation media and include all updates released as of February 10th, 2009. The ISO images are available for i386, x86_64, PPC architectures via Jigdo and or Torrent starting Monday February 16th, 2009. Go to http://spins.fedoraunity.org/spins to get the bits! PPC Re-spins PPC isos are being released marked * **UNTESTED**, *Please Test and give us feedback, Thanks to We would like to give a special thanks to the following for testing this Re-Spin: - zcat Jason Farrell - vwbusguy- Scott Williams - Southern_Gentleman Ben Williams - kanarip Jeroen van Meeuwen - fenrus2 Dennis Johnson - Harley-D Dana Hoffman Jr Testing Results A full test matrix can be found at http://spins.fedoraunity.org/Members/Southern_Gentleman/fedora-10-20090210-re-spin-test-matrix/ A full list of bugs, packages and changelogs that have been updated in this Re-Spin can be reviewed on http://spins.fedoraunity.org/changelogs/20090210/ About Fedora Unity Re-Spins 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 2.05GiB of downloads for a full install. This is a community project, for and by the community. You can contribute to the community by joining our test process. Go to* http://spins.fedoraunity.org/spins* to get the bits! Assistance Needed 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). To report bugs in the Re-Spins please use http://bugs.fedoraunity.org/ -- Ben Williams Window-Linux Specialist Mathematics Department-Virginia Tech 561E McBryde Hall 540 231-2739 From stickster at gmail.com Mon Feb 16 21:12:48 2009 From: stickster at gmail.com (Paul Frields) Date: Mon, 16 Feb 2009 16:12:48 -0500 Subject: requesting a trademark license for our community In-Reply-To: <1234652661.17658.3.camel@localhost.localdomain> References: <1234652661.17658.3.camel@localhost.localdomain> Message-ID: On Sat, Feb 14, 2009 at 6:04 PM, Mostafa Daneshvar wrote: > Dear Board; > We, as Iranian community, want your permission to use > "fedoraproject.ir".One of our members registered it without considering > related regulations mentioned in > "http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Legal/". > within these few months this community attracted a lot of users,nearly > 510 registered. According to logs our website approximately has 5000 > pages view each day. Our forum has 5500 posts (up to now). > Considering our efforts within this time, we need your license to > continue our efforts. We need to grant us to use Fedora logo in our > website. > > We should be thankful for your immediate response Thank you for you email -- we're looking into this now, and will get back to you as soon as we can. Paul Frields Fedora Project Leader From skvidal at fedoraproject.org Tue Feb 17 19:40:43 2009 From: skvidal at fedoraproject.org (seth vidal) Date: Tue, 17 Feb 2009 14:40:43 -0500 Subject: linux foundation conference sad face Message-ID: <1234899643.16686.17.camel@rosebud> "* Linux Participation Panel - Measuring Community Contributions: A panel with Jono Bacon - Community Manager at Ubuntu, James Bottomley - kernel developer, Joe Brockmeier - Community Manager, OpenSuse and Dan Frye ? VP of Open Systems Development at IBM" A shame no one from Fedora could make it out there. Did we even get an invite? -sv From tcallawa at redhat.com Tue Feb 17 19:48:17 2009 From: tcallawa at redhat.com (Tom "spot" Callaway) Date: Tue, 17 Feb 2009 14:48:17 -0500 Subject: linux foundation conference sad face In-Reply-To: <1234899643.16686.17.camel@rosebud> References: <1234899643.16686.17.camel@rosebud> Message-ID: <499B1481.5090900@redhat.com> On 2009-02-17 at 14:40:43 -0500, seth vidal wrote: > "* Linux Participation Panel - Measuring Community Contributions: A > panel with Jono Bacon - Community Manager at Ubuntu, James Bottomley - > kernel developer, Joe Brockmeier - Community Manager, OpenSuse and Dan > Frye ? VP of Open Systems Development at IBM" > > > A shame no one from Fedora could make it out there. Did we even get an > invite? To the best of my knowledge, no. ~spot From mspevack at redhat.com Tue Feb 17 19:53:41 2009 From: mspevack at redhat.com (Max Spevack) Date: Tue, 17 Feb 2009 20:53:41 +0100 (CET) Subject: linux foundation conference sad face In-Reply-To: <1234899643.16686.17.camel@rosebud> References: <1234899643.16686.17.camel@rosebud> Message-ID: On Tue, 17 Feb 2009, seth vidal wrote: > "* Linux Participation Panel - Measuring Community Contributions: A > panel with Jono Bacon - Community Manager at Ubuntu, James Bottomley - > kernel developer, Joe Brockmeier - Community Manager, OpenSuse and Dan > Frye ? VP of Open