From jspaleta at gmail.com Thu Jan 1 17:53:31 2009 From: jspaleta at gmail.com (Jeff Spaleta) Date: Thu, 1 Jan 2009 08:53:31 -0900 Subject: Fedora Remix definition In-Reply-To: <20081231003611.GB13594@localhost.localdomain> References: <20081230075620.GB27851@victor.nirvana> <1230657035.5156.108.camel@localhost6.localdomain6> <20081231003611.GB13594@localhost.localdomain> Message-ID: <604aa7910901010953o496a286ap6a7f4c2e4a7b58a3@mail.gmail.com> On Tue, Dec 30, 2008 at 3:36 PM, Paul W. Frields wrote: > Thanks for providing this summary Chris. > > In the context of the "one Fedora package" question, it's important to > remember that the key goals of having Remixes are to (1) allow the > downstream to inherit some of Fedora's brand power, and (2) help the > downstream drive interest in Fedora as the upstream. So here's the one question that I think will bake your noodle. What if someone walked into the project and wanted to do a coronary based distribution instead of a binary rpm distribution, using Fedora srpms as source material? reference: http://wiki.rpath.com/wiki/Conary:RPM_Package_Recipe_HOWTO Would we feel comfortable extending the Fedora brand power to that sort of experiment under the terms of the Fedora Remix secondary mark? -jef From matt at domsch.com Thu Jan 1 19:07:01 2009 From: matt at domsch.com (Matt Domsch) Date: Thu, 1 Jan 2009 13:07:01 -0600 Subject: Fedora Remix definition In-Reply-To: <604aa7910901010953o496a286ap6a7f4c2e4a7b58a3@mail.gmail.com> References: <20081230075620.GB27851@victor.nirvana> <1230657035.5156.108.camel@localhost6.localdomain6> <20081231003611.GB13594@localhost.localdomain> <604aa7910901010953o496a286ap6a7f4c2e4a7b58a3@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <20090101190700.GA10066@domsch.com> On Thu, Jan 01, 2009 at 08:53:31AM -0900, Jeff Spaleta wrote: > On Tue, Dec 30, 2008 at 3:36 PM, Paul W. Frields wrote: > > Thanks for providing this summary Chris. > > > > In the context of the "one Fedora package" question, it's important to > > remember that the key goals of having Remixes are to (1) allow the > > downstream to inherit some of Fedora's brand power, and (2) help the > > downstream drive interest in Fedora as the upstream. > > So here's the one question that I think will bake your noodle. > What if someone walked into the project and wanted to do a coronary > based distribution instead of a binary rpm distribution, using Fedora > srpms as source material? > > reference: http://wiki.rpath.com/wiki/Conary:RPM_Package_Recipe_HOWTO > > Would we feel comfortable extending the Fedora brand power to that > sort of experiment under the terms of the Fedora Remix secondary mark? yes, I would. I see remixes as an excellent way to push the boundries of what Fedora (the distribution) is today, while still being a part of Fedora (the community). From Axel.Thimm at ATrpms.net Thu Jan 1 19:37:47 2009 From: Axel.Thimm at ATrpms.net (Axel Thimm) Date: Thu, 1 Jan 2009 21:37:47 +0200 Subject: Fedora Remix definition In-Reply-To: <604aa7910901010953o496a286ap6a7f4c2e4a7b58a3@mail.gmail.com> References: <20081230075620.GB27851@victor.nirvana> <1230657035.5156.108.camel@localhost6.localdomain6> <20081231003611.GB13594@localhost.localdomain> <604aa7910901010953o496a286ap6a7f4c2e4a7b58a3@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <20090101193747.GB8134@victor.nirvana> On Thu, Jan 01, 2009 at 08:53:31AM -0900, Jeff Spaleta wrote: > On Tue, Dec 30, 2008 at 3:36 PM, Paul W. Frields wrote: > > Thanks for providing this summary Chris. > > > > In the context of the "one Fedora package" question, it's important to > > remember that the key goals of having Remixes are to (1) allow the > > downstream to inherit some of Fedora's brand power, and (2) help the > > downstream drive interest in Fedora as the upstream. > > So here's the one question that I think will bake your noodle. > What if someone walked into the project and wanted to do a coronary > based distribution instead of a binary rpm distribution, using Fedora > srpms as source material? > > reference: http://wiki.rpath.com/wiki/Conary:RPM_Package_Recipe_HOWTO > > Would we feel comfortable extending the Fedora brand power to that > sort of experiment under the terms of the Fedora Remix secondary mark? Probably closer to rpm packaging: What if there is someone that rebuilds Fedora rpms optimized for $subarch or maybe build for non-supported platforms? I think currently the answer to all of the above is no. -- Axel.Thimm at ATrpms.net -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 197 bytes Desc: not available URL: From jspaleta at gmail.com Thu Jan 1 19:58:18 2009 From: jspaleta at gmail.com (Jeff Spaleta) Date: Thu, 1 Jan 2009 10:58:18 -0900 Subject: Fedora Remix definition In-Reply-To: <20090101193747.GB8134@victor.nirvana> References: <20081230075620.GB27851@victor.nirvana> <1230657035.5156.108.camel@localhost6.localdomain6> <20081231003611.GB13594@localhost.localdomain> <604aa7910901010953o496a286ap6a7f4c2e4a7b58a3@mail.gmail.com> <20090101193747.GB8134@victor.nirvana> Message-ID: <604aa7910901011158y57e50832j6a90e75230f68813@mail.gmail.com> On Thu, Jan 1, 2009 at 10:37 AM, Axel Thimm wrote: > Probably closer to rpm packaging: What if there is someone that > rebuilds Fedora rpms optimized for $subarch or maybe build for > non-supported platforms? > > I think currently the answer to all of the above is no. Assuming this is no. Are these cases covered by our secondary arch initiative and if were done as secondary arches wouldn't they get access to the primary mark? -jef From stickster at gmail.com Fri Jan 2 01:27:39 2009 From: stickster at gmail.com (Paul W. Frields) Date: Thu, 1 Jan 2009 20:27:39 -0500 Subject: About: representing Fedora Officially in Bangladesh In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20090102012739.GG15517@localhost.localdomain> On Thu, Dec 25, 2008 at 09:53:57PM +0600, Angel wrote: > Hi, > I am an Ambassador of Fedora, representing Fedora in Bangladesh. I have been > involved with Fedora Project for more than two years. Within this time frame > I have seen interest for Fedora among my friends, classmates and my family. Now > I would like to form our this group/community as Fedora Bangladesh. > > Recently on a meeting with Bangladesh Linux Users Alliance (BLUA, a Linux > user group working in Bangladesh to promote various Linux distro and open > source initiative, [for your kind information: BLUA also function as parent > organization to official Loco team of Ubuntu Linux] ), BLUA has shown > interest of representing Fedora under the team name Fedora Bangladesh. > However they have requested official recognition from the Fedora Project > team to put Fedora Bangladesh under there Wing. > > Soon, we are going to arrange a Fedora release party (after the election of > Bangladesh) from our this friends, classmates community. Also we have > already bought a country domain for Fedora Bangladesh > fedoraproject.org.bdwebsite. > > Is there any guidelines that I/we should follow forming Fedora Bangladesh > that will give us the legal & official status to Represent Fedora in > Bangladesh under the name Fedora Bangladesh team? Please let us know. > > Thank you for your cooperation & hopefully we will be able to represent > Fedora in Bangladesh Officially. Thanks very much for your interest in supporting the Fedora community in Bangladesh! The word "Fedora" is a trademark, so we do have particular guidelines about how it can be used. The current guidelines are located here: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Legal/Trademark_guidelines However, these guidelines are still somewhat in flux and the latest draft under review by Red Hat's Legal department is located here: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Pfrields/New_trademark_guidelines To use the term "Fedora" in a domain name, you will need a formal trademark license agreement with Red Hat. There are several groups also waiting for these agreements, and I have been working with Red Hat Legal to create these agreements, so we can distribute them to the people who need them. The many international communities that are part of Fedora inevitably use names that show their location, but I don't think it's necessary for them to each create legal entities. Doing so could create confusion among the community, and put Red Hat's legal department in a strange position as well, forcing them to police community groups who are simply trying to promote Fedora in their locales. The Fedora EMEA group is a notable exception because, first, it is a non-profit organization that doesn't represent any single national group, and second, it was created as a pilot project for obtaining financial support for volunteers in that region. There were many requirements for this organization to make it legal in Germany where it was formed, and to make it acceptable to Red Hat which owns the Fedora trademarks. There are still some details we need to work out before extending that model to other areas, which I hope to do sometime this year. Please take a look at our trademark guidelines and if you have questions we can discuss them here, or on the Fedora ambassadors mailing list. -- 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 mspevack at redhat.com Fri Jan 2 07:29:56 2009 From: mspevack at redhat.com (Max Spevack) Date: Fri, 2 Jan 2009 08:29:56 +0100 (CET) Subject: Fedora Remix definition In-Reply-To: <604aa7910901010953o496a286ap6a7f4c2e4a7b58a3@mail.gmail.com> References: <20081230075620.GB27851@victor.nirvana> <1230657035.5156.108.camel@localhost6.localdomain6> <20081231003611.GB13594@localhost.localdomain> <604aa7910901010953o496a286ap6a7f4c2e4a7b58a3@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: On Thu, 1 Jan 2009, Jeff Spaleta wrote: > Would we feel comfortable extending the Fedora brand power to that > sort of experiment under the terms of the Fedora Remix secondary mark? I think the answer to this question needs to be yes. People have to feel like they can experiment radically with the base that Fedora provides, and that they can do it with the "blessing" of the larger Project. To do otherwise would be to stifle some innovative ideas while still in the cradle. We should be encouraging people to try really outside the box ideas. Some of them might end up being brought back to FESCo or other parts of Fedora as truly innovative. --Max From tcallawa at redhat.com Fri Jan 2 15:34:49 2009 From: tcallawa at redhat.com (Tom "spot" Callaway) Date: Fri, 02 Jan 2009 10:34:49 -0500 Subject: Fedora Remix definition In-Reply-To: <604aa7910901011158y57e50832j6a90e75230f68813@mail.gmail.com> References: <20081230075620.GB27851@victor.nirvana> <1230657035.5156.108.camel@localhost6.localdomain6> <20081231003611.GB13594@localhost.localdomain> <604aa7910901010953o496a286ap6a7f4c2e4a7b58a3@mail.gmail.com> <20090101193747.GB8134@victor.nirvana> <604aa7910901011158y57e50832j6a90e75230f68813@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <1230910490.3386.77.camel@localhost.localdomain> On Thu, 2009-01-01 at 10:58 -0900, Jeff Spaleta wrote: > Assuming this is no. Are these cases covered by our secondary arch > initiative and if were done as secondary arches wouldn't they get > access to the primary mark? If someone were to do so and plead their case to me, I would probably figure out a way to have them come up as a secondary arch, provided they either provided their own koji instance or sold rel-eng on the idea of using the existing koji servers (if applicable). As always, I reserve the right to say no when an actual case is presented. ;) ~spot From stickster at gmail.com Fri Jan 2 16:30:57 2009 From: stickster at gmail.com (Paul W. Frields) Date: Fri, 2 Jan 2009 11:30:57 -0500 Subject: Fedora Remix definition In-Reply-To: References: <20081230075620.GB27851@victor.nirvana> <1230657035.5156.108.camel@localhost6.localdomain6> <20081231003611.GB13594@localhost.localdomain> <604aa7910901010953o496a286ap6a7f4c2e4a7b58a3@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <20090102163057.GF6883@localhost.localdomain> On Fri, Jan 02, 2009 at 08:29:56AM +0100, Max Spevack wrote: > On Thu, 1 Jan 2009, Jeff Spaleta wrote: > >> Would we feel comfortable extending the Fedora brand power to that >> sort of experiment under the terms of the Fedora Remix secondary mark? > > I think the answer to this question needs to be yes. People have to > feel like they can experiment radically with the base that Fedora > provides, and that they can do it with the "blessing" of the larger > Project. > > To do otherwise would be to stifle some innovative ideas while still in > the cradle. We should be encouraging people to try really outside the > box ideas. Some of them might end up being brought back to FESCo or > other parts of Fedora as truly innovative. Right. Potential users should keep in mind that the "Fedora Remix" mark carries specific requirements too, which are easily met. One of those is clearly indicating that the remix in question is not an official product of the Fedora Project, and further indicating where to get official Fedora software. That clause is there to help prevent dilution of the brand and ensure that no one is confused about the origins of any particular software. -- 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 Tue Jan 6 02:18:30 2009 From: stickster at gmail.com (Paul W. Frields) Date: Mon, 5 Jan 2009 21:18:30 -0500 Subject: Reminder: Fedora Board IRC meeting 1900 UTC 2009-01-06 Message-ID: <20090106021830.GE21964@localhost.localdomain> The Board is holding its monthly public meeting on Tuesday, 6 January 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 3 February 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: From stickster at gmail.com Wed Jan 7 22:43:22 2009 From: stickster at gmail.com (Paul W. Frields) Date: Wed, 7 Jan 2009 17:43:22 -0500 Subject: Fedora Board appointment Message-ID: <20090107224322.GA5978@localhost.localdomain> I'm very pleased to announce that Dimitris Glezos has been selected to fill the final seat on the Fedora Project Board. Many of you may know Dimitris from his tireless work in the Fedora Localization (L10n/translation) team, as part of its steering committee, his past work on Documentation including its steering committee, and additional work with Websites, Marketing, Ambassadors, and other groups. He is also the upstream creator of Transifex, a web-based application for enabling free and open source, cross-project translation services. Dimitris has extensive history and experience in growing FOSS contribution, breaking down barriers across all boundaries (including those of language and locale), vigorously collaborating with people throughout the Fedora Project, and working tirelessly in an open and transparent way that encourages trust, respect, and positivity. I hope the whole Fedora community will join me in welcoming him to the Board. The new Board will meet for the first time next week, on Tuesday 13 January 2008. Dimitris will join Bill Nottingham and Matt Domsch, who are returning as community-elected members, and fellow appointee Christopher Aillon. I speak for the whole Board when I say that we look forward to serving the community and that your input is always welcome. Please feel free to join the fedora-advisory-board mailing list to start a discussion if needed, or you may email us. https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-advisory-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 stickster at gmail.com Thu Jan 8 17:04:56 2009 From: stickster at gmail.com (Paul W. Frields) Date: Thu, 8 Jan 2009 12:04:56 -0500 Subject: F11 name elections Message-ID: <20090108170456.GA5284@localhost.localdomain> My plan for the Fedora 11 name election results is to collect the results from Nigel Jones, our elections coordinator, some time on Friday night EST -- Saturday morning, Brisbane time -- and to announce the results at the closing of BarCamp on Saturday night. There will be a post to the appropriate announcement lists at roughly the same time. -- 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 fugolini at fedoraproject.org Thu Jan 8 18:58:47 2009 From: fugolini at fedoraproject.org (Francesco Ugolini) Date: Thu, 8 Jan 2009 19:58:47 +0100 Subject: Policy on DST Message-ID: Here is the link (https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-advisory-board/2008-December/msg00011.html) of a previous discussion we had in this list. What's the official conclusion? Will each sub-project/SCo set its meeting time according to UTC (chaning it when DST comes or leaves) or whatever else ? Regards Francesco Ugolini From jonstanley at gmail.com Thu Jan 8 19:50:00 2009 From: jonstanley at gmail.com (Jon Stanley) Date: Thu, 8 Jan 2009 14:50:00 -0500 Subject: Policy on DST In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Thu, Jan 8, 2009 at 1:58 PM, Francesco Ugolini wrote: > What's the official conclusion? Will each sub-project/SCo set its > meeting time according to UTC (chaning it when DST comes or leaves) or > whatever else ? I'm not sure there ever was one. The logical conclusion is that each sub-group would be free to set it's own schedule, and change it (or not) based on DST. From mspevack at redhat.com