From kwade at redhat.com Sun Mar 1 08:54:51 2009 From: kwade at redhat.com (Karsten Wade) Date: Sun, 1 Mar 2009 00:54:51 -0800 Subject: linux foundation conference sad face In-Reply-To: <20090219144257.GC18190@localhost.localdomain> References: <20090219033400.GX3600@mini-me.lan> <20090219144257.GC18190@localhost.localdomain> Message-ID: <20090301085451.GA15315@calliope.phig.org> On Thu, Feb 19, 2009 at 09:42:57AM -0500, Paul W. Frields wrote: > > Thanks -- and for the record I've been contacted by a couple Linux > Foundation people as of yesterday, inviting Fedora to participate in > the community panel. Just as a follow-up, Paul and I agreed to put my name forward to the LF for participating on the community panel. I've signed up for the event and received my confirming invitation. Thanks all for alerting to this need. :) - 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 mostafa.daneshvar at gmail.com Mon Mar 2 14:19:20 2009 From: mostafa.daneshvar at gmail.com (Mostafa Daneshvar) Date: Mon, 02 Mar 2009 17:49:20 +0330 Subject: requesting a trademark license for our community In-Reply-To: References: <1234652661.17658.3.camel@localhost.localdomain> Message-ID: <1236003560.2918.2.camel@localhost.localdomain> On Mon, 2009-02-16 at 16:12 -0500, Paul Frields wrote: > Thank you for you email -- we're looking into this now, and will get > back to you as soon as we can. > > Paul Frields > Fedora Project Leader > Is there any news about it? Mostafa Daneshvar http://mostafadaneshvar.com -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 197 bytes Desc: This is a digitally signed message part URL: From stickster at gmail.com Mon Mar 2 16:42:57 2009 From: stickster at gmail.com (Paul W. Frields) Date: Mon, 2 Mar 2009 11:42:57 -0500 Subject: requesting a trademark license for our community In-Reply-To: <1236003560.2918.2.camel@localhost.localdomain> References: <1234652661.17658.3.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1236003560.2918.2.camel@localhost.localdomain> Message-ID: <20090302164257.GB14691@localhost.localdomain> On Mon, Feb 16, 2009 at 04:12:48PM -0500, Paul Frields wrote: > On Sat, Feb 14, 2009 at 6:04 PM, Mostafa Daneshvar > wrote: > > Dear Board; > > We, as Iranian community, want your permission to use > > "fedoraproject.ir".One of our members registered it without considering > > related regulations mentioned in > > "http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Legal/". > > within these few months this community attracted a lot of users,nearly > > 510 registered. According to logs our website approximately has 5000 > > pages view each day. Our forum has 5500 posts (up to now). > > Considering our efforts within this time, we need your license to > > continue our efforts. We need to grant us to use Fedora logo in our > > website. > > > > We should be thankful for your immediate response > > Thank you for you email -- we're looking into this now, and will get > back to you as soon as we can. As you may know, US federal law currently places sweeping restrictions on US citizens' and corporations' ability to transact with certain people, organizations, and nations. The list of embargoed nations includes Cuba, Iran, Libya, and North Korea, among others. The "Fedora" trademarks are regsitered worldwide to Red Hat, Inc., which administers them on behalf of the Fedora community. Because Red Hat is a US-based company, it must adhere to the restrictions imposed by US law. Therefore, we cannot grant a trademark license for the use of "Fedora" in your domain name, nor for use of the Fedora logo or other trademarks. I noted from your email that one of your community members registered the "fedoraproject.ir" domain. I'll send you a further email to discuss this issue. I sincerely regret not being able to accommodate your request. Paul W. Frields Fedora Project Leader -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: not available URL: From delhage at gmail.com Mon Mar 2 17:30:00 2009 From: delhage at gmail.com (delhage at gmail.com) Date: Mon, 2 Mar 2009 18:30:00 +0100 Subject: requesting a trademark license for our community In-Reply-To: <20090302164257.GB14691@localhost.localdomain> References: <1234652661.17658.3.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1236003560.2918.2.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20090302164257.GB14691@localhost.localdomain> Message-ID: <1b2231930903020930p79c9154r28e7b72822ee568f@mail.gmail.com> On Mon, Mar 2, 2009 at 17:42, Paul W. Frields wrote: > On Mon, Feb 16, 2009 at 04:12:48PM -0500, Paul Frields wrote: >> On Sat, Feb 14, 2009 at 6:04 PM, Mostafa Daneshvar >> wrote: >> > Dear Board; >> > We, as Iranian community, want your permission to use >> > "fedoraproject.ir".One of our members registered it without considering >> > related regulations mentioned in >> > "http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Legal/". >> > within these few months this community attracted a lot of users,nearly >> > 510 registered. According to logs our ? website approximately has 5000 >> > pages view each day. Our forum has 5500 posts (up to now). >> > Considering our efforts within this time, we need your license to >> > continue our efforts. We need to grant us to use Fedora logo in our >> > website. >> > >> > We should be thankful for your immediate response >> >> Thank you for you email -- we're looking into this now, and will get >> back to you as soon as we can. > > > As you may know, US federal law currently places sweeping restrictions > on US citizens' and corporations' ability to transact with certain > people, organizations, and nations. ?The list of embargoed nations > includes Cuba, Iran, Libya, and North Korea, among others. > > The "Fedora" trademarks are regsitered worldwide to Red Hat, Inc., > which administers them on behalf of the Fedora community. ?Because Red > Hat is a US-based company, it must adhere to the restrictions imposed > by US law. ?Therefore, we cannot grant a trademark license for the use > of "Fedora" in your domain name, nor for use of the Fedora logo or > other trademarks. > > I noted from your email that one of your community members registered > the "fedoraproject.ir" domain. ?I'll send you a further email to > discuss this issue. > > I sincerely regret not being able to accommodate your request. > This is very disturbing to me if it's true. We have here a community of people that are being restricted from participating in the global Fedora community because of arbitrary US restrictions. I really hope that we can find a way to circumvent (yes) these restrictions. Will Red Hat try to enforce the trademarks in this case? Will it use it's legal powers to try and shutdown fedoraproject.ir? I would like to get a public clarification regarding this issue and an explanation how two of the four F's, "Freedom" and "Friends" are compatible with this policy. Thanks, Lars -- Lars Delhage RHC{E,X,A,SS} CL{P,E}{9,10} CNI LPIC-2.tel: +46 8 458 78 10 Nohup AB, Stortorget 1, 111 29 Stockholm mob: +46 70 781 60 69 GPG ID: 569492FE url :http://www.nohup.se From sundaram at fedoraproject.org Mon Mar 2 17:41:02 2009 From: sundaram at fedoraproject.org (Rahul Sundaram) Date: Mon, 02 Mar 2009 23:11:02 +0530 Subject: requesting a trademark license for our community In-Reply-To: <1b2231930903020930p79c9154r28e7b72822ee568f@mail.gmail.com> References: <1234652661.17658.3.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1236003560.2918.2.