Systems Development at IBM" > > A shame no one from Fedora could make it out there. Did we even get an > invite? No one from Red Hat's Community team was contacted, that I know of. --Max From skvidal at fedoraproject.org Tue Feb 17 20:02:39 2009 From: skvidal at fedoraproject.org (seth vidal) Date: Tue, 17 Feb 2009 15:02:39 -0500 Subject: linux foundation conference sad face In-Reply-To: References: <1234899643.16686.17.camel@rosebud> Message-ID: <1234900959.16686.45.camel@rosebud> On Tue, 2009-02-17 at 20:53 +0100, Max Spevack wrote: > On Tue, 17 Feb 2009, seth vidal wrote: > > > "* Linux Participation Panel - Measuring Community Contributions: A > > panel with Jono Bacon - Community Manager at Ubuntu, James Bottomley - > > kernel developer, Joe Brockmeier - Community Manager, OpenSuse and Dan > > Frye ? VP of Open Systems Development at IBM" > > > > A shame no one from Fedora could make it out there. Did we even get an > > invite? > > No one from Red Hat's Community team was contacted, that I know of. Nice of them, really. Karsten is in Cali, isn't he? Maybe he can sneak up there and heckle. -sv From stickster at gmail.com Tue Feb 17 22:12:39 2009 From: stickster at gmail.com (Paul W. Frields) Date: Tue, 17 Feb 2009 17:12:39 -0500 Subject: linux foundation conference sad face In-Reply-To: <1234899643.16686.17.camel@rosebud> References: <1234899643.16686.17.camel@rosebud> Message-ID: <20090217221239.GH20387@localhost.localdomain> On Tue, Feb 17, 2009 at 02:40:43PM -0500, seth vidal wrote: > "* Linux Participation Panel - Measuring Community Contributions: A > panel with Jono Bacon - Community Manager at Ubuntu, James Bottomley - > kernel developer, Joe Brockmeier - Community Manager, OpenSuse and Dan > Frye ? VP of Open Systems Development at IBM" > > > A shame no one from Fedora could make it out there. Did we even get an > invite? We didn't, as far as I know. -- Paul W. Frields http://paul.frields.org/ gpg fingerprint: 3DA6 A0AC 6D58 FEC4 0233 5906 ACDB C937 BD11 3717 http://redhat.com/ - - - - http://pfrields.fedorapeople.org/ irc.freenode.net: stickster @ #fedora-docs, #fedora-devel, #fredlug -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: not available URL: From matt at domsch.com Tue Feb 17 22:36:11 2009 From: matt at domsch.com (Matt Domsch) Date: Tue, 17 Feb 2009 22:36:11 +0000 Subject: linux foundation conference sad face In-Reply-To: <20090217221239.GH20387@localhost.localdomain> References: <1234899643.16686.17.camel@rosebud><20090217221239.GH20387@localhost.localdomain> Message-ID: <95572032-1234910158-cardhu_decombobulator_blackberry.rim.net-1618814266-@bxe1190.bisx.prod.on.blackberry> I'll be at the conference. Shall I wrangle a seat at the panel? -----Original Message----- From: "Paul W. Frields" Date: Tue, 17 Feb 2009 17:12:39 To: Subject: Re: linux foundation conference sad face _______________________________________________ fedora-advisory-board mailing list fedora-advisory-board at redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-advisory-board From skvidal at fedoraproject.org Tue Feb 17 22:42:20 2009 From: skvidal at fedoraproject.org (seth vidal) Date: Tue, 17 Feb 2009 17:42:20 -0500 Subject: linux foundation conference sad face In-Reply-To: <95572032-1234910158-cardhu_decombobulator_blackberry.rim.net-1618814266-@bxe1190.bisx.prod.on.blackberry> References: <1234899643.16686.17.camel@rosebud> <20090217221239.GH20387@localhost.localdomain> <95572032-1234910158-cardhu_decombobulator_blackberry.rim.net-1618814266-@bxe1190.bisx.prod.on.blackberry> Message-ID: <1234910540.16686.89.camel@rosebud> On Tue, 2009-02-17 at 22:36 +0000, Matt Domsch wrote: > I'll be at the conference. Shall I wrangle a seat at the panel? That'd be excellent, imo. -sv From stickster at gmail.com Wed Feb 18 01:58:42 2009 From: stickster at gmail.com (Paul W. Frields) Date: Tue, 17 Feb 2009 20:58:42 -0500 Subject: linux foundation conference sad face In-Reply-To: <1234910540.16686.89.camel@rosebud> References: <1234899643.16686.17.camel@rosebud> <20090217221239.GH20387@localhost.localdomain> <95572032-1234910158-cardhu_decombobulator_blackberry.rim.net-1618814266-@bxe1190.bisx.prod.on.blackberry> <1234910540.16686.89.camel@rosebud> Message-ID: <20090218015842.GM20387@localhost.localdomain> On Tue, Feb 17, 2009 at 05:42:20PM -0500, seth vidal wrote: > On Tue, 2009-02-17 at 22:36 +0000, Matt Domsch wrote: > > I'll be at the conference. Shall I wrangle a seat at the panel? > > That'd be excellent, imo. Agreed. LF has done a lot of beefing up of their video content -- maybe they'll be taping these panels for later review by the community. I certainly hope so. -- Paul W. Frields http://paul.frields.org/ gpg fingerprint: 3DA6 A0AC 6D58 FEC4 0233 5906 ACDB C937 BD11 3717 http://redhat.com/ - - - - http://pfrields.fedorapeople.org/ irc.freenode.net: stickster @ #fedora-docs, #fedora-devel, #fredlug -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: not available URL: From sundaram at fedoraproject.org Wed Feb 18 08:40:48 2009 From: sundaram at fedoraproject.org (Rahul Sundaram) Date: Wed, 18 Feb 2009 14:10:48 +0530 Subject: linux foundation conference sad face In-Reply-To: <20090217221239.GH20387@localhost.localdomain> References: <1234899643.16686.17.camel@rosebud> <20090217221239.GH20387@localhost.localdomain> Message-ID: <499BC990.90007@fedoraproject.org> Paul W. Frields wrote: > On Tue, Feb 17, 2009 at 02:40:43PM -0500, seth vidal wrote: >> "* Linux Participation Panel - Measuring Community Contributions: A >> panel with Jono Bacon - Community Manager at Ubuntu, James Bottomley - >> kernel developer, Joe Brockmeier - Community Manager, OpenSuse and Dan >> Frye ? VP of Open Systems Development at IBM" >> >> >> A shame no one from Fedora could make it out there. Did we even get an >> invite? > > We didn't, as far as I know. Linux Foundation is a industry consortium. Essentially you pay more if you want a voice and if you want them to be a voice for you. As simple as that. Rahul From tytso at mit.edu Thu Feb 19 03:34:00 2009 From: tytso at mit.edu (Theodore Tso) Date: Wed, 18 Feb 2009 22:34:00 -0500 Subject: linux foundation conference sad face Message-ID: <20090219033400.GX3600@mini-me.lan> Hi all, I was pointed to this e-mail thread: https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-advisory-board/2009-February/msg00058.html ... and please accept my apologies for the Linux Foundation not reaching out to Fedora more. The intent of the Collaboration Summit is to include all members of the Linux community; it is true that the Linux Foundation is an industry consortium --- that *is* how we raise money to among other things, pay Linus Torvalds' salary --- but we do try to include all parts of the Linux ecosystem. However, our contacts into the various parts of the Linux community aren't uniformly distributed, for a variety of reasons. Our Technical Advisory Board is fairly heavily weighted towards kernel developers, for example. (David Jones, the Fedora kernel wrangler, is on LF's Technical Advisory Board, and I see him socially every so often, given that he's also based out of Boston area, as I am.) That being said, I would very much like to try to make this right, if we can. If there are people from Fedora who would like to attend, please register at the LF web site: http://events.linuxfoundation.org/events/collaboration-summit ... and just indicate why you would like to attend and if there are any workgroup sessions you are interested in attending. If there are specific presentations or workgroups where you are interested in participating, drop me a note and I can help connect you with the relevant workgroup chair or person who is organizing a particular track at the LF Collaboration Summit. Regards, - Ted From stickster at gmail.com Thu Feb 19 14:42:57 2009 From: stickster at gmail.com (Paul W. Frields) Date: Thu, 19 Feb 2009 09:42:57 -0500 Subject: linux foundation conference sad face In-Reply-To: <20090219033400.GX3600@mini-me.lan> References: <20090219033400.GX3600@mini-me.lan> Message-ID: <20090219144257.GC18190@localhost.localdomain> On Wed, Feb 18, 2009 at 10:34:00PM -0500, Theodore Tso wrote: > Hi all, > > I was pointed to this e-mail thread: > > https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-advisory-board/2009-February/msg00058.html > > ... and please accept my apologies for the Linux Foundation not > reaching out to Fedora more. The intent of the Collaboration Summit > is to include all members of the Linux community; it is true that the > Linux Foundation is an industry consortium --- that *is* how we raise > money to among other things, pay Linus Torvalds' salary --- but we do > try to include all parts of the Linux ecosystem. However, our > contacts into the various parts of the Linux community aren't > uniformly distributed, for a variety of reasons. Our Technical > Advisory Board is fairly heavily weighted towards kernel developers, > for example. (David Jones, the Fedora kernel wrangler, is on LF's > Technical Advisory Board, and I see him socially every so often, given > that he's also based out of