Thu Jan 8 19:55:10 2009 From: mspevack at redhat.com (Max Spevack) Date: Thu, 8 Jan 2009 20:55:10 +0100 (CET) Subject: Policy on DST In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Thu, 8 Jan 2009, Jon Stanley wrote: > I'm not sure there ever was one. The logical conclusion is that each > sub-group would be free to set it's own schedule, and change it (or > not) based on DST. "Do whatever you think is right and display adaptability in the case of overlapping meetings." From poelstra at redhat.com Thu Jan 8 23:44:50 2009 From: poelstra at redhat.com (John Poelstra) Date: Thu, 08 Jan 2009 15:44:50 -0800 Subject: Fedora Board Meeting Recap 2009-01-06 Message-ID: <49668FF2.7050809@redhat.com> Recap and full IRC transcripts for the moderated and public channels are here: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Board/Meetings/2009-01-06 Please make corrections and clarifications to the wiki page. = Fedora Project Board Meeting :: Tuesday 2009-01-06 = == FAMSCo Chair Approval == * FAMSCo has submitted Francesco Ugolini to retun as FAMSCo chair * '''RESOLUTION''': Francesco Ugolini is unanimously confirmed as the FAMSCo chair == Q&A Topics == * When will the last board appointment be announced? * What are the board's current thoughts are on the effectiveness of these town hall meetings? * What is being done to improve our testing procedures? * When will more information be disclosed about The Incident? * What is the status of the security response plan? * What audio/video options are available for people who cannot come to FUDCon? From fugolini at fedoraproject.org Fri Jan 9 16:31:35 2009 From: fugolini at fedoraproject.org (Francesco Ugolini) Date: Fri, 9 Jan 2009 17:31:35 +0100 Subject: Fedora Board Meeting Recap 2009-01-06 In-Reply-To: <49668FF2.7050809@redhat.com> References: <49668FF2.7050809@redhat.com> Message-ID: On Fri, Jan 9, 2009 at 12:44 AM, John Poelstra wrote: > Recap and full IRC transcripts for the moderated and public channels are > here: > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Board/Meetings/2009-01-06 > > Please make corrections and clarifications to the wiki page. > > = Fedora Project Board Meeting :: Tuesday 2009-01-06 = > > == FAMSCo Chair Approval == > * FAMSCo has submitted Francesco Ugolini to retun as FAMSCo chair > * '''RESOLUTION''': Francesco Ugolini is unanimously confirmed as the FAMSCo > chair I'm really glad for this confirmation. Thank you very much, I'm sure we will work together to improve Ambassadors experience and community building (events and so on). Regards Francesco Ugolini From chitlesh.goorah at gmail.com Mon Jan 12 21:45:33 2009 From: chitlesh.goorah at gmail.com (Chitlesh GOORAH) Date: Mon, 12 Jan 2009 22:45:33 +0100 Subject: Xuropa offers FEL free exhibition space Message-ID: <50baabb30901121345v3df00672k1ea31413c02228f@mail.gmail.com> Hello everyone, First, I would like to wish you all Happy New Year 2009 with my best wishes. Happy reading as well :) == Abstract == Xuropa, a new company offering online virtual trade shows for the EDA community, will be offering Fedora an "Online Lab" space for FEL. This "Online Lab" package ( the most expensive package ) will be free for Fedora and Xuropa will offer a paypal addon where people can donate to Fedora. Asking Fedora Board's approval to procede. == About Xuropa == Xuropa is a new company focussing on building an online EDA community around commercial and opensource EDA tools. With its platform, the community can evaluate different tools, give presentations about one's EDA software and identify the most appropriate software for his/her design methodology. http://xuropa.com http://clunixchit.blogspot.com/2008/12/professional-marketing-strategy-for-eda.html == About the Online Lab == This youtube video describes the "Online Lab" package and how a subscribed user can acess FEL on Xuropa http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=9yDZnAPI-nw&feature=related Among the 4 packages (Online Kiosk,Online Booth,Online Suite and Online Lab), Online Lab is the most expensive in accordance to: http://www.xuropa.com/zone_restricted.php?zone_id=51 This package includes : # Secure invite-only access to your products # Remote product beta-testing # Remote product training # Remote product evaluations The above video demonstrate what "remote" here means and how training and beta testing can be carried out. There will be no FEL download from Xuropa's website. == Marketing == With our FEL LiveDVD, we - bring electronic engineers/students closer to opensource community - do marketing for our upstream projects such as gEDA/gaf, opencircuitdesign,pharosc, perl-verilog*,.. - .... Now with this Online Lab we can bring FEL to the "next level" and give upstream more chances to post their papers and do presentations via FEL. Xuropa's platform simulate an online conference hall. In other words like it is like an event /forum, but online. Every exhibitor has its booth(with a fee) and presentation, but online to help networking between ASIC engineers. Though, with this exhibition strategy, I am obeying all Fedora ground rules, I'm requesting again the usage of Fedora trademark to market fedora and its packages. Thereby, I also like to precise there will only be packages approved and built on our dear koji. As you know, my intention about FEL is NOT about packaging electronics tools for fedora, but to centralize(in fedora) _most_ electronic tools to create design flows for micro-nano electronics and help opensource developers to improve and distribute their tools with respect to electronic industry trends. Thereby this means encourage upstreams to communicate with other upstreams and help them market their software for the real world. In the electronics world, opensource EDA tools we have are far from the professional environment where huge companies spend billions of dollars in research and development. Hence with Xuropa, FEL enters the big world of electronics where those multi-billions EDA vendors are, to give our upstream projects room to market themselves through FEL. == Donation feature == Xuropa's cofounder proposes a "donation" paypal feature for which they will take a percentage of it. I'm ok with it. My question is, is Fedora Board you ok with it ? They would then collect funds and wire to "us" 85% of the proceeds after expenses (paypal's and hardware and license costs). This may not be very much to start, but it will build over time. However, if we are lucky, I guess we will get $100. I nominate MaxSpevack to be in charge of all money transaction, since he manages Fedora's budget already. IF we do happen to get lucky, maybe it would be nice to use "Fedora Scholarship" to get more contributors to FEL :) http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Scholarship == How Fedora benefit from this == The Online Lab as the above youtube video demonstrates, subscribers can access a Fedora session and use the FEL applications, rate, give feedbacks and get familiar to FEL without download and installation. It is a chance to show the quality-class distribution Fedora is and what a Fedora user can achieve with FEL. Companies willing to opensource their inhouse tools/scripts will more likely use Fedora as a means to bring new features to the opensource EDA tools on Fedora. - Xuropa will provide FEL for others to use on their servers. (if people like it, they will download it and promote/rate it) - Many Field Application Engineers will hear Fedora for the first time. - opensource EDA tools will be on the same rank as commercial tools in terms of people mindset about "it's free it's not that good" - more eda bloggers will blog about industry class opensource tools such as perl-Verilog*, gtkwave, tkdiff - We will have more concrete real life suggestions for improvements from big names. We FEL contributors will learn from their experience and leadership skills - (I hope) FEL developers will grant access to some confidential publications for free :) I hope - all this depends on how we(FEL) can help to shape the opensource EDA community to work together. - ..................... - and what I wish the most, help big EDA vendors license their opensource tools in a free distribuable way and use FEL as a means to do so. - more linux support from the chip vendors (if you look at the websites of maxim-ic or linear technology,.. ) they provide free tools to use with their chips. Chip samples anyone can order for free. But it is sad that their tools can't be run under linux. Lots of tiny things like that FEL will benefit from and make others benefit from it. I know it is a long shot, but we all know there is a need to satisfy and I believe we can do step by step. We will hit walls for sure, but we will also have bright days ahead of us. CAD engineers who send time evaluating beta versions of vendors tools on RedHat/CentOS will follow what the next RHEL will provide. == How Upstream projects benefit from this == - More chances that in-house tools or scripts will be opensourced by companies. - More chances upstream tools will have contributors who are willing to shape opensource tools for real life usage - More chances for free marketing or maybe sponsoring - A means to make presentations to the masses via our presence on Xuropa. ..... (more during fosdem) I hope Fedora Board will see this as an opportunity to help both our upstream projects and our new Fedora users. Kind regards, Chitlesh Goorah From mspevack at redhat.com Tue Jan 13 11:10:45 2009 From: mspevack at redhat.com (Max Spevack) Date: Tue, 13 Jan 2009 12:10:45 +0100 (CET) Subject: FAD in late January or early/mid February? Message-ID: Back in December, I wrote about the idea of having Fedora Activity Days (FAD) to complement FUDCons as the "top level" Fedora events in 2009. The idea of FADs, in short, is that they can be more numerous than FUDCons because they have one or two specific goals (anything related to Fedora), target a smaller number of people in a specific region or city, and are far less expensive. In an ideal world, we'll get to a point where we are having 2 FADs per month, in various places all over the world. I assume there's a lot of energy and motivation for various projects coming out of FUDCon, and I'd like to see if any feature or group of people would like to capitalize on that by organizing a FAD sometime between now and, say, February 13th, so that the budget to support that FAD can come out of the Community Architecture budget that disappears at the end of February. We're holding at FAD at FOSDEM in Brussels at the beginning of February, and Sankarshan/Rahul are working on organizing one or more in India between now and the end of February. I think we could probably fit one more in, and for the purposes of balance, it would be nice to do it somewhere in North America, and use it to move forward something that was discussed at FUDCon. If anyone wants to go for it, see: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/FAD https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/How_to_organize_a_FAD Thanks, Max From herlo1 at gmail.com Tue Jan 13 15:14:25 2009 From: herlo1 at gmail.com (Clint Savage) Date: Tue, 13 Jan 2009 08:14:25 -0700 Subject: FAD in late January or early/mid February? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Tue, Jan 13, 2009 at 4:10 AM, Max Spevack wrote: > Back in December, I wrote about the idea of having Fedora Activity Days > (FAD) to complement FUDCons as the "top level" Fedora events in 2009. > > The idea of FADs, in short, is that they can be more numerous than FUDCons > because they have one or two specific goals (anything related to Fedora), > target a smaller number of people in a specific region or city, and are far > less expensive. > > In an ideal world, we'll get to a point where we are having 2 FADs per > month, in various places all over the world. > > I assume there's a lot of energy and motivation for various projects coming > out of FUDCon, and I'd like to see if any feature or group of people would > like to capitalize on that by organizing a FAD sometime between now and, > say, February 13th, so that the budget to support that FAD can come out of > the Community Architecture budget that disappears at the end of February. > > We're holding at FAD at FOSDEM in Brussels at the beginning of February, and > Sankarshan/Rahul are working on organizing one or more in India between now > and the end of February. > > I think we could probably fit one more in, and for the purposes of balance, > it would be nice to do it somewhere in North America, and use it to move > forward something that was discussed at FUDCon. > > If anyone wants to go for it, see: > > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/FAD > > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/How_to_organize_a_FAD > > Thanks, > Max > > _______________________________________________ > fedora-advisory-board mailing list > fedora-advisory-board at redhat.com > http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-advisory-board > Max, I'm including the Fedora Ambassadors List because at one time we were going to have a FAD along side SCaLE and it can probably still happen. It's a little later than Feb 13 (Feb 20-22) but it's still in Q4. I think Larry Cafiero was interested in making this happen so I wanted to see what the possibilities were of making that happen. One thought is to do it on Feb 20 (the Friday) as there are special sessions going on and not general sessions. Thoughts? Clint From mspevack at redhat.com Tue Jan 13 15:55:23 2009 From: mspevack at redhat.com (Max Spevack) Date: Tue, 13 Jan 2009 16:55:23 +0100 (CET) Subject: [Ambassadors] Re: FAD in late January or early/mid February? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Tue, 13 Jan 2009, Clint Savage wrote: > I'm including the Fedora Ambassadors List because at one time we were > going to have a FAD along side SCaLE and it can probably still happen. > It's a little later than Feb 13 (Feb 20-22) but it's still in Q4. I > think Larry Cafiero was interested in making this happen so I wanted > to see what the possibilities were of making that happen. One thought > is to do it on Feb 20 (the Friday) as there are special sessions going > on and not general sessions. I'm supportive of any group within Fedora (Ambassadors, Engineering, Websites, Infrastructure, Docs, etc. etc.) that wants to put a FAD together. My ideal-world vision is that different sub-teams or feature teams will take advantage of this model (get a group of people together to intensively focus on a small number of Fedora-related tasks) and the budget that exists to support it. What do you have in mind in terms of goals/agenda for a FAD at SCALE? --Max From stickster at gmail.com Tue Jan 13 17:15:10 2009 From: stickster at gmail.com (Paul W. Frields) Date: Tue, 13 Jan 2009 12:15:10 -0500 Subject: FAD in late January or early/mid February? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20090113171510.GL24569@localhost.localdomain> On Tue, Jan 13, 2009 at 12:10:45PM +0100, Max Spevack wrote: > Back in December, I wrote about the idea of having Fedora Activity Days > (FAD) to complement FUDCons as the "top level" Fedora events in 2009. > > The idea of FADs, in short, is that they can be more numerous than > FUDCons because they have one or two specific goals (anything related to > Fedora), target a smaller number of people in a specific region or city, > and are far less expensive. > > In an ideal world, we'll get to a point where we are having 2 FADs per > month, in various places all over the world. I wanted to reiterate my support for this model. FUDCon is forced to be many things to many people, and thus ends up very expensive from a logistical point of view as well as a financial one. FADs give us flexibility in spending, organizing, and reporting, and also spread the public awareness messages about advancements we make throughout the year rather than clustering them around a single event per region. -- 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 herlo at fedoraproject.org Tue Jan 13 17:40:38 2009 From: herlo at fedoraproject.org (Clint Savage) Date: Tue, 13 Jan 2009 10:40:38 -0700 Subject: [Ambassadors] Re: FAD in late January or early/mid February? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Tue, Jan 13, 2009 at 8:55 AM, Max Spevack wrote: > On Tue, 13 Jan 2009, Clint Savage wrote: > >> I'm including the Fedora Ambassadors List because at one time we were >> going to have a FAD along side SCaLE and it can probably still happen. It's >> a little later than Feb 13 (Feb 20-22) but it's still in Q4. I think Larry >> Cafiero was interested in making this happen so I wanted to see what the >> possibilities were of making that happen. One thought is to do it on Feb 20 >> (the Friday) as there are special sessions going on and not general >> sessions. My plan was to get some folks from docs and from ambassadors together. I suppose there may be benefit for devs to come. The idea of having FAD on Friday would mean that while it could be linked up with the conference, it wouldn't interfere with the main conference sessions. The thought I had was to hack together some functionality in Moksha that could help ambassadors to track the activities going on within (and without) Fedora. Give us a portal (if you will) with a simiple way to add events, manage them and track resources. For Docs, it's an ongoing thing and since there are a few docs persons in California that might be able to come that couldn't make FUDCon, I think that'd be invaluable for them to meet others in the Docs team. It's also valuable to have some fun, so I think a nice dinner with the contributors would help congeal the group. I'm sure there's more here to think about and possibly do. But I think a FAD still needs a core goal (as was pointed out). We could reasonably get others to participate if we advertised now. Cheers, Clint From stickster at gmail.com Wed Jan 14 18:58:03 2009 From: stickster at gmail.com (Paul W. Frields) Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2009 13:58:03 -0500 Subject: Xuropa offers FEL free exhibition space In-Reply-To: <50baabb30901121345v3df00672k1ea31413c02228f@mail.gmail.com> References: <50baabb30901121345v3df00672k1ea31413c02228f@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <20090114185803.GA24702@localhost.localdomain> Setting reply-to, we need to track Board issues on the FAB list where possible. On Mon, Jan 12, 2009 at 10:45:33PM +0100, Chitlesh GOORAH wrote: > > Asking Fedora Board's approval to procede. Snipping to Board-specific area below... This is a worthy and interesting project, Chitlesh. [...snip...] > Though, with this exhibition strategy, I am obeying all Fedora ground > rules, I'm requesting again the usage of Fedora trademark to market > fedora and its packages. Thereby, I also like to precise there will > only be packages approved and built on our dear koji. So the trademark is to be used to present a fully 100% Fedora spin, as approved through the spins process, only on a third-party web site. Is that correct? > == Donation feature == > > Xuropa's cofounder proposes a "donation" paypal feature for which they > will take a percentage of it. I'm ok with it. My question is, is > Fedora Board you ok with it ? > > They would then collect funds and wire to "us" 85% of the proceeds > after expenses (paypal's and hardware and license costs). This may > not be very much to start, but it will build over time. However, if we > are lucky, I guess we will get $100. > > I nominate MaxSpevack to be in charge of all money transaction, since > he manages Fedora's budget already. IF we do happen to get lucky, > maybe it would be nice to use "Fedora Scholarship" to get more > contributors to FEL :) > > http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Scholarship A couple concerns: * The donation feature should let people know before they finalize any payment exactly what percentage is going to Fedora. * Is it possible that such a donation feature may be more trouble to track than it's actually worth? Can we do the site *without* a donation feature? -- 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 jspaleta at gmail.com Thu Jan 15 06:25:57 2009 From: jspaleta at gmail.com (Jeff Spaleta) Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2009 21:25:57 -0900 Subject: Xuropa offers FEL free exhibition space In-Reply-To: <20090114185803.GA24702@localhost.localdomain> References: <50baabb30901121345v3df00672k1ea31413c02228f@mail.gmail.com> <20090114185803.GA24702@localhost.localdomain> Message-ID: <604aa7910901142225g4263417drb467bb66cc3a6e47@mail.gmail.com> 2009/1/14 Paul W. Frields : > * Is it possible that such a donation feature may be more trouble to > track than it's actually worth? Can we do the site *without* a > donation feature? Unless something has changed, I think you'll have a hard time tracking any donation inside the existing Red Hat account structure. We'd need a separate non-profit methinks. But is it worth it? I think it could be, if we were able to have a long standing and very specific reason to take donations. Personally I would for example LOVE to see a way for community to donate towards the endowment of another Fedora scholarship instead of just having Red Hat pony up all the money.. I'd like to see some sort of corporate matching challenge with regard to the scholarship program. I even think I mentioned that to Greg at one point. Or take in donations for travel grants for Fedora contributors to apply for to go to conferences. -jef From james at xuropa.com Thu Jan 15 00:29:58 2009 From: james at xuropa.com (James Colgan) Date: Wed, 14 Jan 2009 16:29:58 -0800 Subject: Xuropa offers FEL free exhibition space Message-ID: Dear Fedora Advisory Board, First of all, I'd like to thank Chitlesh for reaching out to. There is a great fit between FEL's vision and how we see the electronic design industry being able to benefit from new license, use and business models moving forward. We had a good discussion today and see a couple of ways we can help Fedora. We've created an Online Booth for FEL within the Xuropa Community. Chitlesh will be the manager of this area and will be populating it and getting it ready to release to the FEL community this week. It will be a great tool to promote and increase Fedora/FEL exposure. At the end of this month Cadence is opening the first of their Xuropa Online Labs. This will generate a lot of traffic over time for FEL and help promote the work within the industry. In the meantime, we're looking at ways to provide FEL with an Online Lab for electronic design engineers and FEL community members to try out FEL via their browser and contribute to the community dialog. Chitlesh kindly forwarded one of your discussion emails with some questions from Paul I'd like to address directly. ===snip=== >So the trademark is to be used to present a fully 100% Fedora spin, as >approved through the spins process, only on a third-party web site. >Is that correct? This is correct. The Fedora logo will be used exactly as you state, in an unadulterated form supporting Fedora in a Fedora dedicated area of a third party web platform. > == Donation feature == > > Xuropa's cofounder proposes a "donation" paypal feature for which they > will take a percentage of it. I'm ok with it. My question is, is > Fedora Board you ok with it ? > > They would then collect funds and wire to "us" 85% of the proceeds > after expenses (paypal's and hardware and license costs). This may > not be very much to start, but it will build over time. However, if we > are lucky, I guess we will get $100. > > I nominate MaxSpevack to be in charge of all money transaction, since > he manages Fedora's budget already. IF we do happen to get lucky, > maybe it would be nice to use "Fedora Scholarship" to get more > contributors to FEL :) > > http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Scholarship >A couple concerns: >* The donation feature should let people know before they finalize any >payment exactly what percentage is going to Fedora. >* Is it possible that such a donation feature may be more trouble to >track than it's actually worth? Can we do the site *without* a >donation feature? We can definitely state the percentage of the donation that goes to FEL prior to the donation being made. While the Online Booth has been presented without this donation feature I think that it would be beneficial for all that we work it into the model in the future. As to how much will be generated, to be honest we won't know until we try it out. However, it will help us to cover ours and FELs costs. Later on, once we have moved to a different infrastructure, we hope to support FEL within an Online Lab. We'd like to make this available at no cost to FEL, but again, we have costs that we'd like to be able to recover if possible (we're a small company ourselves). So I'd like to understand how we can make this all easier for us all from an accounting perspective and to enable FEL to begin to grow some operating budget from these efforts. I'll check the scholarship link above. Is this the first time that an open source project within Fedora has worked with donations? (I've seen it done with other open source and collaborations, the most well known being Mozilla http://www.mozilla.org/foundation/donate.html) Any guidance from the board here would be greatly appreciated. In the meantime, we're looking forward to Chitlesh and the community getting the Online Booth in place and building the community. Best regards, James James A. Colgan CEO Xuropa Inc. 441 28th Street San Francisco CA 94131 Tel: +1 (415) 867-9506 www.xuropa.com james at xuropa.com "Connect-Attract-Engage" This email and any attachments may contain private, confidential and privileged material for the sole use of the intended recipient. If you are not the intended recipient, please immediately delete this email and any attachments. -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: image001.jpg Type: image/jpeg Size: 1645 bytes Desc: not available URL: From stickster at gmail.com Thu Jan 15 13:38:35 2009 From: stickster at gmail.com (Paul W. Frields) Date: Thu, 15 Jan 2009 08:38:35 -0500 Subject: Xuropa offers FEL free exhibition space In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20090115133835.GE7559@localhost.localdomain> On Wed, Jan 14, 2009 at 04:29:58PM -0800, James Colgan wrote: > > == Donation feature == > > > > Xuropa's cofounder proposes a "donation" paypal feature for which > > they will take a percentage of it. I'm ok with it. My question is, > > is Fedora Board you ok with it ? > > > > They would then collect funds and wire to "us" 85% of the proceeds > > after expenses (paypal's and hardware and license costs). This > > may not be very much to start, but it will build over > > time. However, if we are lucky, I guess we will get $100. > > > > I nominate MaxSpevack to be in charge of all money transaction, > > since he manages Fedora's budget already. IF we do happen to get > > lucky, maybe it would be nice to use "Fedora Scholarship" to get > > more contributors to FEL :) > > > > http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Scholarship > > >A couple concerns: > > >* The donation feature should let people know before they finalize > >any payment exactly what percentage is going to Fedora. > > >* Is it possible that such a donation feature may be more trouble > >to track than it's actually worth? Can we do the site *without* a > >donation feature? > > We can definitely state the percentage of the donation that goes to > FEL prior to the donation being made. While the Online Booth has > been presented without this donation feature I think that it would > be beneficial for all that we work it into the model in the future. > > As to how much will be generated, to be honest we won't know until > we try it out. However, it will help us to cover ours and FELs > costs. Later on, once we have moved to a different infrastructure, > we hope to support FEL within an Online Lab. We'd like to make this > available at no cost to FEL, but again, we have costs that we'd like > to be able to recover if possible (we're a small company ourselves). > So I'd like to understand how we can make this all easier for us all > from an accounting perspective and to enable FEL to begin to grow > some operating budget from these efforts. I'll check the > scholarship link above. > > Is this the first time that an open source project within Fedora has > worked with donations? (I've seen it done with other open source > and collaborations, the most well known being Mozilla > http://www.mozilla.org/foundation/donate.html) Mozilla, as well as some other open source groups, have the distinction of being run by 501(c)(3) nonprofit foundations, whereas Fedora does not. In fact, we can't, at least in the USA, because we get most of our operating budget from a single source, Red Hat. However, we do have a partner NPO in the EMEA region, the Fedora EMEA e.V. group, which might make this process less onerous. The amount may be small enough that this doesn't present an enormous problem for tracking or accounting, but the precedent is one of no little interest to the Board, I'd think. > Any guidance from the board here would be greatly appreciated. > > In the meantime, we're looking forward to Chitlesh and the community getting > the Online Booth in place and building the community. James, thank you for all the interest you've shown in Fedora and the FEL. We are eager to discuss this further and I look forward to hearing thoughts from some of the other Board and community members. -- 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 kanarip at kanarip.com Thu Jan 15 14:03:30 2009 From: kanarip at kanarip.com (Jeroen van Meeuwen) Date: Thu, 15 Jan 2009 15:03:30 +0100 Subject: Xuropa offers FEL free exhibition space In-Reply-To: <604aa7910901142225g4263417drb467bb66cc3a6e47@mail.gmail.com> References: <50baabb30901121345v3df00672k1ea31413c02228f@mail.gmail.com> <20090114185803.GA24702@localhost.localdomain> <604aa7910901142225g4263417drb467bb66cc3a6e47@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <496F4232.7000604@kanarip.com> Jeff Spaleta wrote: > 2009/1/14 Paul W. Frields : >> * Is it possible that such a donation feature may be more trouble to >> track than it's actually worth? Can we do the site *without* a >> donation feature? > > > Unless something has changed, I think you'll have a hard time tracking > any donation inside the existing Red Hat account structure. > We'd need a separate non-profit methinks. But is it worth it? I think > it could be, if we were able to have a long standing and very specific > reason to take donations. > In fact, we've already got a non-profit organization that can bypass the Red Hat account structure culprit. And it's definitely worth it. > Personally I would for example LOVE to see a way for community to > donate towards the endowment of another Fedora scholarship instead of > just having Red Hat pony up all the money.. I'd like to see some sort > of corporate matching challenge with regard to the scholarship > program. Noted. I even think I mentioned that to Greg at one point. Or take > in donations for travel grants for Fedora contributors to apply for to > go to conferences. > Noted. ;-) Kind regards, Jeroen van Meeuwen -kanarip From poelstra at redhat.com Thu Jan 15 16:12:31 2009 From: poelstra at redhat.com (John Poelstra) Date: Thu, 15 Jan 2009 08:12:31 -0800 Subject: Fedora Board Recap 2009-01-13 Message-ID: <496F606F.4040301@redhat.com> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Board/Meetings/2009-01-13 == Roll Call == Attendees: John Poelstra, Paul Frields, Seth Vidal, Matt Domsch, Chris Aillon, Spot Callaway, Dimitris Glezos, Bill Nottingham, Harald Hoyer, Chris Tyler, and Jesse Keating == Welcome New Board Memebers == * Chris Aillon * Dimitris Glezos * Reminder that as much business as possible should be conducted on the fedora-advisory-board at redhat.com mailing list * fedora-board-list at redhat.com should be used for confidential matters that cannot be discussed publicly * Non-disclosure agreements (NDAs) are not required for non-Red Hat members and the board would like to keep it this way ** Ask that issues confidential and legal issues which cannot be discussed publicly remain confidential == Net Neutrality hearings in Canada == * Chris Tyler may be participating in hearings and using Fedora as an example of an open source project ** may request a letter from Fedora * Paul Frields also working to provide resources from Red Hat * '''ACTIONS:''' ** Check back with Paul to see that information has been provided == FUDCon Fedora 11 == === Things That Went Well === * No conflict with the Red Hat Summit like last time * Lots of talks at barcamp * Audio and video streaming very helpful for people not physically present * Hotel and venue close to T (public transpiration) was fantastic! === Observations and Possible Changes === * Some participants felt that the overall conference was poorly organized ** Hard to know how to get involved or what was going on when they showed up at Friday's hackfest ** Examine structure of FUDCon and order of sessions--have barcamp on day #1 followed by two days of hackfest ** Move to a Saturday, Sunday, Monday schedule? * Some barcamp sessions were not presented or organized very well * What if we required a slide deck prepared a week before FUDCon? ** Doing pitches online could add more time to the barcamp day itself ** Move last-minute topics or shorter topics to a "lightning talk" slots * Some sessions consumed a lot of time while presenter tried to get their demo to be functional * Could we message better what happens on each day and what people can expect? * Tension between between making conference more organized and stifling flexibility * Can we survey past attendees to identify other areas that were deficient? * Only five time slots for barcamp presentations ** Lots of presentations which resulted in 45 total sessions ** Resulted in too many conflicts * Some sessions were the "same old people" where the information being presented was already known by a majority of the audience * FUDPub worked well in the shared environment where it wasn't just a private party * By the third day a lot of people seem tired and less engaged * What about encapsulating the event and lodging in one location (hotel)? * Wireless connections