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20090302164257.GB14691@localhost.localdomain> <1b2231930903020930p79c9154r28e7b72822ee568f@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <49AC1A2E.3080201@fedoraproject.org> delhage at gmail.com wrote: > This is very disturbing to me if it's true. We have here a community > of people that are being restricted from participating in the global > Fedora community because of arbitrary US restrictions. I really hope > that we can find a way to circumvent (yes) these restrictions. Can Fedora EMEA help here? Will > Red Hat try to enforce the trademarks in this case? Will it use it's > legal powers to try and shutdown fedoraproject.ir? I would like to get > a public clarification regarding this issue and an explanation how two > of the four F's, "Freedom" and "Friends" are compatible with this > policy. Red Hat is the legal entity behind Fedora and a US based organizations would have to follow laws even if it believes those are stupid or silly. I mean, Fedora would love to ignore silly software patents and include valuable and otherwise perfectly fine free and open source software. We just cannot in some cases. That is unfortunate but you shouldn't blame the messenger. Rahul From tcallawa at redhat.com Mon Mar 2 17:37:22 2009 From: tcallawa at redhat.com (Tom "spot" Callaway) Date: Mon, 02 Mar 2009 12:37:22 -0500 Subject: requesting a trademark license for our community In-Reply-To: <49AC1A2E.3080201@fedoraproject.org> References: <1234652661.17658.3.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1236003560.2918.2.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20090302164257.GB14691@localhost.localdomain> <1b2231930903020930p79c9154r28e7b72822ee568f@mail.gmail.com> <49AC1A2E.3080201@fedoraproject.org> Message-ID: <49AC1952.1080608@redhat.com> On 2009-03-02 at 12:41:02 -0500, Rahul Sundaram wrote: > > Can Fedora EMEA help here? The short answer is no. Believe me, we have been trying very hard for some time now to try to find a way around these restrictions, but there really is not one. ~spot From delhage at gmail.com Mon Mar 2 17:40:51 2009 From: delhage at gmail.com (delhage at gmail.com) Date: Mon, 2 Mar 2009 18:40:51 +0100 Subject: requesting a trademark license for our community In-Reply-To: <49AC1A2E.3080201@fedoraproject.org> References: <1234652661.17658.3.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1236003560.2918.2.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20090302164257.GB14691@localhost.localdomain> <1b2231930903020930p79c9154r28e7b72822ee568f@mail.gmail.com> <49AC1A2E.3080201@fedoraproject.org> Message-ID: <1b2231930903020940l5decfcbci7f479fc4a22e065c@mail.gmail.com> On Mon, Mar 2, 2009 at 18:41, Rahul Sundaram wrote: > Will >> >> Red Hat try to enforce the trademarks in this case? Will it use it's >> legal powers to try and shutdown fedoraproject.ir? I would like to get >> a public clarification regarding this issue and an explanation how two >> of the four F's, "Freedom" and "Friends" are compatible with this >> policy. > > Red Hat is the legal entity behind Fedora and a US based organizations would > have to follow laws even if it believes those are stupid or silly. I mean, > Fedora would love to ignore silly software patents and include valuable and > otherwise perfectly fine free and open source software. We just cannot in > some cases. That is unfortunate but you shouldn't blame the messenger. > I understand that. My question is really if Red Hat is *required* to go after an "infringement" in this case or if it can just drop it and pretend like nothing has happened? Lars -- Lars Delhage RHC{E,X,A,SS} CL{P,E}{9,10} CNI LPIC-2.tel: +46 8 458 78 10 Nohup AB, Stortorget 1, 111 29 Stockholm mob: +46 70 781 60 69 GPG ID: 569492FE url :http://www.nohup.se From sundaram at fedoraproject.org Mon Mar 2 17:47:38 2009 From: sundaram at fedoraproject.org (Rahul Sundaram) Date: Mon, 02 Mar 2009 23:17:38 +0530 Subject: requesting a trademark license for our community In-Reply-To: <49AC1952.1080608@redhat.com> References: <1234652661.17658.3.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1236003560.2918.2.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20090302164257.GB14691@localhost.localdomain> <1b2231930903020930p79c9154r28e7b72822ee568f@mail.gmail.com> <49AC1A2E.3080201@fedoraproject.org> <49AC1952.1080608@redhat.com> Message-ID: <49AC1BBA.7030107@fedoraproject.org> Tom "spot" Callaway wrote: > On 2009-03-02 at 12:41:02 -0500, Rahul Sundaram > wrote: >> Can Fedora EMEA help here? > > The short answer is no. Believe me, we have been trying very hard for > some time now to try to find a way around these restrictions, but there > really is not one. I assume you already though about this but since the board discussions on this topic has been confidential (I would assume for good reasons), is .fedoracommunity.org allowed for a US embargoed country? Rahul From frankly3d at fedoraproject.org Mon Mar 2 17:52:04 2009 From: frankly3d at fedoraproject.org (Frank Murphy (Frankly3D)) Date: Mon, 02 Mar 2009 17:52:04 +0000 Subject: requesting a trademark license for our community In-Reply-To: <1b2231930903020940l5decfcbci7f479fc4a22e065c@mail.gmail.com> References: <1234652661.17658.3.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1236003560.2918.2.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20090302164257.GB14691@localhost.localdomain> <1b2231930903020930p79c9154r28e7b72822ee568f@mail.gmail.com> <49AC1A2E.3080201@fedoraproject.org> <1b2231930903020940l5decfcbci7f479fc4a22e065c@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <49AC1CC4.2050007@fedoraproject.org> delhage at gmail.com wrote: > I understand that. My question is really if Red Hat is *required* to > go after an "infringement" in this case or if it can just drop it and > pretend like nothing has happened? > > Lars > ianal. But I'm guessing that just as the US Gov. embargoes Iran, Iran legal system won't be overly concerned about a US injunction. Frank From stickster at gmail.com Mon Mar 2 17:52:09 2009 From: stickster at gmail.com (Paul W. Frields) Date: Mon, 2 Mar 2009 12:52:09 -0500 Subject: requesting a trademark license for our community In-Reply-To: <49AC1BBA.7030107@fedoraproject.org> References: <1234652661.17658.3.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1236003560.2918.2.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20090302164257.GB14691@localhost.localdomain> <1b2231930903020930p79c9154r28e7b72822ee568f@mail.gmail.com> <49AC1A2E.3080201@fedoraproject.org> <49AC1952.1080608@redhat.com> <49AC1BBA.7030107@fedoraproject.org> Message-ID: <20090302175209.GC16869@localhost.localdomain> On Mon, Mar 02, 2009 at 11:17:38PM +0530, Rahul Sundaram wrote: > Tom "spot" Callaway wrote: >> On 2009-03-02 at 12:41:02 -0500, Rahul Sundaram >> wrote: >>> Can Fedora EMEA help here? >> >> The short answer is no. Believe me, we have been trying very hard for >> some time now to try to find a way around these restrictions, but there >> really is not one. > > I assume you already though about this but since the board discussions on > this topic has been confidential (I would assume for good reasons), is > .fedoracommunity.org allowed for a US embargoed country? I don't think so; providing a service like that is probably a business transaction in the eyes of the law. This is not a pleasant situation to be in, because I don't think anyone wants to discourage any part of our global community. -- Paul W. Frields http://paul.frields.org/ gpg fingerprint: 3DA6 A0AC 6D58 FEC4 0233 5906 ACDB C937 BD11 3717 http://redhat.com/ - - - - http://pfrields.fedorapeople.org/ irc.freenode.net: stickster @ #fedora-docs, #fedora-devel, #fredlug -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: not available URL: From sundaram at fedoraproject.org Mon Mar 2 18:01:53 2009 From: sundaram at fedoraproject.org (Rahul Sundaram) Date: Mon, 02 Mar 2009 23:31:53 +0530 Subject: requesting a trademark license for our community In-Reply-To: <20090302175209.GC16869@localhost.localdomain> References: <1234652661.17658.3.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1236003560.2918.2.