Boston area, as I am.) > > That being said, I would very much like to try to make this right, if > we can. If there are people from Fedora who would like to attend, > please register at the LF web site: > > http://events.linuxfoundation.org/events/collaboration-summit > > ... and just indicate why you would like to attend and if there are > any workgroup sessions you are interested in attending. If there are > specific presentations or workgroups where you are interested in > participating, drop me a note and I can help connect you with the > relevant workgroup chair or person who is organizing a particular > track at the LF Collaboration Summit. Thanks -- and for the record I've been contacted by a couple Linux Foundation people as of yesterday, inviting Fedora to participate in the community panel. -- Paul W. Frields http://paul.frields.org/ gpg fingerprint: 3DA6 A0AC 6D58 FEC4 0233 5906 ACDB C937 BD11 3717 http://redhat.com/ - - - - http://pfrields.fedorapeople.org/ irc.freenode.net: stickster @ #fedora-docs, #fedora-devel, #fredlug -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: not available URL: From jonathan.wagener at gmail.com Mon Feb 23 17:10:07 2009 From: jonathan.wagener at gmail.com (Jonathan Wagener) Date: Mon, 23 Feb 2009 19:10:07 +0200 Subject: fedora partnership Message-ID: Hi, i am a partner in a company that does web development and hosting, we run all of our web servers and development servers on Fedora and Dell technology, so I was wondering if it is possible to partner with you guys? if so how does one go about it? -- Jonathan Wagener Lead Developer, Amoebasys www.amoebasys.com +27 (0) 21 673 6759 +27 (0) 72 928 0513 www.espresso-online.info (blog) -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From mmcgrath at redhat.com Mon Feb 23 17:41:07 2009 From: mmcgrath at redhat.com (Mike McGrath) Date: Mon, 23 Feb 2009 11:41:07 -0600 (CST) Subject: fedora partnership In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Mon, 23 Feb 2009, Jonathan Wagener wrote: > Hi, > > i am a partner in a company that does web development and hosting, we run all of our web servers and development servers > on Fedora and Dell technology, so I was wondering if it is possible to partner with you guys? if so how does one go about > it? > > -- > Jonathan Wagener > Lead Developer, Amoebasys > www.amoebasys.com > There's lots of ways to partner with Fedora commonly including: * Assigning tasks to some of your employees to work on for X hours a week to better fedora * Hosting and bandwidth providing for some servers for our infrastructure * Running a Fedora Mirror * Working with ambassadors to get marketing materials together * Sponsoring individual contributors to represent Fedora at trade shows * etc, etc, etc :) What all did you have in mind? -Mike From kanarip at kanarip.com Mon Feb 23 22:51:13 2009 From: kanarip at kanarip.com (Jeroen van Meeuwen) Date: Mon, 23 Feb 2009 23:51:13 +0100 Subject: Live Re-Spins and Localized Spins Message-ID: <49A32861.9020401@kanarip.com> Hi there, Fedora Unity is seriously considering Re-Spinning the Live Spins released with Fedora 10, based on Fedora 10 + updates. We might call them Re-Live-Spins, just for the fun of it ;-) We know there is, or there has been, a lot of politics involved with the topic of Re-Spinning in general, and with the idea of Live Re-Spins even more so, as there has been when we first started with the regular installation media Re-Spins, or back in the day when we did the first Fedora Live Spin (using Kadischi). I think it's fair to say that, so far, we have not embarrassed anyone, despite the concerns or distrust. Different arguments in previous discussions include, amongst others, the concern that Quality Assurance on our part might be lacking in comparison to the QA done on regular releases, and the fact that these Re-Spins or Live Re-Spins have not been composed on Fedora Infrastructure -wrt. security risks. All well so far, but the fact that these arguments have always been... let's just say... less constructive, not to bluntly say they have often been condescending, and sometimes even offensive. After more then 12 releases of the Fedora Unity Re-Spins, we feel confident we have the team suited to fulfill the desire of the community to get their hands on some Live Re-Spins. You may be wondering... "What part of the community are we talking about? How many people download these things anyway?". Well, at the time of this writing, 820 people are downloading the Fedora Unity spins[1] through BitTorrent, compared