were unreliable at MIT * Having FUDCon Boston in the heart of winter does not make a lot of sense * Extend barcamp day to have talks after dinner break * Break up days by having barcamp in morning, hackfest in afternoons across multiple days == Future FUDCons == * Moving to Fedora Activity Day (FAD) structure * Will not be holding FUDCon in conjunction with Red Hat Summit in Chicago, September 2009 * Funding for FUDCon in Boston in 2010 looks unlikely at this point ** Would be a great time/location for a Fedora Activity Day * Why can't someone write a barcamp application do the counting, room scheduling, and conflict resolution? ** Could this be a Google summer of code project? ** Barcamps are happening everywhere--seems like there could be a lot of uptake from conferences == Xuropa == * https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-advisory-board/2009-January/msg00016.html * FEL/OEM requests for trademark clearance: ** At first glance, TM guidelines appear to allow use of the trademark to show support for FEL/Fedora, provided other requirements are met ** Is the revenue stream worth pursuing? ** Transparency of accounting issues: *** Max could track funds, which helps *** Donors would need to know up front what fraction supports Fedora *** Not sure this minor revenue stream is required or desirable From james at xuropa.com Thu Jan 15 16:24:07 2009 From: james at xuropa.com (James Colgan) Date: Thu, 15 Jan 2009 08:24:07 -0800 Subject: Xuropa offers FEL free exhibition space In-Reply-To: <20090115133835.GE7559@localhost.localdomain> References: <20090115133835.GE7559@localhost.localdomain> Message-ID: <54774E2B7DA64D379D7CB43825798EDA@Xuropa1> Thank you Paul for your explanation. I really do not want the donation feature to hold up progress we can make in supporting Fedora and the FEL. It is the first time that we've contemplated this type of feature and thought it would be attractive/helpful. I suggest we decouple this from moving forward and put it on a parallel track as we work through the process. Does that make sense? James -----Original Message----- From: Paul W. Frields [mailto:stickster at gmail.com] Sent: Thursday, January 15, 2009 5:39 AM To: james at xuropa.com; fedora-advisory-board at redhat.com Subject: Re: Xuropa offers FEL free exhibition space On Wed, Jan 14, 2009 at 04:29:58PM -0800, James Colgan wrote: > > == Donation feature == > > > > Xuropa's cofounder proposes a "donation" paypal feature for which > > they will take a percentage of it. I'm ok with it. My question is, > > is Fedora Board you ok with it ? > > > > They would then collect funds and wire to "us" 85% of the proceeds > > after expenses (paypal's and hardware and license costs). This > > may not be very much to start, but it will build over > > time. However, if we are lucky, I guess we will get $100. > > > > I nominate MaxSpevack to be in charge of all money transaction, > > since he manages Fedora's budget already. IF we do happen to get > > lucky, maybe it would be nice to use "Fedora Scholarship" to get > > more contributors to FEL :) > > > > http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Scholarship > > >A couple concerns: > > >* The donation feature should let people know before they finalize > >any payment exactly what percentage is going to Fedora. > > >* Is it possible that such a donation feature may be more trouble > >to track than it's actually worth? Can we do the site *without* a > >donation feature? > > We can definitely state the percentage of the donation that goes to > FEL prior to the donation being made. While the Online Booth has > been presented without this donation feature I think that it would > be beneficial for all that we work it into the model in the future. > > As to how much will be generated, to be honest we won't know until > we try it out. However, it will help us to cover ours and FELs > costs. Later on, once we have moved to a different infrastructure, > we hope to support FEL within an Online Lab. We'd like to make this > available at no cost to FEL, but again, we have costs that we'd like > to be able to recover if possible (we're a small company ourselves). > So I'd like to understand how we can make this all easier for us all > from an accounting perspective and to enable FEL to begin to grow > some operating budget from these efforts. I'll check the > scholarship link above. > > Is this the first time that an open source project within Fedora has > worked with donations? (I've seen it done with other open source > and collaborations, the most well known being Mozilla > http://www.mozilla.org/foundation/donate.html) Mozilla, as well as some other open source groups, have the distinction of being run by 501(c)(3) nonprofit foundations, whereas Fedora does not. In fact, we can't, at least in the USA, because we get most of our operating budget from a single source, Red Hat. However, we do have a partner NPO in the EMEA region, the Fedora EMEA e.V. group, which might make this process less onerous. The amount may be small enough that this doesn't present an enormous problem for tracking or accounting, but the precedent is one of no little interest to the Board, I'd think. > Any guidance from the board here would be greatly appreciated. > > In the meantime, we're looking forward to Chitlesh and the community getting > the Online Booth in place and building the community. James, thank you for all the interest you've shown in Fedora and the FEL. We are eager to discuss this further and I look forward to hearing thoughts from some of the other Board and community members. -- 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 From stickster at gmail.com Thu Jan 15 16:55:20 2009 From: stickster at gmail.com (Paul W. Frields) Date: Thu, 15 Jan 2009 11:55:20 -0500 Subject: Xuropa offers FEL free exhibition space In-Reply-To: <54774E2B7DA64D379D7CB43825798EDA@Xuropa1> References: <20090115133835.GE7559@localhost.localdomain> <54774E2B7DA64D379D7CB43825798EDA@Xuropa1> Message-ID: <20090115165520.GI5966@localhost.localdomain> On Thu, Jan 15, 2009 at 08:24:07AM -0800, James Colgan wrote: > Thank you Paul for your explanation. > > I really do not want the donation feature to hold up progress we can make in > supporting Fedora and the FEL. It is the first time that we've contemplated > this type of feature and thought it would be attractive/helpful. I suggest > we decouple this from moving forward and put it on a parallel track as we > work through the process. > > Does that make sense? I think that's a fine and prudent idea, absolutely. The most important objective for Fedora, in this case, is that the FEL and Fedora are visible and relevant for EDA audiences worldwide, and that Chitlesh and other FEL and Fedora contributors are empowered to provide those resources to interested individuals and groups effectively, without substantial drain on Xuropa's resources. -- 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 jspaleta at gmail.com Thu Jan 15 17:08:10 2009 From: jspaleta at gmail.com (Jeff Spaleta) Date: Thu, 15 Jan 2009 08:08:10 -0900 Subject: Xuropa offers FEL free exhibition space In-Reply-To: <20090115165520.GI5966@localhost.localdomain> References: <20090115133835.GE7559@localhost.localdomain> <54774E2B7DA64D379D7CB43825798EDA@Xuropa1> <20090115165520.GI5966@localhost.localdomain> Message-ID: <604aa7910901150908k1f91a40ft29ed48a4fe558b7e@mail.gmail.com> On Thu, Jan 15, 2009 at 7:55 AM, Paul W. Frields wrote: > I think that's a fine and prudent idea, absolutely. The most > important objective for Fedora, in this case, is that the FEL and > Fedora are visible and relevant for EDA audiences worldwide, and that > Chitlesh and other FEL and Fedora contributors are empowered to > provide those resources to interested individuals and groups > effectively, without substantial drain on Xuropa's resources. Paul, If Xuropa is able to handle the accounting of donation collection and dispersement to specific upstream FEL related project development..or even to support Chitlesh directly to do FEL integration work would that be acceptable without any of the money coming into the Fedora project, would that be acceptable? The Board could come to an agreement with Xuropa as to the reporting and dispersement requirements Xuropa would need to do to keep the trademark access. I get the sense that Xuropa might be a better steward for donations targeted to further open EDA development than Fedora could be as they are an entity in the technical area that FEL targets. And if that's the case, just letting Xuropa manage the flow of donations to upstream projects may make some sense. -jef From kwade at redhat.com Thu Jan 15 17:35:31 2009 From: kwade at redhat.com (Karsten Wade) Date: Thu, 15 Jan 2009 09:35:31 -0800 Subject: BarCamp scheduler idea for summer coding Message-ID: <20090115173531.GM7770@calliope.phig.org> I saw you all had an idea for a BarCamp scheduling app. It was funny, when we were doing the scheduling on that Saturday morning, $someone walked out the door muttering to himself, "This is what computers are made for." If you've got an idea, the Summer coding for 2009 pages are now up: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Summer_coding_ideas_for_2009 https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Summer_coding_2009 If you haven't heard, Google's Summer of Code is a go for this year, although it is likely to be a bit smaller. Our ability to get student slots is direclty related to the quality of our applications and proposals from students. Giving them good ideas to work from is a great place to start. (More on the GSoC soon; I'm going to be recruiting more Marketing help.) - 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 Thu Jan 15 18:02:28 2009 From: stickster at gmail.com (Paul W. Frields) Date: Thu, 15 Jan 2009 13:02:28 -0500 Subject: BarCamp scheduler idea for summer coding In-Reply-To: <20090115173531.GM7770@calliope.phig.org> References: <20090115173531.GM7770@calliope.phig.org> Message-ID: <20090115180228.GB25489@localhost.localdomain> On Thu, Jan 15, 2009 at 09:35:31AM -0800, Karsten Wade wrote: > I saw you all had an idea for a BarCamp scheduling app. It was funny, > when we were doing the scheduling on that Saturday morning, $someone > walked out the door muttering to himself, "This is what computers are > made for." I'm pretty sure that's the exact comment that prompted the conversation about an app. Funny how the lack of painter's tape at this BarCamp -- my fault, to be sure -- really highlighted the problem! That meant we couldn't distribute the cost of arranging the schedule among so many speakers. Which maybe exposed the larger head-scratching, as in "Why do we do it like this at all?" The BarCamp app was also discussed as part of the need for a better, more modular conference app that would serve so many communities who end up writing their own. Clint Savage, for example, was involved in writing one of these for UTOS because of the lack of something that worked the way they needed. So a better upstream might be called for, whether a schedule conflict resolver for BarCamp is part of that or not. In the spirit of full disclosure, I've done no research on 100% FOSS conference software. > If you've got an idea, the Summer coding for 2009 pages are now up: > > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Summer_coding_ideas_for_2009 > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Summer_coding_2009 > > If you haven't heard, Google's Summer of Code is a go for this year, > although it is likely to be a bit smaller. Our ability to get > student slots is direclty related to the quality of our applications > and proposals from students. Giving them good ideas to work from is a > great place to start. > > (More on the GSoC soon; I'm going to be recruiting more Marketing > help.) Brilliant, we were saying that this sounded like a great GSoC idea. -- 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 Thu Jan 15 19:09:42 2009 From: matt at domsch.com (Matt Domsch) Date: Thu, 15 Jan 2009 13:09:42 -0600 Subject: Xuropa offers FEL free exhibition space In-Reply-To: <604aa7910901150908k1f91a40ft29ed48a4fe558b7e@mail.gmail.com> References: <20090115133835.GE7559@localhost.localdomain> <54774E2B7DA64D379D7CB43825798EDA@Xuropa1> <20090115165520.GI5966@localhost.localdomain> <604aa7910901150908k1f91a40ft29ed48a4fe558b7e@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <20090115190942.GB24792@domsch.com> On Thu, Jan 15, 2009 at 08:08:10AM -0900, Jeff Spaleta wrote: > On Thu, Jan 15, 2009 at 7:55 AM, Paul W. Frields wrote: > > I think that's a fine and prudent idea, absolutely. The most > > important objective for Fedora, in this case, is that the FEL and > > Fedora are visible and relevant for EDA audiences worldwide, and that > > Chitlesh and other FEL and Fedora contributors are empowered to > > provide those resources to interested individuals and groups > > effectively, without substantial drain on Xuropa's resources. > > Paul, > > If Xuropa is able to handle the accounting of donation collection and > dispersement to specific upstream FEL related project development..or > even to support Chitlesh directly to do FEL integration work would > that be acceptable without any of the money coming into the Fedora > project, would that be acceptable? The Board could come to an > agreement with Xuropa as to the reporting and dispersement > requirements Xuropa would need to do to keep the trademark access. > > I get the sense that Xuropa might be a better steward for donations > targeted to further open EDA development than Fedora could be as they > are an entity in the technical area that FEL targets. And if that's > the case, just letting Xuropa manage the flow of donations to upstream > projects may make some sense. I don't know that Xuropa would need a trademark license from us to do so. * Xuropa hosts FEL in their online lab, and raises the visibility of Fedora and FEL. No license needed. * Xuropa solicits donations for themselves (not saying they're collecting for Fedora, or that they might contribute some amount back to Fedora). No license needed. * Xuropa then chooses to contribute (time or $$ or resources) directly to the development of FEL. Perhaps they make CDs or pay Chitlesh somehow. No license needed. * Xuropa then chooses to contribute $$ to the Fedora Project itself in some way. Fedora EMEA is our best conduit for that, or Xuropa could be asked to pay for specific items at an event (e.g. the bar tab) w/o flowing the money through Red Hat or Fedora EMEA at all. Need it be more complicated than this? Thanks, Matt From jspaleta at gmail.com Thu Jan 15 20:09:08 2009 From: jspaleta at gmail.com (Jeff Spaleta) Date: Thu, 15 Jan 2009 11:09:08 -0900 Subject: Xuropa offers FEL free exhibition space In-Reply-To: <20090115190942.GB24792@domsch.com> References: <20090115133835.GE7559@localhost.localdomain> <54774E2B7DA64D379D7CB43825798EDA@Xuropa1> <20090115165520.GI5966@localhost.localdomain> <604aa7910901150908k1f91a40ft29ed48a4fe558b7e@mail.gmail.com> <20090115190942.GB24792@domsch.com> Message-ID: <604aa7910901151209n11e7a008oc0160510970f2584@mail.gmail.com> On Thu, Jan 15, 2009 at 10:09 AM, Matt Domsch wrote: > I don't know that Xuropa would need a trademark license from us to do > so. To run their own donation collection box..no of course not. And they are free to do that. But if they wanted to associate that collection directly with the Fedora project brand, leveraging the Fedora brand value to increase interest in donation, but handle all the details of the collection and distribution...that would be a trademark issue I believe. I think from our own project perspective, having our name associated with donations going to support open upstream development is a good thing for the brand. But the devil is in the details as to how much of that donation would need to go to community. Obviously a 100% donation passthrough is something we could support with our brand. Anything less becomes murkier. -jef From chitlesh.goorah at gmail.com Thu Jan 15 20:29:51 2009 From: chitlesh.goorah at gmail.com (Chitlesh GOORAH) Date: Thu, 15 Jan 2009 21:29:51 +0100 Subject: Xuropa offers FEL free exhibition space In-Reply-To: <604aa7910901151209n11e7a008oc0160510970f2584@mail.gmail.com> References: <20090115133835.GE7559@localhost.localdomain> <54774E2B7DA64D379D7CB43825798EDA@Xuropa1> <20090115165520.GI5966@localhost.localdomain> <604aa7910901150908k1f91a40ft29ed48a4fe558b7e@mail.gmail.com> <20090115190942.GB24792@domsch.com> <604aa7910901151209n11e7a008oc0160510970f2584@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <50baabb30901151229o7a8c82b1o5bcee87c4782515c@mail.gmail.com> On Thu, Jan 15, 2009 at 9:09 PM, Jeff Spaleta wrote: > To run their own donation collection box..no of course not. And they > are free to do that. > But if they wanted to associate that collection directly with the > Fedora project brand, leveraging the Fedora brand value to increase > interest in donation, but handle all the details of the collection and > distribution...that would be a trademark issue I believe. Hmm wrong ! "I" requested the Fedora trademark (logo) to use Fedora Logo and "Fedora" along with "Electronic Lab" . Just