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20090302164257.GB14691@localhost.localdomain> <1b2231930903020930p79c9154r28e7b72822ee568f@mail.gmail.com> <49AC1A2E.3080201@fedoraproject.org> <49AC1952.1080608@redhat.com> <49AC1BBA.7030107@fedoraproject.org> <20090302175209.GC16869@localhost.localdomain> Message-ID: <49AC1F11.3090002@fedoraproject.org> Paul W. Frields wrote: > On Mon, Mar 02, 2009 at 11:17:38PM +0530, Rahul Sundaram wrote: >> Tom "spot" Callaway wrote: >>> On 2009-03-02 at 12:41:02 -0500, Rahul Sundaram >>> wrote: >>>> Can Fedora EMEA help here? >>> The short answer is no. Believe me, we have been trying very hard for >>> some time now to try to find a way around these restrictions, but there >>> really is not one. >> I assume you already though about this but since the board discussions on >> this topic has been confidential (I would assume for good reasons), is >> .fedoracommunity.org allowed for a US embargoed country? > > I don't think so; providing a service like that is probably a business > transaction in the eyes of the law. This is not a pleasant situation > to be in, because I don't think anyone wants to discourage any part of > our global community. Along the same lines, wouldn't enabling a L10N community be considered a business transaction as well? How about even allowing Fedora accounts? Can we link to http://www.fedoraproject.ir/? We do have active contributors from these places and we need to be very explicit on what we can or cannot allow. Rahul From stickster at gmail.com Mon Mar 2 18:02:47 2009 From: stickster at gmail.com (Paul W. Frields) Date: Mon, 2 Mar 2009 13:02:47 -0500 Subject: requesting a trademark license for our community In-Reply-To: <49AC1F11.3090002@fedoraproject.org> References: <1234652661.17658.3.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1236003560.2918.2.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20090302164257.GB14691@localhost.localdomain> <1b2231930903020930p79c9154r28e7b72822ee568f@mail.gmail.com> <49AC1A2E.3080201@fedoraproject.org> <49AC1952.1080608@redhat.com> <49AC1BBA.7030107@fedoraproject.org> <20090302175209.GC16869@localhost.localdomain> <49AC1F11.3090002@fedoraproject.org> Message-ID: <20090302180247.GD16869@localhost.localdomain> On Mon, Mar 02, 2009 at 11:31:53PM +0530, Rahul Sundaram wrote: > Paul W. Frields wrote: >> On Mon, Mar 02, 2009 at 11:17:38PM +0530, Rahul Sundaram wrote: >>> Tom "spot" Callaway wrote: >>>> On 2009-03-02 at 12:41:02 -0500, Rahul Sundaram >>>> wrote: >>>>> Can Fedora EMEA help here? >>>> The short answer is no. Believe me, we have been trying very hard for >>>> some time now to try to find a way around these restrictions, but there >>>> really is not one. >>> I assume you already though about this but since the board discussions >>> on this topic has been confidential (I would assume for good reasons), >>> is .fedoracommunity.org allowed for a US embargoed country? >> >> I don't think so; providing a service like that is probably a business >> transaction in the eyes of the law. This is not a pleasant situation >> to be in, because I don't think anyone wants to discourage any part of >> our global community. > > Along the same lines, wouldn't enabling a L10N community be considered a > business transaction as well? How about even allowing Fedora accounts? > Can we link to http://www.fedoraproject.ir/? > > We do have active contributors from these places and we need to be very > explicit on what we can or cannot allow. I'm loathe to enter into a protracted discussion when IANAL, and I'm sure you understand that as well. Red Hat Legal is looking at these topics and we will provide further clear guidance as soon as humanly possible. -- 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 kambiz at aghaiepour.com Mon Mar 2 18:52:07 2009 From: kambiz at aghaiepour.com (Kambiz Aghaiepour) Date: Mon, 02 Mar 2009 13:52:07 -0500 Subject: requesting a trademark license for our community In-Reply-To: <20090302164257.GB14691@localhost.localdomain> References: <1234652661.17658.3.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1236003560.2918.2.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20090302164257.GB14691@localhost.localdomain> Message-ID: <49AC2AD7.80600@aghaiepour.com> Paul W. Frields wrote: > On Mon, Feb 16, 2009 at 04:12:48PM -0500, Paul Frields wrote: >> On Sat, Feb 14, 2009 at 6:04 PM, Mostafa Daneshvar >> wrote: >>> Dear Board; >>> We, as Iranian community, want your permission to use >>> "fedoraproject.ir".One of our members registered it without considering >>> related regulations mentioned in >>> "http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Legal/". >>> within these few months this community attracted a lot of users,nearly >>> 510 registered. According to logs our website approximately has 5000 >>> pages view each day. Our forum has 5500 posts (up to now). >>> Considering our efforts within this time, we need your license to >>> continue our efforts. We need to grant us to use Fedora logo in our >>> website. >>> >>> We should be thankful for your immediate response >> Thank you for you email -- we're looking into this now, and will get >> back to you as soon as we can. > > > As you may know, US federal law currently places sweeping restrictions > on US citizens' and corporations' ability to transact with certain > people, organizations, and nations. The list of embargoed nations > includes Cuba, Iran, Libya, and North Korea, among others. > > The "Fedora" trademarks are regsitered worldwide to Red Hat, Inc., > which administers them on behalf of the Fedora community. Because Red > Hat is a US-based company, it must adhere to the restrictions imposed > by US law. Therefore, we cannot grant a trademark license for the use > of "Fedora" in your domain name, nor for use of the Fedora logo or > other trademarks. > > I noted from your email that one of your community members registered > the "fedoraproject.ir" domain. I'll send you a further email to > discuss this issue. > > I sincerely regret not being able to accommodate your request. > > > Paul W. Frields > Fedora Project Leader Paul, Would it be possible to sidestep this issue entirely in the following way, and I certain am not making this suggestion as a way of circumventing the US regulations, nor do I want to get into a philosophical discussion about the merits of the US position with respect to transactions with embargoed nations. There are a number of Farsi speaking people around the world who are very interested in using and promoting of Fedora Linux. Farsi as you know is a language that is written and spoken in Iran and parts of Afghanistan as well as many ex-patriots from these countries who now live in many different parts of the world (US, Canada, many countries in Europe, etc). Would Red Hat be willing to assist in the building up of the Farsi speaking linux community and create the "farsi.fedoracommunity.org" DNS record and point this site to a US hosted server? Let me know if you think this would create any legal difficulties for Red Hat. Thanks Kambiz -- "In the end, we will remember not the words of our enemies, but the silence of our friends." --MLK From mmcgrath at redhat.com Mon Mar 2 18:59:23 2009 From: mmcgrath at redhat.com (Mike McGrath) Date: Mon, 2 Mar 2009 12:59:23 -0600 (CST) Subject: requesting a trademark license for our community In-Reply-To: <20090302164257.GB14691@localhost.localdomain> References: <1234652661.17658.3.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1236003560.2918.2.