to 628 for the Fedora Project spins[2]. Bear in mind both have alternative distribution methods as well and these numbers do not represent anything -it's just an indication of the amount of people downloading Re-Spins and Fedora Unity Spins (Such as the Everything Spin). Since it's not like we're on a tight schedule or anything, we wanted to give the Fedora Advisory Board a chance to tune in on our thoughts and process and discussion and tell us what you think, hopefully bringing some new arguments to the table. A few more things to ponder; - Fedora Unity wholeheartedly agrees with the fact these spins should be created on proper Fedora Infrastructure. Now, if only we could get our hands on a x86_64 Fedora instance... Regardless of the specific version of Fedora because our tools allow cross-composing stuff. - Fedora Unity's Test team will make sure the Live Re-Spins also pass the respective QA TestCases. We may even come up with a few more as we put the spins through the wringer. - Fedora Unity has automated the process. Scripts take care of jigdofying, torrentifying and distributing the Re-Spins and Live Re-Spins amongst several peers which, once the initial distribution has taken place, will become jigdo mirrors or torrent seeds. - Yes, these efforts might be (are) better spent at testing rawhide or even Alpha/Beta/RC/GA releases. Don't worry, many of our efforts have resulted in testing what was to be in Alpha/Beta/RC/GA before it ever happened. Besides, it's not like we're proposing supporting Fedora releases until after it's EOL dates. - Yes, these efforts might be (are) better spent at testing rawhide or even Alpha/Beta/RC/GA releases. However, with the Remix tools and configuration files being out there, someone has to take up the effort of supporting *current* releases -that includes the kickstarts, the tools, the applications (anaconda, pykickstart, etc), the packages included on spins, and the overall size of the spin. Right now, only Fedora Unity bothers. - Fedora Unity has the tools to include sources with the spins. We have been distributing sources with our spins from the beginning, and we will continue to do so. - The size of each Live Spin to be respun is most likely to increase. The same thing happens when a user respins the live media, and we are most likely to end up stripping packages off the live media, bearing in mind the original maintainer of the spin might be willing to help us and preserving the original use-case of the spin, or we are having oversized media that only fits DVDs. Right now, several Fedora 10 spins (when respun by a user) experience the effect of larger updates and pulled-in dependencies. - The Fedora Unity team is also considering releasing Localized Live Re-Spins, finally aiding those particular parts of the community that request localized spins when walking up a booth at any given event, and those parts that request localized spins before they even go attend at a booth. Kind regards, Jeroen van Meeuwen -kanarip [1] http://spinner.fedoraunity.org:6969/ [2] http://torrent.fedoraproject.org:6969/ From vwfoxguru at gmail.com Tue Feb 24 13:16:27 2009 From: vwfoxguru at gmail.com (Scott Williams) Date: Tue, 24 Feb 2009 08:16:27 -0500 Subject: "Fedora" in a domain name Message-ID: <5216be500902240516r7518aec9q793a2436bbbc18e8@mail.gmail.com> > > On Sun, 8 Feb 2009, Scott Williams wrote: > > I'm starting a project to package security updates for EOL versions of Fedora > and was interested in possibly using the word "Fedora" within the domain > URL. I intend to carefully follow the guidelines in > http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Legal/TrademarkGuidelines and am seeking the > consent of the Fedora board before registering any URLs. > > I'm not particularly interested in debating the domain name question, because > Paul and the rest of the FPB have taken care of that. What I am curious to > know, Scott, is what you think has changed in the community or in the > scope of what you want to do w/ EOL security updates that will make this > project more compelling for participation than Fedora Legacy. Fedora > Legacy was successful for quite a while, and its shutdown was not a > failure on its part, but rather a realization of two key points: (1) It > was in the better interest of the larger Fedora Project to have the > talents that were doing Fedora Legacy more focused on the new stuff happening > in Rawhide or in other parts of the Project. The opportunity cost of > Fedora Legacy was quite high. (2) For people who