like at LinuxTag, Fedora Ambassadors hang Fedora Banners with Fedora Trademark on it. Other companies such as Cadence , Mathworks have the own booth/Lab along side with their logos. By the way, in the past, my fedora trademark request was approved to do marketing about fedora. I have been given admin rights by James for the FEL's Online Booth. So like a Fedora Ambassador at the Booth, I'll hang the Fedora Logo. Fedora Trademark has nothing to do with the donation feature. Please don't complicate things when it is not a problem. Remember the little donation at the Fedora booth at Linuxtag or Fosdem? Interpret it likewise. Like Matt pointed is simple and I'm grateful that James accepted my request. With our teleconference yesterday, we have built up a mutual trust. Since James said " I suggest we decouple this from moving forward and put it on a parallel track as we work through the process." I'll be delighted to open out booth very soon. Don't leave me logoless ! regards, Chitlesh Goorah From stickster at gmail.com Thu Jan 15 21:46:47 2009 From: stickster at gmail.com (Paul W. Frields) Date: Thu, 15 Jan 2009 16:46:47 -0500 Subject: Xuropa offers FEL free exhibition space In-Reply-To: <50baabb30901151229o7a8c82b1o5bcee87c4782515c@mail.gmail.com> References: <20090115133835.GE7559@localhost.localdomain> <54774E2B7DA64D379D7CB43825798EDA@Xuropa1> <20090115165520.GI5966@localhost.localdomain> <604aa7910901150908k1f91a40ft29ed48a4fe558b7e@mail.gmail.com> <20090115190942.GB24792@domsch.com> <604aa7910901151209n11e7a008oc0160510970f2584@mail.gmail.com> <50baabb30901151229o7a8c82b1o5bcee87c4782515c@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <20090115214647.GE4794@localhost.localdomain> On Thu, Jan 15, 2009 at 09:29:51PM +0100, Chitlesh GOORAH wrote: > On Thu, Jan 15, 2009 at 9:09 PM, Jeff Spaleta wrote: > > To run their own donation collection box..no of course not. And they > > are free to do that. > > But if they wanted to associate that collection directly with the > > Fedora project brand, leveraging the Fedora brand value to increase > > interest in donation, but handle all the details of the collection and > > distribution...that would be a trademark issue I believe. > > > Hmm wrong ! > > "I" requested the Fedora trademark (logo) to use Fedora Logo and > "Fedora" along with "Electronic Lab" . Just like at LinuxTag, Fedora > Ambassadors hang Fedora Banners with Fedora Trademark on it. Other > companies such as Cadence , Mathworks have the own booth/Lab along > side with their logos. > > By the way, in the past, my fedora trademark request was approved to > do marketing about fedora. > > I have been given admin rights by James for the FEL's Online Booth. So > like a Fedora Ambassador at the Booth, I'll hang the Fedora Logo. > > Fedora Trademark has nothing to do with the donation feature. Please > don't complicate things when it is not a problem. > > Remember the little donation at the Fedora booth at Linuxtag or > Fosdem? Interpret it likewise. > > Like Matt pointed is simple and I'm grateful that James accepted my > request. With our teleconference yesterday, we have built up a mutual > trust. Since James said > " I suggest we decouple this from moving forward and put it on a > parallel track as we work through the process." > > I'll be delighted to open out booth very soon. > Don't leave me logoless ! Chitlesh, you'll definitely be able to use the logo at the Online Booth. You're promoting an official Fedora spin, and supporting the Fedora Project through the Online Booth. The logo should link to the official Fedora Project site at http://fedoraproject.org and then everything's good to go. Reading our trademark guidelines, I don't see any problem whatsoever with this arrangement. In fact, we've specifically set up those guidelines to allow personal and business sites to support Fedora in this fashion. Whether the logo is attached to a donation button might generate more discussion. I think that's the situation to which Jef was specifically referring. But thanks to James' suggestion, we can consider that as a separate matter from the Online Booth, which should be good to proceed. -- 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 jspaleta at gmail.com Thu Jan 15 23:26:19 2009 From: jspaleta at gmail.com (Jeff Spaleta) Date: Thu, 15 Jan 2009 14:26:19 -0900 Subject: Xuropa offers FEL free exhibition space In-Reply-To: <20090115214647.GE4794@localhost.localdomain> References: <20090115133835.GE7559@localhost.localdomain> <54774E2B7DA64D379D7CB43825798EDA@Xuropa1> <20090115165520.GI5966@localhost.localdomain> <604aa7910901150908k1f91a40ft29ed48a4fe558b7e@mail.gmail.com> <20090115190942.GB24792@domsch.com> <604aa7910901151209n11e7a008oc0160510970f2584@mail.gmail.com> <50baabb30901151229o7a8c82b1o5bcee87c4782515c@mail.gmail.com> <20090115214647.GE4794@localhost.localdomain> Message-ID: <604aa7910901151526m24f98143qde1df2a6fff5098a@mail.gmail.com> On Thu, Jan 15, 2009 at 12:46 PM, Paul W. Frields wrote: > Whether the logo is attached to a donation button might generate more > discussion. I think that's the situation to which Jef was > specifically referring. But thanks to James' suggestion, we can > consider that as a separate matter from the Online Booth, which should > be good to proceed. Yes my comments are directly related to usage of the Fedora marks in direct association with a donation button..and only the donation button. Donations could be problematic for us as a project if we aren't prepared to deal with them in a transparent fashion. I've no problem if Xuropa is committed to helping support FEL. In fact I'm ecstatic! I think what Chitlesh is doing with FEL is absolutely fantastic and we should all talk about it more. Getting content expert business interests like Xuropa lined up to support the development of FEL and the upstream projects it integrates is a non-trivial accomplishment worth of support. We just have to be careful with the donations, because frankly we aren't setup to deal with them in an equitable and transparent way at the project level. The absolute last thing I want to do is give people the expectation that they are contributing financially to the Fedora Project when they hit the donation button, but not be able to keep a track of what those donations are doing. -jef From katzj at redhat.com Thu Jan 15 23:34:59 2009 From: katzj at redhat.com (Jeremy Katz) Date: Thu, 15 Jan 2009 18:34:59 -0500 Subject: Fedora Board Recap 2009-01-13 In-Reply-To: <496F606F.4040301@redhat.com> References: <496F606F.4040301@redhat.com> Message-ID: <20090115233459.GB603@redhat.com> On Thursday, January 15 2009, John Poelstra said: [snip] > === Observations and Possible Changes === > * Some barcamp sessions were not presented or organized very well > * What if we required a slide deck prepared a week before FUDCon? As soon as you start requiring prepared presentations, you start diverging quite a bit from the barcamp nature and into traditional "conference presentation" land... [snip] > ** Lots of presentations which resulted in 45 total sessions > ** Resulted in too many conflicts While this makes it hard to get to everything you want, I think that it's a huge success to get a lot of people wanting to talk about what they are passionate about. Maybe an answer is to have more barcamp time as opposed to hackfest time? Especially as there ends up being plenty of random hacking that just occurs in the hallway. Just trying to sort of brainstorm out loud here. > * Some sessions were the "same old people" where the information being > presented was already known by a majority of the audience If people were going to the talks, then it wasn't the same old. If you know it, get up and leave. That's what the barcamp format is all about. > * By the third day a lot of people seem tired and less engaged This is just the nature of "deep" days like we had -- and it would have been the fourth day for some people given the Day0 stuff Jeremy From stickster at gmail.com Fri Jan 16 14:44:38 2009 From: stickster at gmail.com (Paul W. Frields) Date: Fri, 16 Jan 2009 09:44:38 -0500 Subject: Fedora Board Recap 2009-01-13 In-Reply-To: <20090115233459.GB603@redhat.com> References: <496F606F.4040301@redhat.com> <20090115233459.GB603@redhat.com> Message-ID: <20090116144438.GD28057@localhost.localdomain> On Thu, Jan 15, 2009 at 06:34:59PM -0500, Jeremy Katz wrote: > On Thursday, January 15 2009, John Poelstra said: > [snip] > > === Observations and Possible Changes === > > * Some barcamp sessions were not presented or organized very well > > * What if we required a slide deck prepared a week before FUDCon? > > As soon as you start requiring prepared presentations, you start > diverging quite a bit from the barcamp nature and into traditional > "conference presentation" land... It might be possible to do a tracked FUDCon event, with part of the venue devoted to BarCamp and part devoted to formal talks. My guess is we'd want to lean toward BarCamp in terms of volume. > [snip] > > ** Lots of presentations which resulted in 45 total sessions > > ** Resulted in too many conflicts > > While this makes it hard to get to everything you want, I think that > it's a huge success to get a lot of people wanting to talk about what > they are passionate about. Maybe an answer is to have more barcamp > time as opposed to hackfest time? Especially as there ends up being > plenty of random hacking that just occurs in the hallway. Just trying > to sort of brainstorm out loud here. This comment echoes some things said in the Board meeting as well. Some possibilities: * Software-based conflict resolution would speed up the process, so we could start the day sooner with a more complete schedule. * We could simply add a dinner break and more hours afterward. Push any night event later in the evening or shorten it as required. "Narrow" the schedule grid, assuming the locations are on the horizontal axis, making it easier to get to more talks. * > > * Some sessions were the "same old people" where the information being > > presented was already known by a majority of the audience > > If people were going to the talks, then it wasn't the same old. If you > know it, get up and leave. That's what the barcamp format is all about. Or request that the speaker talk about something else. It's a participatory format, not a lecture format. If I'm at a talk where I'm learning new material, I'll settle into a reception-only mode, but if the material is at least partially familiar, I try to participate. I happened to give a talk where the vast majority of attendees knew *much* more about the topic than I. That was a win for me and for the few attendees who really were beginners, the audience for whom the talk was intended. Interestingly, some of the experts learned from each other too, showing (I believe) that the open mind can always find value in collaboration. I gave fair warning at the start of the session, so if anyone felt slighted I could cheerfully refund them double what they paid, no questions asked. ;-) > > * By the third day a lot of people seem tired and less engaged > > This is just the nature of "deep" days like we had -- and it would have > been the fourth day for some people given the Day0 stuff Also the last day of hackfest followed FUDPub -- although by all accounts FUDPub was free of profligacy. If we arranged the days starting with a BarCamp on Saturday (and FUDPub that night), and then hackfest on Sunday and Monday, both days starting slightly later, we might avoid that slump. Most attendees are also scheduled to travel on the last day/evening, lending to a feeling that things are winding down gradually all day. Short of doing a week-long event, which is probably financially infeasible, I'm not sure how we can combat this slump. -- 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 inode0 at gmail.com Fri Jan 16 15:58:50 2009 From: inode0 at gmail.com (inode0) Date: Fri, 16 Jan 2009 09:58:50 -0600 Subject: Fedora Board Recap 2009-01-13 In-Reply-To: <20090116144438.GD28057@localhost.localdomain> References: <496F606F.4040301@redhat.com> <20090115233459.GB603@redhat.com> <20090116144438.GD28057@localhost.localdomain> Message-ID: On Fri, Jan 16, 2009 at 8:44 AM, Paul W. Frields wrote: > On Thu, Jan 15, 2009 at 06:34:59PM -0500, Jeremy Katz wrote: >> On Thursday, January 15 2009, John Poelstra said: >> [snip] >> > === Observations and Possible Changes === >> > * Some barcamp sessions were not presented or organized very well >> > * What if we required a slide deck prepared a week before FUDCon? >> >> As soon as you start requiring prepared presentations, you start >> diverging quite a bit from the barcamp nature and into traditional >> "conference presentation" land... > > It might be possible to do a tracked FUDCon event, with part of the > venue devoted to BarCamp and part devoted to formal talks. My guess > is we'd want to lean toward BarCamp in terms of volume. We have been considering a hybrid barcamp structure for a local barcamp we are planning as well in part to accommodate more attendees who are more comfortable with coming to learn about new things but who don't feel comfortable being expected to actively participate. Our current thinking is to schedule maybe one or two sessions per timeslot that are pre-arranged in the more traditional conference style to be mixed throughout the day with barcamp sessions. >> [snip] >> > ** Lots of presentations which resulted in 45 total sessions >> > ** Resulted in too many conflicts >> >> While this makes it hard to get to everything you want, I think that >> it's a huge success to get a lot of people wanting to talk about what >> they are passionate about. Maybe an answer is to have more barcamp >> time as opposed to hackfest time? Especially as there ends up being >> plenty of random hacking that just occurs in the hallway. Just trying >> to sort of brainstorm out loud here. > > This comment echoes some things said in the Board meeting as well. > Some possibilities: > > * Software-based conflict resolution would speed up the process, so we > could start the day sooner with a more complete schedule. I'm not sure this would really help since the "voting" for sessions does not really indicate which sessions you end up attending or which sessions you most want to attend. Well, it might help speed up scheduling, but I don't think it would help resolve the resulting conflicts for attendees much. Honestly I thought the scheduling went pretty well as it was. > * We could simply add a dinner break and more hours afterward. Push > any night event later in the evening or shorten it as required. > "Narrow" the schedule grid, assuming the locations are on the > horizontal axis, making it easier to get to more talks. Having the barcamp portion of the program longer might be nice but we should keep in mind that no matter what we do in this respect we will be left with people not getting to all the things they would like to get to as long as we are successful getting the sort of leadership participation demonstrated at FUDconF11. With 50, 60, 70, 80, pitched sessions rampant conflicts are inevitable and really this is a good problem to have compared to the alternative. >> > * Some sessions were the "same old people" where the information being >> > presented was already known by a majority of the audience >> >> If people were going to the talks, then it wasn't the same old. If you >> know it, get up and leave. That's what the barcamp format is all about. > > Or request that the speaker talk about something else. It's a > participatory format, not a lecture format. If I'm at a talk where > I'm learning new material, I'll settle into a reception-only mode, but > if the material is at least partially familiar, I try to participate. And working with speakers might help here too. Let speakers know ahead of time of the issues with encore performances so they can be better prepared to adapt to the audience they actually end up having. Even if you are planning an introductory session on a topic similar to ones you have given before you should be prepared to do something a bit more advanced if the composition of the audience warrants it. > I happened to give a talk where the vast majority of attendees knew > *much* more about the topic than I. That was a win for me and for the > few attendees who really were beginners, the audience for whom the > talk was intended. Interestingly, some of the experts learned from > each other too, showing (I believe) that the open mind can always find > value in collaboration. I gave fair warning at the start of the > session, so if anyone felt slighted I could cheerfully refund them > double what they paid, no questions asked. ;-) > >> > * By the third day a lot of people seem tired and less engaged >> >> This is just the nature of "deep" days like we had -- and it would have >> been the fourth day for some people given the Day0 stuff > > Also the last day of hackfest followed FUDPub -- although by all > accounts FUDPub was free of profligacy. If we arranged the days > starting with a BarCamp on Saturday (and FUDPub that night), and then > hackfest on Sunday and Monday, both days starting slightly later, we > might avoid that slump. Most attendees are also scheduled to travel > on the last day/evening, lending to a feeling that things are winding > down gradually all day. Short of doing a week-long event, which is > probably financially infeasible, I'm not sure how we can combat this > slump. Travel and fatigue on the final day were evident to me. Travel for many of the non-locals required leaving before things were scheduled to wind down completely as well. One can't get 8pm flights to everywhere unfortunately. Short of staying over an extra night, which I would be inclined to do in the future, there probably isn't a solution to that. The sort of restructuring suggested here might help with the fatigue factor on the final morning though. Keep in mind that FUDconF11 was a wonderful event for everyone who made it to Boston and even for some who didn't. I think the informality of the event is part of its charm and part of what makes it such a good vehicle with which to get things done. John From stickster at gmail.com Fri Jan 16 16:22:26 2009 From: stickster at gmail.com (Paul W. Frields) Date: Fri, 16 Jan 2009 11:22:26 -0500 Subject: Fedora Board Recap 2009-01-13 In-Reply-To: References: <496F606F.4040301@redhat.com> <20090115233459.GB603@redhat.com> <20090116144438.GD28057@localhost.localdomain> Message-ID: <20090116162226.GO28057@localhost.localdomain> On Fri, Jan 16, 2009 at 09:58:50AM -0600, inode0 wrote: > Keep in mind that FUDconF11 was a wonderful event for everyone who > made it to Boston and even for some who didn't. I think the > informality of the event is part of its charm and part of what makes > it such a good vehicle with which to get things done. I think one thing that might be worthwhile is a survey of the attendees to get their responses in a manner less inclined to be anecdotal. (Although of course there are always the concerns about a self-selecting survey population...) We've done that in the past -- and the old surveys are even recorded here: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Marketing/Surveys Perhaps someone in Comm-Arch would be willing to run another of these before the glow wears off? -- 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 kwade at redhat.com Fri Jan 16 18:57:25 2009 From: kwade at redhat.com (Karsten Wade) Date: Fri, 16 Jan 2009 10:57:25 -0800 Subject: Fedora Board Recap 2009-01-13 In-Reply-To: References: <496F606F.4040301@redhat.com> <20090115233459.GB603@redhat.com> <20090116144438.GD28057@localhost.localdomain> Message-ID: <20090116185725.GB7770@calliope.phig.org> On Fri, Jan 16, 2009 at 09:58:50AM -0600, inode0 wrote: > > We have been considering a hybrid barcamp structure for a local > barcamp we are planning as well in part to accommodate more attendees > who are more comfortable with coming to learn about new things but who > don't feel comfortable being expected to actively participate. Our > current thinking is to schedule maybe one or two sessions per timeslot > that are pre-arranged in the more traditional conference style to be > mixed throughout the day with barcamp sessions. Yeah, this mixed format could draw more participants. I've heard of this practice used in other events. > Travel and fatigue on the final day were evident to me. Travel for > many of the non-locals required leaving before things were scheduled > to wind down completely as well. One can't get 8pm flights to > everywhere unfortunately. Short of staying over an extra night, which > I would be inclined to do in the future, there probably isn't a > solution to that. The sort of restructuring suggested here might help > with the fatigue factor on the final morning though. I've tried both. Since I'm a total homebody, I actually prefer getting home, and it usually is a good thing when I'm back ASAP. However, the opposite is true at the same time. When I stayed Sunday night in Boston one or two times ago, I ended up having a great late night session in a hotel room that was at least equal to any other time of the weekend. - 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 kwade at redhat.com Fri Jan 16 19:05:12 2009 From: kwade at redhat.com (Karsten Wade) Date: Fri, 16 Jan 2009 11:05:12 -0800 Subject: FUDCon attendee survey (was: Fedora Board Recap 2009-01-13) In-Reply-To: <20090116162226.GO28057@localhost.localdomain> References: <496F606F.4040301@redhat.com> <20090115233459.GB603@redhat.com> <20090116144438.GD28057@localhost.localdomain> <20090116162226.GO28057@localhost.localdomain> Message-ID: <20090116190512.GC7770@calliope.phig.org> On Fri, Jan 16, 2009 at 11:22:26AM -0500, Paul W. Frields wrote: > On Fri, Jan 16, 2009 at 09:58:50AM -0600, inode0 wrote: > > Keep in mind that FUDconF11 was a wonderful event for everyone who > > made it to Boston and even for some who didn't. I think the > > informality of the event is part of its charm and part of what makes > > it such a good vehicle with which to get things done. > > I think one thing that might be worthwhile is a survey of the > attendees to get their responses in a manner less inclined to be > anecdotal. (Although of course there are always the concerns about a > self-selecting survey population...) > > We've done that in the past -- and the old surveys are even recorded > here: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Marketing/Surveys > > Perhaps someone in Comm-Arch would be willing to run another of these > before the glow wears off? I'd be willing to coordinate this, but we all need to suggest specific questions. As some of you may know, putting together a worthwhile survey is part art, part science. It's not likely that we can get this available any sooner than Tuesday end of day; the Red Hat office where we get keysurvey.com loads is closed on Monday. (I'm not interested in the rabbit hole of, "Find a new survey tool.") If we get that far, I'd welcome help in collating the data, etc. To be clear -- I don't think anyone in CommArch actually has the time to do this alone, so if it's left to that, it won't get done. I'm hoping there is enough distributed thinking that can be done to make it possible. - 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 Fri Jan 16 19:25:52 2009 From: stickster at gmail.com (Paul W. Frields) Date: Fri, 16 Jan 2009 14:25:52 -0500 Subject: FUDCon attendee survey (was: Fedora Board Recap 2009-01-13) In-Reply-To: <20090116190512.GC7770@calliope.phig.org> References: <496F606F.4040301@redhat.com> <20090115233459.GB603@redhat.com> <20090116144438.GD28057@localhost.localdomain> <20090116162226.GO28057@localhost.localdomain> <20090116190512.GC7770@calliope.phig.org> Message-ID: <20090116192552.GC10242@localhost.localdomain> On Fri, Jan 16, 2009 at 11:05:12AM -0800, Karsten Wade wrote: > On Fri, Jan 16, 2009 at 11:22:26AM -0500, Paul W. Frields wrote: > > On Fri, Jan 16, 2009 at 09:58:50AM -0600, inode0 wrote: > > > Keep in mind that FUDconF11 was a wonderful event for everyone who > > > made it to Boston and even for some who didn't. I think the > > > informality of the event is part of its charm and part of what makes > > > it such a good vehicle with which to get things done. > > > > I think one thing that might be worthwhile is a survey of the > > attendees to get their responses in a manner less inclined to be > > anecdotal. (Although of course there are always the concerns about a > > self-selecting survey population...) > > > > We've done that in the past -- and the old surveys are even recorded > > here: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Marketing/Surveys > > > > Perhaps someone in Comm-Arch would be willing to run another of these > > before the glow wears off? > > I'd be willing to coordinate this, but we all need to suggest specific > questions. As some of you may know, putting together a worthwhile > survey is part art, part science. > > It's not likely that we can get this available any sooner than Tuesday > end of day; the Red Hat office where we get keysurvey.com loads is > closed on Monday. (I'm not interested in the rabbit hole of, "Find a > new survey tool.") > > If we get that far, I'd welcome help in collating the data, etc. > > To be clear -- I don't think anyone in CommArch actually has the time > to do this alone, so if it's left to that, it won't get done. I'm > hoping there is enough distributed thinking that can be done to make > it possible. I'll be happy to help. I put this page up to start: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Survey_for_FUDCon_F11_post-event We can add or change question content there for now; when that's done would you be willing to work with the keysurvey.com PoC to have something posted and announced? -- 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 ianweller at gmail.com Mon Jan 19 03:45:06 2009 From: ianweller at gmail.com (Ian Weller) Date: Sun, 18 Jan 2009 21:45:06 -0600 Subject: [[Contact]] on wiki up to date? Message-ID: <20090119034506.GA20550@gmail.com> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Contact Is this up to date? -- Ian Weller http://ianweller.org GnuPG fingerprint: E51E 0517 7A92 70A2 4226 B050 87ED 7C97 EFA8 4A36 "Technology is a word that describes something that doesn't work yet." ~ Douglas Adams -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 197 bytes Desc: not available URL: From mspevack at redhat.com Mon Jan 19 08:47:29 2009 From: mspevack at redhat.com (Max Spevack) Date: Mon, 19 Jan 2009 09:47:29 +0100 (CET) Subject: [[Contact]] on wiki up to date? In-Reply-To: <20090119034506.GA20550@gmail.com> References: <20090119034506.GA20550@gmail.com> Message-ID: On Sun, 18 Jan 2009, Ian Weller wrote: > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Contact > > Is this up to date? I cleaned up some of it, and left a few comments/questions. --Max From poelstra at redhat.com Thu Jan 22 20:19:31 2009 From: poelstra at redhat.com (John Poelstra) Date: Thu, 22 Jan 2009 12:19:31 -0800 Subject: Fedora Board Recap 2009-01-20 Message-ID: <4978D4D3.2070708@redhat.com> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Board/Meetings/2009-01-20 == Roll Call == Attendees: John Poelstra, Paul Frields, Bill Nottingham, Spot Callaway, Chris Tyler, Matt Domsch, Chris Aillon, Jesse Keating, Harald Hoyer, Dimitris Glezos, and Seth Vidal == Net Neutrality Follow-up == * Paul Frields gathered information as requested but found nothing that provided value * Ask that Chris bring a letter to board if the time arises or circulate for discussion on fedora-advisory-board == FUDCon F11 Follow-up == * Paul sent links to survey questions to fedora-advisory-board * Karsten Wade is handling the process of getting the survey setup * Board would like to make a survey a requirement of each FUDCon and Fedora Activity Day (FAD) going forward ** Use the same questions in subsequent surveys == Finalizing trademark guidelines == * Could the guidelines slowing down community development? * https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Pfrields/New_trademark_guidelines * Guidelines around registering domains with Fedora in the name * Move discussion, questions, and concerns to fedora-advisory-board at redhat.com == What is Fedora? == * Are Fedora's mission and goals clear? * Background ** https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Overview ** https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-list/2009-January/msg02227.html * Move further discussion to fedora-advisory-board at redhat.com From mmcgrath at redhat.com Thu Jan 22 21:10:14 2009 From: mmcgrath at redhat.com (Mike McGrath) Date: Thu, 22 Jan 2009 15:10:14 -0600 (CST) Subject: Fedora Board Recap 2009-01-20 In-Reply-To: <4978D4D3.2070708@redhat.com> References: <4978D4D3.2070708@redhat.com> Message-ID: On Thu, 22 Jan 2009, John Poelstra wrote: > > == What is Fedora? == > * Are Fedora's mission and goals clear? > * Background > ** https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Overview > ** https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-list/2009-January/msg02227.html > * Move further discussion to fedora-advisory-board at redhat.com > Me again :) http://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-advisory-board/2007-July/msg00137.html So I'll kick this up a notch a bit and not ask questions but propose things. I'd like the fedora board and or FPL to give us a mission statement. I'd like to see a plan that I and everyone else can follow to implement this statement in the work we do. If http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Overview is correct. I'd like to see the page focused and simplified on what we're about. I'd also like to know what we should do to get it spread around a bit more. Somehow I feel like we've not properly set our users expectations right and in the end it hurts us when they have a bad experience. Fedora's goal is not one of a popularity contest, we serve a deeper purpose. [1] -Mike [1] I could be very wrong on this but the fedora-users thread was interesting but didn't yield the number of answers I'd hoped. From jwboyer at gmail.com Thu Jan 22 23:55:42 2009 From: jwboyer at gmail.com (Josh Boyer) Date: Thu, 22 Jan 2009 18:55:42 -0500 Subject: Fedora Board Recap 2009-01-20 In-Reply-To: References: <4978D4D3.2070708@redhat.com> Message-ID: <20090122235542.GA30028@zod.rchland.ibm.com> On Thu, Jan 22, 2009 at 03:10:14PM -0600, Mike McGrath wrote: >On Thu, 22 Jan 2009, John Poelstra wrote: >> >> == What is Fedora? == >> * Are Fedora's mission and goals clear? >> * Background >> ** https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Overview >> ** https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-list/2009-January/msg02227.html >> * Move further discussion to fedora-advisory-board at redhat.com >> > >Me again :) > >http://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-advisory-board/2007-July/msg00137.html > >So I'll kick this up a notch a bit and not ask questions but propose >things. > >I'd like the fedora board and or FPL to give us a mission statement. > >I'd like to see a plan that I and everyone else can follow to implement >this statement in the work we do. > >If http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Overview is correct. I'd like to see the >page focused and simplified on what we're about. I'd also like to know >what we should do to get it spread around a bit more. > >Somehow I feel like we've not properly set our users expectations right >and in the end it hurts us when they have a bad experience. Fedora's goal >is not one of a popularity contest, we serve a deeper purpose. [1] Then start by answering your own question. Fedora's goals, it's mission, and it's plan are driven by it's community[1]. Not by the Board, and with all respect to our excellent leader, not by the FPL. So, what do you want that plan to be? josh [1] And by community, I mean everyone that contributes to it regardless of employer. From mmcgrath at redhat.com Fri Jan 23 00:37:24 2009 From: mmcgrath at redhat.com (Mike McGrath) Date: Thu, 22 Jan 2009 18:37:24 -0600 (CST) Subject: Fedora Board Recap 2009-01-20 In-Reply-To: <20090122235542.GA30028@zod.rchland.ibm.com> References: <4978D4D3.2070708@redhat.com> <20090122235542.GA30028@zod.rchland.ibm.com> Message-ID: On Thu, 22 Jan 2009, Josh Boyer wrote: > > > >If http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Overview is correct. I'd like to see the > >page focused and simplified on what we're about. I'd also like to know > >what we should do to get it spread around a bit more. > > > >Somehow I feel like we've not properly set our users expectations right > >and in the end it hurts us when they have a bad experience. Fedora's goal > >is not one of a popularity contest, we serve a deeper purpose. [1] > > Then start by answering your own question. Fedora's goals, it's mission, > and it's plan are driven by it's community[1]. Not by the Board, and with all > respect to our excellent leader, not by the FPL. > > So, what do you want that plan to be? > > josh > > [1] And by community, I mean everyone that contributes to it regardless of > employer. > To me that's a cop out. How can 13,000+ active community members all lead a single project? Why have a board at all[1]? I think the community leading was great back when there weren't that many of us but now I really do think it's hurting people. I'm happy to continue to aid in leading the infrastructure team but where are we going and for what ultimate purpose. Everyone has their own expectations of Fedora but no one has said what it is and should be. The result is us constantly not meeting the expectations of the mainstream (because those expectations have not been defined by us) and then having technical users discount us because of the bad press. Not everyone is doing this, but enough are that people take notice. We are a mature and growing project. I can't imagine a non-free organization of our size and scope getting any further then this without a defined purpose, goals and mission. Individual teams keep setting goals for themselves (like in infrastructure for example) but without some larger purpose those goals are likely to get misaligned. -Mike [1] Our board is community and non community members. It seems suited to this task. From jspaleta at gmail.com Fri Jan 23 00:38:55 2009 From: jspaleta at gmail.com (Jeff Spaleta) Date: Thu, 22 Jan 2009 15:38:55 -0900 Subject: Fedora Board Recap 2009-01-20 In-Reply-To: <20090122235542.GA30028@zod.rchland.ibm.com> References: <4978D4D3.2070708@redhat.com> <20090122235542.GA30028@zod.rchland.ibm.com> Message-ID: <604aa7910901221638x685b4266md736a9050d2ec3bd@mail.gmail.com> On Thu, Jan 22, 2009 at 2:55 PM, Josh Boyer wrote: > Then start by answering your own question. Fedora's goals, it's mission, > and it's plan are driven by it's community[1]. Not by the Board, and with all > respect to our excellent leader, not by the FPL. > > So, what do you want that plan to be? > > josh > > [1] And by community, I mean everyone that contributes to it regardless of > employer. A suggestion..... straight from my interactions in a local brick and mortar non-profit group over the past couple of months. Run a set of organized mission, vision, values, belief exercises with a core group of 20 to 30 project leaders and empower those people to come to a consensus on messaging and to frame a vision for the project 3 years out. The specific exercises we are did in my brick and mortar non-profit will not directly apply (of course). We committed a solid 20 hours on a single weekend to do most of the activities based around a fast networking format as described here: http://www.squarewheels.com/scottswriting/mission.html I went in extremely skyptical because it was obvious going in that there were a lot of differences of opinions as to what direction the org is going in. And came out of the process I was actually pretty amazed that it went as smoothly as it did and that leaders were individually willing to let go of their own ideas as to what the org's priorities are and were willing to invest into what the obvious repeated themes where in the fast networking exercises. Part of that success was the skill of the outside facilitator. There were moments when people expressed their ownership of an idea somewhat emotionally, and having a skilled outside facilitator there helped work through those moments. Part of the success was that the attendees were pre-identified as community leadership in the org who were willing to give up their entire weekend to craft direction (and committed to susequently meet for follow up meetings of normal length as well). Now of course, my local org doesn't scale to Fedora in terms of logistics. Fedora can't get the right 30 leaders into a face-to-face room at a conference center across town and have them break up into table teams of 5 or 6 people. At least not without significant expense. So this sort of approach would have to be adapted. But I think its a good approach for the type of problem Mike is struggling with. I wish I thought I had the skills to facilitate this sort of thing, but I know I do not. -jef From jwboyer at gmail.com Fri Jan 23 00:55:55 2009 From: jwboyer at gmail.com (Josh Boyer) Date: Thu, 22 Jan 2009 19:55:55 -0500 Subject: Fedora Board Recap 2009-01-20 In-Reply-To: References: <4978D4D3.2070708@redhat.com> <20090122235542.GA30028@zod.rchland.ibm.com> Message-ID: <20090123005555.GB20080@yoda.jdub.homelinux.org> On Thu, Jan 22, 2009 at 06:37:24PM -0600, Mike McGrath wrote: >On Thu, 22 Jan 2009, Josh Boyer wrote: >> > >> >If http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Overview is correct. I'd like to see the >> >page focused and simplified on what we're about. I'd also like to know >> >what we should do to get it spread around a bit more. >> > >> >Somehow I feel like we've not properly set our users expectations right >> >and in the end it hurts us when they have a bad experience. Fedora's goal >> >is not one of a popularity contest, we serve a deeper purpose. [1] >> >> Then start by answering your own question. Fedora's goals, it's mission, >> and it's plan are driven by it's community[1]. Not by the Board, and with all >> respect to our excellent leader, not by the FPL. >> >> So, what do you want that plan to be? >> >> josh >> >> [1] And by community, I mean everyone that contributes to it regardless of >> employer. >> > >To me that's a cop out. I'll note that you still haven't answered your own question ;). >How can 13,000+ active community members all lead a >single project? Why have a board at all[1]? I think the community >leading was great back when there weren't that many of us but now I really >do think it's hurting people. I'm happy to continue to aid in leading the >infrastructure team but where are we going and for what ultimate purpose. I think infrastructure is a great example of community leading. You guys roll out stuff all the time that is new and exciting and was never dictated by a Board, planned out, and made sure to fit in "mission statements" or "goals". >Everyone has their own expectations of Fedora but no one has said what it >is and should be. The result is us constantly not meeting the >expectations of the mainstream (because those expectations have not been >defined by us) and then having technical users discount us because of the >bad press. Not everyone is doing this, but enough are that people take >notice. I see both good and bad press surrounding Fedora. Do you have examples of where you think we really need to address a criticism that has been made? >We are a mature and growing project. I can't imagine a non-free >organization of our size and scope getting any further then this without a >defined purpose, goals and mission. Individual teams keep setting goals >for themselves (like in infrastructure for example) but without some >larger purpose those goals are likely to get misaligned. Ok, I think you have a point there. However, I also think that is one of the functions of both FESCo and the Board. Those committees exist to make sure the various SIGs, projects, etc continue to move forward and _not_ get misaligned. So rather than a kind of concrete mission statement, think of them as the group that weighs each new turn of events in light of the current state of things and makes sure it's not entirely tangential to Fedora. They are there to enable people and monitor (I hesitate to use the term 'police'), not to define. I'm sure if someone said "Hey, let's scrap this koji thing and use launchpad", the Board would say "No." Similarly, if someone said we should start shipping proprietary kernel drivers or alternative kernels (even such as kernel-libre) that FESCo would review it and say no. Honestly, I think the Overview page you linked to is enough of a guideline of what we are and where we're going. >[1] Our board is community and non community members. It seems suited to >this task. Our board is community and community members. Just because they were appointed does not mean they are not part of our community. josh From mmcgrath at redhat.com Fri Jan 23 01:46:03 2009 From: mmcgrath at redhat.com (Mike McGrath) Date: Thu, 22 Jan 2009 19:46:03 -0600 (CST) Subject: Fedora Board Recap 2009-01-20 In-Reply-To: <20090123005555.GB20080@yoda.jdub.homelinux.org> References: <4978D4D3.2070708@redhat.com> <20090122235542.GA30028@zod.rchland.ibm.com> <20090123005555.GB20080@yoda.jdub.homelinux.org> Message-ID: On Thu, 22 Jan 2009, Josh Boyer wrote: > On Thu, Jan 22, 2009 at 06:37:24PM -0600, Mike McGrath wrote: > > > >To me that's a cop out. > > I'll note that you still haven't answered your own question ;). > I'm not on the board but I'll play that game just the same: To provide a platform where new and free technologies come to get first exposure to our larger industry. > >How can 13,000+ active community members all lead a > >single project? Why have a board at all[1]? I think the community > >leading was great back when there weren't that many of us but now I really > >do think it's hurting people. I'm happy to continue to aid in leading the > >infrastructure team but where are we going and for what ultimate purpose. > > I think infrastructure is a great example of community leading. You guys roll > out stuff all the time that is new and exciting and was never dictated by > a Board, planned out, and made sure to fit in "mission statements" or "goals". > I assure you what we roll out is often planned out. I'm not looking for dictation, I'm looking for larger overall direction. What are we doing? Where are we going? If the answer is "building fedora 11" that's not the "think larger" answer I'm looking for. > >Everyone has their own expectations of Fedora but no one has said what it > >is and should be. The result is us constantly not meeting the > >expectations of the mainstream (because those expectations have not been > >defined by us) and then having technical users discount us because of the > >bad press. Not everyone is doing this, but enough are that people take > >notice. > > I see both good and bad press surrounding Fedora. Do you have examples of > where you think we really need to address a criticism that has been made? > People complain about Fedora because they don't get why we are here. They jumped in, installed Fedora thinking it was something else. Why did they think that? Because we don't define it so others do. That overview page has a lot of content. It is unfocused, unclear, far too long and isn't really asking the right questions. "Who uses Fedora?" "Linus Torvalds" So what? We won the Torvalds prize? That's a nice factoid but it's not an overview. There's a reason Torvalds uses Fedora and he (and we) know what it is. But since we don't define it, we don't whistle it while we work, so people not involved in the development process don't get it. This thing I'm talking about, we should reek of it. When you install Fedora you should smell it in the exhaust of your CPU. We have not given context with our distribution upon using it. It's not just some new jerk distribution. It's not a general purpose distribution (unless it is?) We continue to fight with the press to say we get stuff in first and we're doing the work, but we continue to get compared to other distributions out there. We should hold ourselves and the press to a higher standard. When someone uses Fedora or reviews it it should be under the context of "new" not "compared to distribution X" because I'd like to think we're different then that. Simply trying to make a free distribution just isn't enough for us and the talent we have in our project anymore, what's next?. -Mike From mmcgrath at redhat.com Fri Jan 23 02:26:53 2009 From: mmcgrath at redhat.com (mmcgrath at redhat.com) Date: Thu, 22 Jan 2009 21:26:53 -0500 (EST) Subject: Fedora Board Recap 2009-01-20 In-Reply-To: References: <4978D4D3.2070708@redhat.com> <20090122235542.GA30028@zod.rchland.ibm.com> <20090123005555.GB20080@yoda.jdub.homelinux.org> Message-ID: On Jan 22, 2009, at 7:46 PM, Mike McGrath wrote: > On Thu, 22 Jan 2009, Josh Boyer wrote: >> On Thu, Jan 22, 2009 at 06:37:24PM -0600, Mike McGrath wrote: >>> >>> To me that's a cop out. >> >> I'll note that you still haven't answered your own question ;). >> > > I'm not on the board but I'll play that game just the same: > > To provide a platform where new and free technologies come to get > first > exposure to our larger industry. > >>> How can 13,000+ active community members all lead a >>> single project? Why have a board at all[1]? I think the community >>> leading was great back when there weren't that many of us but now >>> I really >>> do think it's hurting people. I'm happy to continue to aid in >>> leading the >>> infrastructure team but where are we going and for what ultimate >>> purpose. >> >> I think infrastructure is a great example of community leading. >> You guys roll >> out stuff all the time that is new and exciting and was never >> dictated by >> a Board, planned out, and made sure to fit in "mission statements" >> or "goals". >> > > I assure you what we roll out is often planned out. I'm not looking > for > dictation, I'm looking for larger overall direction. What are we > doing? > Where are we going? If the answer is "building fedora 11" that's > not the > "think larger" answer I'm looking for. > >>> Everyone has their own expectations of Fedora but no one has said >>> what it >>> is and should be. The result is us constantly not meeting the >>> expectations of the mainstream (because those expectations have >>> not been >>> defined by us) and then having technical users discount us because >>> of the >>> bad press. Not everyone is doing this, but enough are that people >>> take >>> notice. >> >> I see both good and bad press surrounding Fedora. Do you have >> examples of >> where you think we really need to address a criticism that has been >> made? >> > > People complain about Fedora because they don't get why we are > here. They > jumped in, installed Fedora thinking it was something else. Why did > they > think that? Because we don't define it so others do. > > That overview page has a lot of content. It is unfocused, unclear, > far > too long and isn't really asking the right questions. "Who uses > Fedora?" > "Linus Torvalds" So what? We won the Torvalds prize? That's a nice > factoid but it's not an overview. There's a reason Torvalds uses > Fedora > and he (and we) know what it is. But since we don't define it, we > don't > whistle it while we work, so people not involved in the development > process don't get it. > > This thing I'm talking about, we should reek of it. When you install > Fedora you should smell it in the exhaust of your CPU. > > We have not given context with our distribution upon using it. It's > not > just some new jerk distribution. It's not a general purpose > distribution > (unless it is?) We continue to fight with the press to say we get > stuff > in first and we're doing the work, but we continue to get compared to > other distributions out there. We should hold ourselves and the > press to > a higher standard. When someone uses Fedora or reviews it it should > be > under the context of "new" not "compared to distribution X" because > I'd > like to think we're different then that. > > Simply trying to make a free distribution just isn't enough for us > and the > talent we have in our project anymore, what's next?. It did just dawn on me that I might be trying to fix something that isn't really broken. So I'll sit tight and see what others think. Kthx. :-) -Mike From gdk at redhat.com Fri Jan 23 02:43:26 2009 From: gdk at redhat.com (Greg Dekoenigsberg) Date: Thu, 22 Jan 2009 21:43:26 -0500 (EST) Subject: Fedora Board Recap 2009-01-20 In-Reply-To: References: <4978D4D3.2070708@redhat.com> <20090122235542.GA30028@zod.rchland.ibm.com> Message-ID: On Thu, 22 Jan 2009, Mike McGrath wrote: > How can 13,000+ active community members all lead a single project? > Why have a board at all[1]? I think the community leading was great > back when there weren't that many of us but now I really do think it's > hurting people. I'm happy to continue to aid in leading the > infrastructure team but where are we going and for what ultimate > purpose. I just look at this thread in a sort of stunned awe. It wasn't that long ago before we were scrambling to have any community invovlement at all. Now we're trying to figure out how to articulate a coherent vision on behalf of 13,000 people -- a number that continues to grow, by the way, despite the occasional doubts that we feel about whether we are on the right track. This is an extremely high-class problem to have. I'm exceedingly grateful that we continue to be relevant enough to have this kind of conversation. --g -- Got an XO that you're not using? Loan it to a needy developer! [[ http://wiki.laptop.org/go/XO_Exchange_Registry ]] From gdk at redhat.com Fri Jan 23 03:14:03 2009 From: gdk at redhat.com (Greg Dekoenigsberg) Date: Thu, 22 Jan 2009 22:14:03 -0500 (EST) Subject: Fedora Board Recap 2009-01-20 In-Reply-To: References: <4978D4D3.2070708@redhat.com> <20090122235542.GA30028@zod.rchland.ibm.com> Message-ID: On Thu, 22 Jan 2009, Greg Dekoenigsberg wrote: > On Thu, 22 Jan 2009, Mike McGrath wrote: > >> How can 13,000+ active community members all lead a single project? Why >> have a board at all[1]? I think the community leading was great back when >> there weren't that many of us but now I really do think it's hurting >> people. I'm happy to continue to aid in leading the infrastructure team >> but where are we going and for what ultimate purpose. > > I just look at this thread in a sort of stunned awe. > > It wasn't that long ago before we were scrambling to have any community > invovlement at all. > > Now we're trying to figure out how to articulate a coherent vision on behalf > of 13,000 people -- a number that continues to grow, by the way, despite the > occasional doubts that we feel about whether we are on the right track. > > This is an extremely high-class problem to have. I'm exceedingly grateful > that we continue to be relevant enough to have this kind of conversation. Oh, and an actual opinion, that may or may not be useful to people: My favorite gin is Hendrick's. >From their website: "Hendrick?s is an iconoclastically produced small batch gin distilled in Ayrshire, Scotland. Our unusual distillation process combined with our oddly delicious set of infusions yields a one-of-a-kind gin that is passionately loved by a tiny yet growing handful of individuals all over the world. No other gin