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20090302164257.GB14691@localhost.localdomain> Message-ID: On Mon, 2 Mar 2009, Paul W. Frields wrote: > On Mon, Feb 16, 2009 at 04:12:48PM -0500, Paul Frields wrote: > > On Sat, Feb 14, 2009 at 6:04 PM, Mostafa Daneshvar > > wrote: > > > Dear Board; > > > We, as Iranian community, want your permission to use > > > "fedoraproject.ir".One of our members registered it without considering > > > related regulations mentioned in > > > "http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Legal/". > > > within these few months this community attracted a lot of users,nearly > > > 510 registered. According to logs our website approximately has 5000 > > > pages view each day. Our forum has 5500 posts (up to now). > > > Considering our efforts within this time, we need your license to > > > continue our efforts. We need to grant us to use Fedora logo in our > > > website. > > > > > > We should be thankful for your immediate response > > > > Thank you for you email -- we're looking into this now, and will get > > back to you as soon as we can. > > > As you may know, US federal law currently places sweeping restrictions > on US citizens' and corporations' ability to transact with certain > people, organizations, and nations. The list of embargoed nations > includes Cuba, Iran, Libya, and North Korea, among others. > I just want to go on record saying that I think this is wrong and I don't think I'm alone. I don't disagree with us following our US laws, but I think those laws are quite broken. I'm going to (and I'd encourage other US citizens to) contact lawmakers and let them know what position we've been placed in. I don't suspect anything will come from it, but its the best option we have. Sorry Mostafa. -Mike From chitlesh.goorah at gmail.com Mon Mar 2 22:36:26 2009 From: chitlesh.goorah at gmail.com (Chitlesh GOORAH) Date: Mon, 2 Mar 2009 23:36:26 +0100 Subject: Trademark request: Fedora Electronic Lab Message-ID: <50baabb30903021436v1f2864d3w3831490d461d557b@mail.gmail.com> Hello there, For the fourth consecutive fedora releases, I'm requesting Fedora Board the permission to use Fedora trademark and Fedora Logos with respect to the work done behind Fedora Electronic Lab. == About FEL == Fedora Electronic Lab is Fedora's high-end hardware design, simulation and verification platform. It helps users to create chips, pcbs ... Website : http://chitlesh.fedorapeople.org/FEL/ Our work done are summarised on this page http://chitlesh.fedorapeople.org/FEL/devel/FEL_devel_timeline.html. Even items for F-12 development cycle are listed. In brief, Fedora Electronic Lab's goals sum up to * Propose a portfolio for hardware _design_ with opensource tools * Propose a portfolio to _simulate_ hardware design with opensource tools * Propose a portfolio for hardware design _verification_ with opensource tools * Provide methodologies to use opensource EDA tools in an efficient way * Promote a community around FEL * Bridge 2 communities - opensource software community and opensource hardware community * help new opensource EDA software developers * Help upstream with the marketing of their tools * Lead the opensource communities to the current semiconductor industry trend * Help lecturers include software under the FEL umbrella in their syllabus - we have already since on fedora marketing and fedora electronic lab mailing list, that some indian lecturers have already done so. The last three FEL releases exceeded our expectations - at least mine -. We are hoping that with F11 we could put the quality barrier even higher and expands our FEL portfolios. If you have any doubts or questions please feel free to reply to this email. Kind regards, Chitlesh From stickster at gmail.com Tue Mar 3 02:01:37 2009 From: stickster at gmail.com (Paul W. Frields) Date: Mon, 2 Mar 2009 21:01:37 -0500 Subject: Trademark request: Fedora Electronic Lab In-Reply-To: <50baabb30903021436v1f2864d3w3831490d461d557b@mail.gmail.com> References: <50baabb30903021436v1f2864d3w3831490d461d557b@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <20090303020137.GG24105@localhost.localdomain> On Mon, Mar 02, 2009 at 11:36:26PM +0100, Chitlesh GOORAH wrote: > Hello there, > > For the fourth consecutive fedora releases, I'm requesting Fedora > Board the permission to use Fedora trademark and Fedora Logos with > respect to the work done behind Fedora Electronic Lab. > > == About FEL == > > Fedora Electronic Lab is Fedora's high-end hardware design, simulation > and verification platform. It helps users to create chips, pcbs ... > > Website : http://chitlesh.fedorapeople.org/FEL/ > > > > Our work done are summarised on this page > http://chitlesh.fedorapeople.org/FEL/devel/FEL_devel_timeline.html. > Even items for F-12 development cycle are listed. > > In brief, Fedora Electronic Lab's goals sum up to > * Propose a portfolio for hardware _design_ with opensource tools > * Propose a portfolio to _simulate_ hardware design with opensource tools > * Propose a portfolio for hardware design _verification_ with opensource tools > * Provide methodologies to use opensource EDA tools in an efficient way > * Promote a community around FEL > * Bridge 2 communities - opensource software community and opensource > hardware community > * help new opensource EDA software developers > * Help upstream with the marketing of their tools > * Lead the opensource communities to the current semiconductor industry trend > * Help lecturers include software under the FEL umbrella in their > syllabus - we have already since on fedora marketing and fedora > electronic lab mailing list, that some indian lecturers have already > done so. > > The last three FEL releases exceeded our expectations - at least mine > -. We are hoping that with F11 we could put the quality barrier even > higher and expands our FEL portfolios. > > If you have any doubts or questions please feel free to reply to this email. Thanks for contacting us Chitlesh -- I've reminded the Spins SIG to give us word on their approval by tomorrow's Board meeting at 1900 UTC, so the Board can take an approval vote at its 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 engels at bluepoint.com.ph Tue Mar 3 10:04:44 2009 From: engels at bluepoint.com.ph (Engels Antonio) Date: Tue, 3 Mar 2009 18:04:44 +0800 (PHT) Subject: Community domain request Message-ID: <53739.10.0.0.4.1236074684.squirrel@mail.bluepoint.com.ph> Hi, My name is Engels Antonio. Aside from being a Fedora Ambassador, I am also responsible for managing the hosts of the Fedora community in the Philippines. Our online community resources are currently being hosted gratis by Bluepoint Foundation at http://fedora.bluepoint.com.ph/ It has since been renamed to http://fp.bluepoint.com.ph/ to avoid problems related to the unauthorized use of the word fedora. We established this community in order to bring together Filipinos interested in Fedora. Being an archipelago, the Philippines has many languages and dialects. Even if majority understand English, this diversity prevents most Filipinos from participating in the main Fedora Project site. We hope to use our community as a training ground for future Fedora Project members, and as a facility to coordinate local Fedora events. Our initial plan was to register fedora.ph in order to give our community a domain separate from Bluepoint's. We were pleased to know that a pre-purchased domain option is now available. In behalf of the Philippine Fedora community, I would like to request for a local community domain i.e. ph.fedoracommunity.org or whatever the board deems fit. Thank you for your time. We look forward to your favorable reply. Regards, Engels -- Engels Antonio engels at fedoraproject.org From stickster at gmail.com Tue Mar 3 13:17:47 2009 From: stickster at gmail.com (Paul W. Frields) Date: Tue, 3 Mar 2009 08:17:47 -0500 Subject: Community domain request In-Reply-To: <53739.10.0.0.4.1236074684.squirrel@mail.bluepoint.com.ph> References: <53739.10.0.0.4.1236074684.squirrel@mail.bluepoint.com.ph> Message-ID: <20090303131747.GA4824@localhost.localdomain> On Tue, Mar 03, 2009 at 06:04:44PM +0800, Engels Antonio wrote: > Hi, > > My name is Engels Antonio. Aside from being a Fedora Ambassador, I am also > responsible for managing the hosts of the Fedora community in the > Philippines. > > Our online community resources are currently being hosted gratis by > Bluepoint Foundation at