wanted the legacy > support, an enterprise distro, which already had process and > infrastructure to provide that longer suppot was a more efficient choice. > In other words, Fedora's niche, combined with the larger Red Hat > Enterprise (and rebuilds) ecosystem around it, meant that folks were > spending a ton of time on Fedora legacy work for not a whole lot of > payoff. I'm not trying to discourage you. I'm simply trying to get a sense > as to whether you think some of these points have changed, or perhaps are no > longer valid. > > ===== > > I'm curious how much further you are going to try to extend the life of older > Fedora distros via security updates. What are you starting with? --Max Max, Here's our scope and guidelines document we came up with in our meeting: http://docs.google.com/Doc?id=dc7dcczk_2fxtsctdq&hl=en ~Scott -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From poelstra at redhat.com Fri Feb 27 01:02:23 2009 From: poelstra at redhat.com (John Poelstra) Date: Thu, 26 Feb 2009 17:02:23 -0800 Subject: Fedora Board Recap 2009-02-24 Message-ID: <49A73B9F.70409@redhat.com> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Board/Meetings/2009-02-24 == Roll Call == * Attendees: Paul Frields, Seth Vidal, Jesse Keating, Matt Domsch, Chris Tyler, Chris Aillon, Spot Callaway, Dimitris Glezos, Harald Hoyer * Regrets: Bill Nottingham * Secretary: John Poelstra == Trademark & Domain Name Registration == * Paul Frields will begin contacting people individually about trademark agreements and domain name registrations * Board set procedure around granting trademark approval for domain name registration ** https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Local_community_domains ** subject to amendment based on outcome of embargoed country issue * NEXT ACTIONS: Paul to report back in two weeks on progress == Fedora 11 FUDCon Survey Status == * results have been collected * ACTIONS: Paul will post the results to the wiki ** https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Survey_for_FUDCon_F11_post-event#Results == Fedora and Embargoed Countries == * Community building and interactions with embargoed countries * Red Hat Legal is reviewing the matter and will respond as they are able * Board would like to issue a formal statement when and if that is possible == What is Fedora? == * Process will start with laying out a general mission statement followed by more detailed vision statements * Lengthy discussion (1.25 hours) and collaborative brainstorming using gobby * Board is still working to reach consensus * NEXT ACTIONS: ** Continue discussion on mailing list ** Reach consensus on mission statement at 2009-03-10 meeting (cannot discuss next week due to public IRC meeting) == Unfinished Board Business == * To discuss at future meetings *# Creative Commons Repo--https://fedorahosted.org/fesco/ticket/65 *# Request for trademark approval for domain name registration *# Review of security response plans == Next Meeting == * Date: 2009-03-03 * Time: 18:00 UTC * Location: irc.freenode.net ** Moderated channel for board answers: #fedora-board-meeting ** Public channel to ask questions: #fedora-board-public From stickster at gmail.com Fri Feb 27 14:06:40 2009 From: stickster at gmail.com (Paul W. Frields) Date: Fri, 27 Feb 2009 09:06:40 -0500 Subject: Reminder: Fedora Board IRC meeting 1900 UTC 2009-03-03 Message-ID: <20090227140640.GF23861@localhost.localdomain> The Board is holding its monthly public meeting on Tuesday, 3 March 2009, at 1900 UTC on IRC Freenode. The Board has settled on a schedule that puts these public IRC meetings on the first Tuesday of each month. Therefore, the next following public meeting will be on 7 April 2009. For these meetings, the public is invited to do the following: * Join #fedora-board-meeting to see the Board's conversation. This channel is read-only for non-Board members. * Join #fedora-board-public to discuss topics and post questions. This channel is read/write for everyone. The moderator will direct questions from the #fedora-board-public channel to the Board members at #fedora-board-meeting. This should limit confusion and ensure our logs are useful to everyone. We look forward to seeing you at the meeting. -- Paul W. Frields http://paul.frields.org/ gpg fingerprint: 3DA6 A0AC 6D58 FEC4 0233 5906 ACDB C937 BD11 3717 http://redhat.com/ - - - - http://pfrields.fedorapeople.org/ irc.freenode.net: stickster @ #fedora-docs, #fedora-devel, #fredlug -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: not available URL: