Fedora Board Recap 2009-01-13

[John Poelstra]

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