http://fedora.bluepoint.com.ph/ > > It has since been renamed to http://fp.bluepoint.com.ph/ to avoid problems > related to the unauthorized use of the word fedora. > > We established this community in order to bring together Filipinos > interested in Fedora. > > Being an archipelago, the Philippines has many languages and dialects. > Even if majority understand English, this diversity prevents most > Filipinos from participating in the main Fedora Project site. > > We hope to use our community as a training ground for future Fedora > Project members, and as a facility to coordinate local Fedora events. > > Our initial plan was to register fedora.ph in order to give our community > a domain separate from Bluepoint's. We were pleased to know that a > pre-purchased domain option is now available. > > In behalf of the Philippine Fedora community, I would like to request for > a local community domain i.e. ph.fedoracommunity.org or whatever the board > deems fit. > > Thank you for your time. We look forward to your favorable reply. Hi Engels, Thank you very much for looking at our local community domain process. I'm happy to add this to the Board's agenda for today's IRC meeting, which is happening at 1900 UTC. You can read details on how to attend our meeting, if you'd like, here on the wiki: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Board/IRC -- 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 Mar 3 13:29:24 2009 From: stickster at gmail.com (Paul W. Frields) Date: Tue, 3 Mar 2009 08:29:24 -0500 Subject: Trademark request: Fedora Electronic Lab In-Reply-To: <20090303020137.GG24105@localhost.localdomain> References: <50baabb30903021436v1f2864d3w3831490d461d557b@mail.gmail.com> <20090303020137.GG24105@localhost.localdomain> Message-ID: <20090303132924.GC4824@localhost.localdomain> On Mon, Mar 02, 2009 at 09:01:37PM -0500, Paul W. Frields wrote: > On Mon, Mar 02, 2009 at 11:36:26PM +0100, Chitlesh GOORAH wrote: > > For the fourth consecutive fedora releases, I'm requesting Fedora > > Board the permission to use Fedora trademark and Fedora Logos with > > respect to the work done behind Fedora Electronic Lab. [...snip...] > > Thanks for contacting us Chitlesh -- I've reminded the Spins SIG to > give us word on their approval by tomorrow's Board meeting at 1900 > UTC, so the Board can take an approval vote at its meeting. Chitlesh, Sorry to reply to myself, but I did have another thought about this process. Historically I don't think the Board has re-voted on every Spin for every release. I asked the Spins SIG to look at whether the Board really needs to revisit their approval every release: http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/fedora-spins/2009-March/000476.html What I'd recommend is that unless there are major changes to Spin behavior relative to either the previous release of that Spin or to the standard release of Fedora, the Board's approval can stand for more than one release. The Board would ask the Spins SIG to bring any such changes to our attention for approval by Feature Freeze. In this case, the Board would be happy to revisit the approval of the FEL Spin, pending the Spins SIG's approval, just to ensure there is no confusion about the FEL's official status. I think the Board's attitude has been that trademark approvals can survive multiple releases, unless substantial changes occur between our standard release and a particular custom Spin. This streamlines the process somewhat and lessens the burden on the Spins SIG, the Spins Wrangler, and the Spin submitter. -- 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 engels at bluepoint.com.ph Wed Mar 4 05:26:09 2009 From: engels at bluepoint.com.ph (Engels Antonio) Date: Wed, 4 Mar 2009 13:26:09 +0800 (PHT) Subject: Community domain request In-Reply-To: <20090303131747.GA4824@localhost.localdomain> References: <53739.10.0.0.4.1236074684.squirrel@mail.bluepoint.com.ph> <20090303131747.GA4824@localhost.localdomain> Message-ID: <3902.10.0.0.4.1236144369.squirrel@mail.bluepoint.com.ph> On Tue, March 3, 2009 9:17 pm, Paul W. Frields wrote: >> In behalf of the Philippine Fedora community, I would like to request >> for a local community domain i.e. ph.fedoracommunity.org or whatever >> the board deems fit. >> >> Thank you for your time. We look forward to your favorable reply. > > Hi Engels, > > Thank you very much for looking at our local community domain process. > I'm happy to add this to the Board's agenda for today's IRC meeting, > which is happening at 1900 UTC. Hi Paul, Thanks! We'll standby for the board's decision. :) Regards, Engels -- Engels Antonio engels at fedoraproject.org From stickster at gmail.com Wed Mar 4 13:02:44 2009 From: stickster at gmail.com (Paul W. Frields) Date: Wed, 4 Mar 2009 08:02:44 -0500 Subject: Community domain request In-Reply-To: <3902.10.0.0.4.1236144369.squirrel@mail.bluepoint.com.ph> References: <53739.10.0.0.4.1236074684.squirrel@mail.bluepoint.com.ph> <20090303131747.GA4824@localhost.localdomain> <3902.10.0.0.4.1236144369.squirrel@mail.bluepoint.com.ph> Message-ID: <20090304130244.GF5845@localhost.localdomain> On Wed, Mar 04, 2009 at 01:26:09PM +0800, Engels Antonio wrote: > On Tue, March 3, 2009 9:17 pm, Paul W. Frields wrote: > >> In behalf of the Philippine Fedora community, I would like to request > >> for a local community domain i.e. ph.fedoracommunity.org or whatever > >> the board deems fit. > >> > >> Thank you for your time. We look forward to your favorable reply. > > > > Thank you very much for looking at our local community domain process. > > I'm happy to add this to the Board's agenda for today's IRC meeting, > > which is happening at 1900 UTC. > > Thanks! We'll standby for the board's decision. :) Engels, The Board unanimously approved your request for ph.fedoracommunity.org. I've filed the Infrastructure ticket here: https://fedorahosted.org/fedora-infrastructure/ticket/1221 The Infrastructure team or I will be in touch shortly for next action. Thank you for your continued support of Fedora in the Phillippines! -- Paul W. Frields http://paul.frields.org/ gpg fingerprint: 3DA6 A0AC 6D58 FEC4 0233 5906 ACDB C937 BD11 3717 http://redhat.com/ - - - - http://pfrields.fedorapeople.org/ irc.freenode.net: stickster @ #fedora-docs, #fedora-devel, #fredlug -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: not available URL: From poelstra at redhat.com Wed Mar 4 17:42:24 2009 From: poelstra at redhat.com (John Poelstra) Date: Wed, 04 Mar 2009 09:42:24 -0800 Subject: Fedora Board Meeting Recap 2009-03-03 Message-ID: <49AEBD80.1050502@redhat.com> Recap and full IRC transcripts for the moderated and public channels are here: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Board/Meetings/2009-03-03 Please make corrections and clarifications to the wiki page. = Fedora Project Board Meeting :: Tuesday 2009-03-03 = == fedoraforever Trademark Approval == * Request from Scott Williams (vwbusguy) * fedoraforever.