tastes like it because no other gin is made like it." A frequently seen advertisement: "Hendrick's. It's not for everybody." Maybe some see Fedora as elitist. Maybe that's not such a bad thing. --g -- Got an XO that you're not using? Loan it to a needy developer! [[ http://wiki.laptop.org/go/XO_Exchange_Registry ]] From jwboyer at gmail.com Fri Jan 23 03:36:30 2009 From: jwboyer at gmail.com (Josh Boyer) Date: Thu, 22 Jan 2009 22:36:30 -0500 Subject: Fedora Board Recap 2009-01-20 In-Reply-To: References: <4978D4D3.2070708@redhat.com> <20090122235542.GA30028@zod.rchland.ibm.com> <20090123005555.GB20080@yoda.jdub.homelinux.org> Message-ID: <20090123033630.GA16580@yoda.jdub.homelinux.org> On Thu, Jan 22, 2009 at 09:26:53PM -0500, mmcgrath at redhat.com wrote: >> Simply trying to make a free distribution just isn't enough for us and >> the >> talent we have in our project anymore, what's next?. > > It did just dawn on me that I might be trying to fix something that > isn't really broken. So I'll sit tight and see what others think. Kthx. > :-) So, I had this big long-winded email drafted up about various things in response to your other email. And then I got to the bottom where you asked this question and thought "hey... Mike and I are actually on almost the same page, just from different angles. So why does he think we need to fix something?" Then you send this out. And I feel better :). josh Fwiw, the long rambling email was about how the distro itself is only part of what Fedora is, and at that level it's really hard to differ yourself for more than a couple of months from your competitors when everything you do is given back for free. But then, you already know that. From inode0 at gmail.com Fri Jan 23 04:08:28 2009 From: inode0 at gmail.com (inode0) Date: Thu, 22 Jan 2009 22:08:28 -0600 Subject: Fedora Board Recap 2009-01-20 In-Reply-To: References: <4978D4D3.2070708@redhat.com> <20090122235542.GA30028@zod.rchland.ibm.com> Message-ID: On Thu, Jan 22, 2009 at 8:43 PM, Greg Dekoenigsberg wrote: > > On Thu, 22 Jan 2009, Mike McGrath wrote: > >> How can 13,000+ active community members all lead a single project? Why >> have a board at all[1]? I think the community leading was great back when >> there weren't that many of us but now I really do think it's hurting people. >> I'm happy to continue to aid in leading the infrastructure team but where >> are we going and for what ultimate purpose. > > I just look at this thread in a sort of stunned awe. > > It wasn't that long ago before we were scrambling to have any community > invovlement at all. > > Now we're trying to figure out how to articulate a coherent vision on behalf > of 13,000 people -- a number that continues to grow, by the way, despite the > occasional doubts that we feel about whether we are on the right track. Where did all these people come from? Perhaps one met Francesco on a train and heard about his love of Fedora and looked us up? Perhaps one met M?ir??n and sized her up as one exception human being and was moved by her passion for Fedora to look closer at the community because there must be something really valuable there to inspire her so much? Perhaps one is inspired by Rodrigo's zero carbon initiative to get involved? All 13,000 don't lead. Most will find a Geronimo. For some that might be Francesco, M?ir??n, Rodrigo, or any of countless others. What bonds us together? It isn't a mission statement. It is common core values, community, interesting work. To be honest, I'm not sure that articulating a coherent vision is even possible since the twists and turns the project takes are directed by the community, not the community as a whole but by some member of the community and those that member inspires. We might in the end have to accept that we don't know what our ultimate purpose is or how we are going to get there. But we can share a culture we are comfortable with, do interesting work, and try to make the world a better place in some small or large way while we are here. John From poelstra at redhat.com Wed Jan 28 23:36:10 2009 From: poelstra at redhat.com (John Poelstra) Date: Wed, 28 Jan 2009 15:36:10 -0800 Subject: Fedora 11 Alpha Readiness Meeting Message-ID: <4980EBEA.6020508@redhat.com> 2009-01-28 == Invitees == Ambassadors & Documentation -- David Nalley (present) Artwork/Design -- M?ir?n Duffy FESCo -- Jon Stanley (present) Fedora Engineering Manager -- Tom "Spot" Callaway (present) Fedora Project Leader -- Paul Frields (present) Infrastructure -- Mike McGrath (present) Marketing -- Jack Aboutboul Quality -- Will Woods (present) Release Engineering -- Jesse Keating (present) Translation -- Dimitris Glezos (present) Websites -- Ricky Zhou (present) Facilitator -- John Poelstra (present) == Goals of this meeting == o Make sure we are all aware of the tasks that need to be completed for for a successful Alpha release o Make sure that everyone has what they need from other groups o Meeting for no more than one hour o NOT make policy decisions or set new directions for Fedora, etc. All those things should continue to happen in the individual teams in their usual transparent manner == Release Engineering == o Everything looking good --in better shape than usual due to longer freezes and diligence to get rawhide installable each day o Pre-staging master mirror and should be ready today o Next create RC for liveimages o Owning creation of the alpha release announcement == Quality == o Things are looking good o PPC looking questionable--not sure if it will work or not; this will not block the release o Will is working on getting a central place that collects reports from community as to whether rawhide installs successfully on a given day == FESCo == o ext4 default file system --going to revisit after alpha and beta to make sure functionality is solid and no data corruption issues o Seeking status for Presto --Spot will track this down == Ambassadors & Documentation == o Release notes one page is ready o https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_11_Alpha_release_notes o Docs team will own the release announcement for the following releases going forward: --Beta --Preview --Final (GA) == Infrastructure == o Everything in infrastructure looks good o Quick check with release engineering on sizing --Release Engineering reports needing ~60 gigs o Working with Red Hat IT to upgrade Netapp filers --This won't happen until March 2009 at the earliest --space constraints may be a problem in the future --Release Engineering noted that all Fedora 7 and 8 material can be purged == Translation == o No translatable items for the Alpha o Things going well == Websites Team == o Need to obtain alpha banner from Art team o Need links and content on http://fedoraproject.org/get-prerelease --points to Fedora 10 content o Need to add link to http://fedoraproject.org/get-prerelease from http://fedoraproject.org/get-fedora == Paul Frields == o Working on getting alpha talking points in place--focal point of press interviews == Spot Callaway == o Need to do ambitious triage during test releases o Need to have a regular working anaconda or prewarn people when possible that it will not be working --Spot to talk with anaconda team o Identified high priority components to triage (bug triage team is working on a similar effort): --components put forth by Spot, Jesse, and Will included: --kernel, *xorg*, firefox, evolution, nautilus, kdebase, kdelibs, gtk, gnome-libs, anaconda, selinux-policy-*, NetworkManager, PackageKit, yum, rpm, gdm, plymouth, firstboot, and upstart --there are probably others --Jon Stanley volunteered to create an RSS feed to automatically query new rawhide bugs for these components --John Poelstra to help organize tracker triage days going forward == Not Discussed == o After the meeting John Poelstra filed an RFE with infrastructure to make these meetings publicly accessible in the future --https://fedorahosted.org/fedora-infrastructure/ticket/1160 From stickster at gmail.com Thu Jan 29 19:46:21 2009 From: stickster at gmail.com (Paul W. Frields) Date: Thu, 29 Jan 2009 14:46:21 -0500 Subject: Reminder: Fedora Board IRC meeting 1900 UTC 2009-01-06 Message-ID: <20090129194621.GB28663@localhost.localdomain> The Board is holding its monthly public meeting on Tuesday, 3 February 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 3 March 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: From stickster at gmail.com Thu Jan 29 21:06:32 2009 From: stickster at gmail.com (Paul Frields) Date: Thu, 29 Jan 2009 16:06:32 -0500 Subject: Reminder: Fedora Board IRC meeting 1900 UTC 2009-02-03 Message-ID: ** Changed subject line to reflect proper date. ** On Thu, Jan 29, 2009 at 2:46 PM, Paul W. Frields wrote: > The Board is holding its monthly public meeting on Tuesday, 3 February > 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 3 > March 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 > From poelstra at redhat.com Thu Jan 29 23:53:43 2009 From: poelstra at redhat.com (John Poelstra) Date: Thu, 29 Jan 2009 15:53:43 -0800 Subject: Fedora Board Recap 2009-01-27 Message-ID: <49824187.9010604@redhat.com> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Board/Meetings/2009-01-27 == Roll Call == * Present: Paul Frields, Bill Nottingham, Chris Aillon, Seth Vidal, Matt Domsch, Dimitris Glezos, Chris Tyler, Spot Callaway, and Jesse Keating * Regrets: Harald Hoyer * Secretary: John Poelstra == Followup to Previous Business == * Last meeting: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Board/Meetings/2009-01-20 === Trademark Guidelines Slowing Down Community? === * Discussion was to be moved to fedora-advisory-board at redhat.com * No discussion observed on the mailing list * Some board members re-reviewed guidelines since the last meeting. Key points from today's discussion were: ** Fedora is trademarkable world-wide ** Trademark guidelines on the wiki seem rather long--could a summarized version be created? *** This is generally not advised as it has the potential to create a second legal document ** Handling of domain name registration (and payment) by Red Hat on behalf of Fedora groups *** Local groups can choose to register their own domains, need to sign the trademark agreement. *** Alternatively, Red Hat can handle the domain registration and ownership **** Does not require execution of trademark agreement **** Domain name points to the organization's servers * '''ACTIONS''': No further discussion === "What is Fedora?" Discussion === * Discussion continued from last week's minutes on fedora-advisory-board list * https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-advisory-board/2009-January/msg00048.html * The board recognizes this question needs to be answered and spent a significant amount of time discussing: *# Who should answer this question and other questions it raises? *# How the questions should be answered? *# What does answering these questions mean to the Fedora Project as a whole? * The Board explored the topic somewhat, but its complexity and importance demand further discussions * '''ACTIONS''' Discussion will continue on 2009-02-10. ==== Comments and Observations (brainstorming) ==== * The bullets below capture the free flow of the ideas and issues raised ** The discussion represented many community concerns from varying points of view. ** The Board realizes that there are differing opinions on these issues. ** Therefore, '''these are not the final views or decisions of the board and should not be construed as such''' * Current web page is very vague and wide-ranging: https://www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/Overview ** ''Enthusiast'' definition is very broad * How well does this the marketing plan capture things? ** http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Marketing/Plan#TARGET_AUDIENCE * Is it the Board's job to define "What Fedora Is"? ** Is it the Fedora Project Leader's job to define Fedora and its purpose? ** What problems would the board be solving by doing this? ** How would it affect the day to day operation of Fedora? ** Could it help the focus of individual developers and what they work on or consider a priority? * What would be the purpose of further defining Fedora? ** Is it to be able to tell more people "no we don't do that?" ** Does it intentionally or unintentionally try to answer the question of whether Fedora competes with Ubuntu or not? * Is having a "desktop" and a "server" focus a strength or a weakness? * Which teams are responsible and accountable for setting default applications in Fedora? ** Some are specified by individual SIGs ** FESCo? ** Some are not clearly defined? * Would it be useful to directly address the ongoing question raised that our supported release cycle is not long enough as part of "What Fedora Is"? ** Is it worth considering extending support timeline another two or three months? ** There are no guidelines about what type of updates should be pushed and when *** History has shown that individual judgement is not always good as each maintainer uses different criteria ** By not clearly defining what users Fedora is not for it is hard to make good design decisions ** By restricting Fedora to a subset of users could we disadvantage current or unforeseen contributors? * What is Red Hat's role in defining Fedora's purpose? * Does the role of Fedora need to be defined? * What guidelines are there around what Fedora cannot do? ** Not directly compete with Red Hat Enterprise Linux * Distill what community is doing now and what we are good at? * Is it better to have a concrete descriptions of what Fedora is versus vague notions of what we want to be: "We only use free and open source software"? === Status of FUDCon F11 Survey === * survey is in the process of being created by a person inside Red Hat that has access to the survey tool * board will get a preview once created and then send out to the community * Paul Frields is requesting that the Red Hat Community Architecture Team administer this survey at all future events == Next Meeting == * Date: 2009-02-03 * Time: 19:00 UTC * Location: irc.freenode.net ** Moderated channel for board answers: #fedora-board-meeting ** Public channel to ask questions: #fedora-board-public From mmcgrath at redhat.com Fri Jan 30 03:01:54 2009 From: mmcgrath at redhat.com (Mike McGrath) Date: Thu, 29 Jan 2009 21:01:54 -0600 (CST) Subject: Bleeding edge software and Fedora Message-ID: Thought I'd pass this along for those that aren't on lwn. There's a lot of good (and bad) comments that stem from the article. http://lwn.net/SubscriberLink/316827/894bd60cdd16f1c9/ -Mike From stickster at gmail.com Fri Jan 30 15:27:09 2009 From: stickster at gmail.com (Paul W. Frields) Date: Fri, 30 Jan 2009 10:27:09 -0500 Subject: Bleeding edge software and Fedora In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20090130152709.GZ28663@localhost.localdomain> On Thu, Jan 29, 2009 at 09:01:54PM -0600, Mike McGrath wrote: > Thought I'd pass this along for those that aren't on lwn. There's a lot > of good (and bad) comments that stem from the article. > > http://lwn.net/SubscriberLink/316827/894bd60cdd16f1c9/ There are quite a lot of assertions and conclusions in that article that don't seem cut and dried to me. I don't know to whom in the Fedora community the author reached out before writing it, or whether it's meant to be more of an opinion piece anyway. I'm sure there were people who didn't enjoy KDE 4.0.3 in Fedora 9's initial release. I heard plenty of opinions on *both* sides of the issue, and based on the feedback I got, I believe there were plenty of people who were happy to try the new technology. For those who weren't, we maintained Fedora 8 up until earlier this month, which remains on KDE 3.5.x. Our purpose wasn't to be "more cutting-edge than thou," but rather to put more eyeballs on the advances in KDE and hopefully a better feedback loop, as we explained earlier: http://lwn.net/Articles/293003/ Also, the KDE SIG that did the integration work explains their rationale here: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/SIGs/KDE/KDE4FAQ I think we can take away that major desktop platform changes deserve plenty of forward warning for users so they can make informed decisions. -- 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 jonrob at fedoraproject.org Fri Jan 30 15:36:43 2009 From: jonrob at fedoraproject.org (Jonathan Roberts) Date: Fri, 30 Jan 2009 15:36:43 +0000 Subject: Bleeding edge software and Fedora In-Reply-To: <20090130152709.GZ28663@localhost.localdomain> References: <20090130152709.GZ28663@localhost.localdomain> Message-ID: <635d8d560901300736t4e640252xe0c417b3ca0b965d@mail.gmail.com> > There are quite a lot of assertions and conclusions in that article > that don't seem cut and dried to me. I don't know to whom in the > Fedora community the author reached out before writing it, or whether > it's meant to be more of an opinion piece anyway. On the bright side, both on that LWN article and on Aaron Seigo's blog, a lot of people expressed an understanding of, and support for, the way Fedora acted with regards to KDE 4.0. I thought the best comments came on Aaron Seigo's blog following Kevin Koffler's extremely well written comment. Jon