* domain for a TM license agreement. * http://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-advisory-board/2009-February/msg00030.html * '''RESOLVED:''' ** board grants trademark usage to Scott Williams ** Paul Frields to followup with Scott Williams on the trademark agreement == Creative Commons Repo == * http://bpepple.fedorapeople.org/fesco/FESCo-2009-02-20.html is the meeting at which this was discussed by FESCo * http://fedorahosted.org/fesco/ticket/65 * Should the board permit the Fedora name (trademark) on a potential CC-content repo. * Board took an incomplete vote on using the Fedora name for this initiative * Further discussion showed that the board is not clear what FESCo plans to do with this approval * '''NEXT ACTIONS''': *# Determine exactly what FESCo is requesting and what they plan to do *# Discuss further at a future board meeting == ph.fedoracommunity.org Trademark Approval == * http://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-advisory-board/2009-March/msg00016.html * '''RESOLVED:''' ** board grants trademark usage to ph.fedoracommunity.org == Questions & Answers == * kambiz asked if the Board approves of the farsi.fedoracommunity.org idea and who will decide the prefix * embargoed countries * inode0 asked for more transparency into the board decision making process * diauq asked if the Board considered increasing the number of public meetings, either via IRC or listen-only VoIP? * nirik asked if there is any news regarding The Incident from last year, or if there is any news on when there might be news. * jjmcd asked if there is any concern that we might have overextended ourselves with F11, in particular whether or not we have the QA and docs resources to properly test and document the vast multitude of features that are lined up for the release * MostafaDaneshvar asked about the Board's position is regarding embargoed nations From stickster at gmail.com Wed Mar 4 20:15:24 2009 From: stickster at gmail.com (Paul W. Frields) Date: Wed, 4 Mar 2009 15:15:24 -0500 Subject: Fedora Board Meeting Recap 2009-03-03 In-Reply-To: <49AEBD80.1050502@redhat.com> References: <49AEBD80.1050502@redhat.com> Message-ID: <20090304201524.GA4623@localhost.localdomain> On Wed, Mar 04, 2009 at 09:42:24AM -0800, John Poelstra wrote: > Recap and full IRC transcripts for the moderated and public channels are > here: > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Board/Meetings/2009-03-03 > > Please make corrections and clarifications to the wiki page. > > = Fedora Project Board Meeting :: Tuesday 2009-03-03 = > > == fedoraforever Trademark Approval == > * Request from Scott Williams (vwbusguy) > * fedoraforever.* domain for a TM license agreement. > * > http://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-advisory-board/2009-February/msg00030.html > * '''RESOLVED:''' > ** board grants trademark usage to Scott Williams > ** Paul Frields to followup with Scott Williams on the trademark agreement FYI for the list, Scott Williams is in receipt of the agreement as of yesterday evening. -- 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 chitlesh.goorah at gmail.com Wed Mar 4 22:15:34 2009 From: chitlesh.goorah at gmail.com (Chitlesh GOORAH) Date: Wed, 4 Mar 2009 23:15:34 +0100 Subject: FEL not as torrent for F-111 In-Reply-To: References: <50baabb30812130348r5ba6c2eau8d4254ee6fe25c4b@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <50baabb30903041415g3c8e32b7l4ead4f9c2a09d78@mail.gmail.com> On Sat, Dec 13, 2008 at 6:53 PM, Mike McGrath wrote: > This will be easy soon. ?I'm in the process of coordinating an upgrade of > our primary mirror system (its still a couple months out yet) but it will > offer significantly more hosting options so we can do things like this. > As long as things don't fall apart horribly, expect it way before F-11. Hello Mike, is there any progress on this end ? :D regards, Chitlesh From mmcgrath at redhat.com Thu Mar 5 14:23:03 2009 From: mmcgrath at redhat.com (Mike McGrath) Date: Thu, 5 Mar 2009 08:23:03 -0600 (CST) Subject: FEL not as torrent for F-111 In-Reply-To: <50baabb30903041415g3c8e32b7l4ead4f9c2a09d78@mail.gmail.com> References: <50baabb30812130348r5ba6c2eau8d4254ee6fe25c4b@mail.gmail.com> <50baabb30903041415g3c8e32b7l4ead4f9c2a09d78@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: On Wed, 4 Mar 2009, Chitlesh GOORAH wrote: > On Sat, Dec 13, 2008 at 6:53 PM, Mike McGrath wrote: > > This will be easy soon. ?I'm in the process of coordinating an upgrade of > > our primary mirror system (its still a couple months out yet) but it will > > offer significantly more hosting options so we can do things like this. > > As long as things don't fall apart horribly, expect it way before F-11. > > > Hello Mike, > > is there any progress on this end ? :D > Yep, won't be ready by F11. I created the ticket to get the new netapps installed well over a year ago. Long story short, it's not done yet. -Mike From engels at bluepoint.com.ph Fri Mar 6 04:31:20 2009 From: engels at bluepoint.com.ph (Engels Antonio) Date: Fri, 6 Mar 2009 12:31:20 +0800 (PHT) Subject: Community domain request In-Reply-To: <20090304130244.GF5845@localhost.localdomain> References: <53739.10.0.0.4.1236074684.squirrel@mail.bluepoint.com.ph> <20090303131747.GA4824@localhost.localdomain> <3902.10.0.0.4.1236144369.squirrel@mail.bluepoint.com.ph> <20090304130244.GF5845@localhost.localdomain> Message-ID: <60802.10.0.0.4.1236313880.squirrel@mail.bluepoint.com.ph> On Wed, March 4, 2009 9:02 pm, Paul W. Frields wrote: >> > Thank you very much for looking at our local community domain process. >> > I'm happy to add this to the Board's agenda for today's IRC meeting, >> > which is happening at 1900 UTC. >> >> Thanks! We'll standby for the board's decision. :) > > Engels, > > The Board unanimously approved your request for > ph.fedoracommunity.org. I've filed the Infrastructure ticket here: > > https://fedorahosted.org/fedora-infrastructure/ticket/1221 > > The Infrastructure team or I will be in touch shortly for next > action. Thank you for your continued support of Fedora in the > Phillippines! Hi Paul, In behalf of the Philippine Fedora community, thanks you very much! Regards, Engels -- Engels Antonio engels at fedoraproject.org From kanarip at kanarip.com Fri Mar 6 14:34:47 2009 From: kanarip at kanarip.com (Jeroen van Meeuwen) Date: Fri, 06 Mar 2009 15:34:47 +0100 Subject: Approved spins for Fedora 11 Message-ID: <49B13487.40102@kanarip.com> Hello, I wanted to let you know what the approved spins list is for Fedora 11: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Category:Spins_Fedora_11 has the list, but I'll list some notes on each of these. A page similar to http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Releases/11/Features has to be created for spins, too. In the end, content will end up on spins.fedoraproject.org (obviously). = AOS Spin = * Format: .img (~130MB) * To be composed with appliance-tools * https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/AOS_Spin = BrOffice.org Spin = * Format: CD * https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/BrOffice.org_Spin = Education Spin = * Format: CD * https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Education_Spin = Electronic Lab Spin = * Format: DVD * Would like to become available over HTTP also, since many of it's community do not have torrent available. * https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/FedoraElectronicLab = Games Spin = * Format: DVD * https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Games_Spin = XFCE Spin = * Format: CD * https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/XFCE_Spin This is a grand total of 6 spins, excluding the Desktop and KDE "permanent" spins. Kind regards, Jeroen van Meeuwen -kanarip From stickster at gmail.com Fri Mar 6 17:18:02 2009 From: stickster at gmail.com (Paul W. Frields) Date: Fri, 6 Mar 2009 12:18:02 -0500 Subject: [Fedora-spins] Approved spins for Fedora 11 In-Reply-To: <49B13487.40102@kanarip.com> References: <49B13487.40102@kanarip.com> Message-ID: <20090306171802.GH16126@localhost.localdomain> On Fri, Mar 06, 2009 at 03:34:47PM +0100, Jeroen van Meeuwen wrote: > This is a grand total of 6 spins, excluding the Desktop and KDE > "permanent" spins. Jeroen, many thanks to you, the spin maintainers and other Spins SIG members, and wrangler John Poelstra for helping get a nice, fresh batch of spins ready for the Fedora 11 release later this spring! -- 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 Fri Mar 6 17:37:31 2009 From: stickster at gmail.com (Paul W. Frields) Date: Fri, 6 Mar 2009 12:37:31 -0500 Subject: CC repo Message-ID: <20090306173731.GI16126@localhost.localdomain> Re: https://fedorahosted.org/fesco/ticket/65 Thanks to Jon for capturing the Board notes into that ticket. I meant to respond to FESCo by Wednesday but failed. You can find the Board meeting log here for more information: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Board/Meetings/2009-03-03 It seemed like a little over half of the Board was interested in the idea and generally positive about it, but was unsure of the parameters for a project to which trademark approval would apply. A couple -1 votes were also captured before the Board generally agreed they needed more data for an informed decision. I think the best way to move forward would be for the originator to write a proposal that clarifies at least the following, to address some of the questions raised in the Board meeting: * Why a repo and not a cross-distro tool? * Would we be creating an issue for CC originators who lose traffic to a Fedora-specific content container? If so, how do we mitigate it? I'm cc'ing the fedora-advisory-board list and setting followups to go there. -- Paul W. Frields http://paul.frields.org/ gpg fingerprint: 3DA6 A0AC 6D58 FEC4 0233 5906 ACDB C937 BD11 3717 http://redhat.com/ - - - - http://pfrields.fedorapeople.org/ irc.freenode.net: stickster @ #fedora-docs, #fedora-devel, #fredlug -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: not available URL: From sundaram at fedoraproject.org Fri Mar 6 17:50:23 2009 From: sundaram at fedoraproject.org (Rahul Sundaram) Date: Fri, 06 Mar 2009 23:20:23 +0530 Subject: CC repo In-Reply-To: <20090306173731.GI16126@localhost.localdomain> References: <20090306173731.GI16126@localhost.localdomain> Message-ID: <49B1625F.8020002@fedoraproject.org> Paul W. Frields wrote: > Re: https://fedorahosted.org/fesco/ticket/65 > > Thanks to Jon for capturing the Board notes into that ticket. I meant > to respond to FESCo by Wednesday but failed. You can find the Board > meeting log here for more information: > > http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Board/Meetings/2009-03-03 > > It seemed like a little over half of the Board was interested in the > idea and generally positive about it, but was unsure of the parameters > for a project to which trademark approval would apply. A couple -1 > votes were also captured before the Board generally agreed they needed > more data for an informed decision. > > I think the best way to move forward would be for the originator to > write a proposal that clarifies at least the following, to address > some of the questions raised in the Board meeting: > > * Why a repo and not a cross-distro tool? > > * Would we be creating an issue for CC originators who lose traffic to > a Fedora-specific content container? If so, how do we mitigate it? > > I'm cc'ing the fedora-advisory-board list and setting followups to go > there. CC'ing Steve, a friend of mine who brought this to fedora-packaging list which resulted in all these discussion. Steve, you might want to add your thoughts on why you wanted a repository. Rahul From mmcgrath at redhat.com Fri Mar 6 19:48:30 2009 From: mmcgrath at redhat.com (Mike McGrath) Date: Fri, 6 Mar 2009 13:48:30 -0600 (CST) Subject: FEL not as torrent for F-111 In-Reply-To: <50baabb30903041415g3c8e32b7l4ead4f9c2a09d78@mail.gmail.com> References: <50baabb30812130348r5ba6c2eau8d4254ee6fe25c4b@mail.gmail.com> <50baabb30903041415g3c8e32b7l4ead4f9c2a09d78@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: On Wed, 4 Mar 2009, Chitlesh GOORAH wrote: > On Sat, Dec 13, 2008 at 6:53 PM, Mike McGrath wrote: > > This will be easy soon. ?I'm in the process of coordinating an upgrade of > > our primary mirror system (its still a couple months out yet) but it will > > offer significantly more hosting options so we can do things like this. > > As long as things don't fall apart horribly, expect it way before F-11. > > > Hello Mike, > > is there any progress on this end ? :D > Oh, one thing I forgot to mention is we can host it on http://alt.fedoraproject.org/pub/alt/ -Mike From chitlesh.goorah at gmail.com Sat Mar 7 10:06:50 2009 From: chitlesh.goorah at gmail.com (Chitlesh GOORAH) Date: Sat, 7 Mar 2009 11:06:50 +0100 Subject: FEL not as torrent for F-111 In-Reply-To: References: <50baabb30812130348r5ba6c2eau8d4254ee6fe25c4b@mail.gmail.com> <50baabb30903041415g3c8e32b7l4ead4f9c2a09d78@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <50baabb30903070206w1f44e0e9r5114b56001f48f45@mail.gmail.com> On Fri, Mar 6, 2009 at 8:48 PM, Mike McGrath wrote: > > Oh, one thing I forgot to mention is we can host it on > http://alt.fedoraproject.org/pub/alt/ Ah cool, Can you host Fedora-FEL 11 on it ? thanks Chitlesh From mmcgrath at redhat.com Sat Mar 7 18:55:29 2009 From: mmcgrath at redhat.com (Mike McGrath) Date: Sat, 7 Mar 2009 12:55:29 -0600 (CST) Subject: FEL not as torrent for F-111 In-Reply-To: <50baabb30903070206w1f44e0e9r5114b56001f48f45@mail.gmail.com> References: <50baabb30812130348r5ba6c2eau8d4254ee6fe25c4b@mail.gmail.com> <50baabb30903041415g3c8e32b7l4ead4f9c2a09d78@mail.gmail.com> <50baabb30903070206w1f44e0e9r5114b56001f48f45@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: On Sat, 7 Mar 2009, Chitlesh GOORAH wrote: > On Fri, Mar 6, 2009 at 8:48 PM, Mike McGrath wrote: > > > > Oh, one thing I forgot to mention is we can host it on > > http://alt.fedoraproject.org/pub/alt/ > > Ah cool, > Can you host Fedora-FEL 11 on it ? > I'm fine with hosting it there, lets make sure it's ok by releng since it is an official respin. I don't want to speak for Jesse and company. -Mike From dimitris at glezos.com Sun Mar 8 17:04:42 2009 From: dimitris at glezos.com (Dimitris Glezos) Date: Sun, 8 Mar 2009 19:04:42 +0200 Subject: Fedora L10n progress study Message-ID: <6d4237680903081004x6db9e7feu47829c8f8bcbe5aa@mail.gmail.com> I spent some time yesterday collecting some statistics to study the progress of the Fedora Localization Project. In case some folks find it interesting, here's a link: http://dimitris.glezos.com/weblog/2009/03/08/flp-advancement-study -? -- Dimitris Glezos Jabber ID: glezos at jabber.org, GPG: 0xA5A04C3B http://dimitris.glezos.com/ "He who gives up functionality for ease of use loses both and deserves neither." (Anonymous) -- From foss.mailinglists at gmail.com Mon Mar 9 02:38:48 2009 From: foss.mailinglists at gmail.com (Sankarshan Mukhopadhyay) Date: Mon, 9 Mar 2009 08:08:48 +0530 Subject: Fedora L10n progress study In-Reply-To: <6d4237680903081004x6db9e7feu47829c8f8bcbe5aa@mail.gmail.com> References: <6d4237680903081004x6db9e7feu47829c8f8bcbe5aa@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <35586fc00903081938n613cca7ewdd5e8c494868b027@mail.gmail.com> On Sun, Mar 8, 2009 at 10:34 PM, Dimitris Glezos wrote: > I spent some time yesterday collecting some statistics to study the > progress of the Fedora Localization Project. In case some folks find > it interesting, here's a link: > > ?http://dimitris.glezos.com/weblog/2009/03/08/flp-advancement-study Looks nice. Thank you for taking the time to do this. -- http://www.gutenberg.net - Fine literature digitally re-published http://www.plos.org - Public Library of Science http://www.creativecommons.org - Flexible copyright for creative work From poelstra at redhat.com Tue Mar 10 23:00:44 2009 From: poelstra at redhat.com (John Poelstra) Date: Tue, 10 Mar 2009 16:00:44 -0700 Subject: [Fwd: Fedora 11 Beta Readiness Meeting :: 2009-03-18 @ 17:00 UTC (13:00 EDT)] Message-ID: <49B6F11C.6060800@redhat.com> The message below was sent to the individuals below. Please coordinate and check with your teams as appropriate. John -------- Original Message -------- Subject: Fedora 11 Beta Readiness Meeting :: 2009-03-18 @ 17:00 UTC (13:00 EDT) Date: Tue, 10 Mar 2009 15:58:50 -0700 From: John Poelstra We will be having a meeting to make sure everything is ready to go for a successful beta release on Wednesday, March 18, 2009 at 17:00 UTC (13:00 EDT). Please coordinate within your team if someone else will representing your team. Please me know by Sunday, March 15, 2009 if there are any changes. On Monday, March 16, 2009 I will send another reminder including the conference call in information. I am inviting the following people based on the designated representatives from the Fedora 11 Alpha meeting. Ambassadors -- Max Spevack Artwork/Design -- M?ir?n Duffy Documentation -- Eric Christensen FESCo -- Jon Stanley Fedora Engineering Manager -- Tom "Spot" Callaway Fedora Project Leader -- Paul Frields Infrastructure -- Mike McGrath Marketing -- Jack Aboutboul Quality -- Will Woods Release Engineering -- Jesse Keating Translation -- Dimitris Glezos Websites -- Ricky Zhou Facilitator -- John Poelstra Thank you, John From sundaram at fedoraproject.org Tue Mar 10 23:08:25 2009 From: sundaram at fedoraproject.org (Rahul Sundaram) Date: Wed, 11 Mar 2009 04:38:25 +0530 Subject: Fedora L10n progress study In-Reply-To: <6d4237680903081004x6db9e7feu47829c8f8bcbe5aa@mail.gmail.com> References: <6d4237680903081004x6db9e7feu47829c8f8bcbe5aa@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <49B6F2E9.3010400@fedoraproject.org> Dimitris Glezos wrote: > I spent some time yesterday collecting some statistics to study the > progress of the Fedora Localization Project. In case some folks find > it interesting, here's a link: > > http://dimitris.glezos.com/weblog/2009/03/08/flp-advancement-study Good work. How do you generate all these graphs? Rahul From dimitris at glezos.com Tue Mar 10 23:16:58 2009 From: dimitris at glezos.com (Dimitris Glezos) Date: Wed, 11 Mar 2009 01:16:58 +0200 Subject: Fedora L10n progress study In-Reply-To: <49B6F2E9.3010400@fedoraproject.org> References: <6d4237680903081004x6db9e7feu47829c8f8bcbe5aa@mail.gmail.com> <49B6F2E9.3010400@fedoraproject.org> Message-ID: <6d4237680903101616o7d94d0b5v8fcd0ddaf9b59e92@mail.gmail.com> On Wed, Mar 11, 2009 at 1:08 AM, Rahul Sundaram wrote: > Dimitris Glezos wrote: >> >> I spent some time yesterday collecting some statistics to study the >> progress of the Fedora Localization Project. In case some folks find >> it interesting, here's a link: >> >> ?http://dimitris.glezos.com/weblog/2009/03/08/flp-advancement-study > > Good work. How do you generate all these graphs? I quickly hacked them together using an OOo Calc spreadsheet and some unix piping and regexxing. No programmable way to produce them currently. -? -- Dimitris Glezos Jabber ID: glezos at jabber.org, GPG: 0xA5A04C3B http://dimitris.glezos.com/ "He who gives up functionality for ease of use loses both and deserves neither." (Anonymous) -- From poelstra at redhat.com Tue Mar 10 23:28:34 2009 From: poelstra at redhat.com (John Poelstra) Date: Tue, 10 Mar 2009 16:28:34 -0700 Subject: Fedora Board Recap 2009-03-10 Message-ID: <49B6F7A2.90302@redhat.com> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Board/Meetings/2009-03-10 == Roll Call == * Board Members: Paul Frields, Bill Nottingham, Seth Vidal,Jesse Keating, Dimitris Glezos, Chris Tyler, Harald Hoyer, Chris Aillon, Matt Domsch, and Spot Callaway * Secretary: John Poelstra == Trademark Followup === * Paul Frields has sent necessary letters for trademark agreement and domain name registration ** 10 letters sent so far ** Feedback has been positive so far * https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Trademark_licensees * Deadline for reply is 2009-03-20 * Will send mail to those who haven't responded on 2009-03-23 ** Will not use the @fedoraproject.org addresses due to password expirations == What is Fedora? == * How well will mission statement translate to other languages? * Add links to definitions of key words * Mission statement arrived at: ** ''To lead the advancement of free and open source software and content as a collaborative community'' ** Paul Frields to send announcement to fedora-advisory-board at redhat.com From stickster at gmail.com Wed Mar 11 01:03:20 2009 From: stickster at gmail.com (Paul W. Frields) Date: Tue, 10 Mar 2009 21:03:20 -0400 Subject: Fedora mission statement Message-ID: <20090311010320.GB23024@localhost.localdomain> Contributors and other community members have been asking for more clarification of Fedora's objectives and mission. The Fedora Board, as a community governance body, agreed to take on this topic, as shown in several of our previous meetings' minutes. We've decided to tackle this problem in several phases. The first phase involves making a general mission statement that clearly declares the Fedora Project's reason for existence -- what we are trying to achieve. This is not the statement that can or should answer every single question about how the Project works, or how we prioritize different types of initiatives. Those statements will follow, but they should all support this overall mission: "To lead the advancement of free and open source software and content as a collaborative community." The three elements of this mission are clear: * The Fedora Project always tries to lead, not follow. * The Fedora Project consistently seeks to create, improve, and spread free/libre code and content. * The Fedora Project succeeds through shared action on the part of many people throughout our community. In preparation for the next phase, we've built out a Foundations page on the wiki to help describe the Fedora core values -- Freedom, Friends, Features, and First. These Foundations help ensure that as we pursue specific objectives, we do so in a way that's in line with our community's beliefs and shared values. For instance, if one were to formulate the objective of "wait for Distro X to solve problem Y," one would quickly find this objective to be out of sync with at least our Features and First values. Next the Board will be embarking on defining a set of broad objectives, envisioning how we can achieve the mission. This is at least in part a responsibility of the project leader, so I'll take a strong interest in helping the Board build out those objectives in a way that helps our whole community understand their underlying rationale. A number of these objectives may already be documented, and I don't expect there will be any major surprises in this content. My hope is that we'll be providing information that helps people understand the basis for our processes, but still encourages contributors to try new avenues as well. We don't want to shut ourselves off from new and different ideas, as long as they support the mission and values our community shares. Thanks for reading, and viva Fedora! -- 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 Wed Mar 11 15:30:15 2009 From: mspevack at redhat.com (Max Spevack) Date: Wed, 11 Mar 2009 16:30:15 +0100 (CET) Subject: Fedora's LWN subscription Message-ID: Just over a year ago, we[1] purchased a group subscription to LWN for 75 accounts. The purpose of these accounts was to ensure that Fedora contributors who might otherwise not have access to LWN's premium material would have the ability to access it. We just renewed the subscription, and this seems like a good time to clean it up. We have been using 73 of the 75 accounts. Of those 73, there are 18 who have not logged in since September 1, 2008 (just over 6 months). As the administrator of the subscription, I'd like to propose the following: * remove those people's subscriptions, giving us 20 total subscriptions free to allocate. * advertise on Planet and fedora-announce-list to see if there are new Fedora folks in the past year who would like a subscription, and distribute them. I'd like to be fair about distribution, so I was thinking to set up a wiki page where people could request a subscription, and give it a deadline. Once the deadline hits, have a little lottery if there are more requests than there are open subscriptions. Repeat every 6 months. Thoughts, comments, or objections? --Max [1] The purchase was made from the budget of Red Hat's Community Architecture team. From smooge at gmail.com Wed Mar 11 16:41:22 2009 From: smooge at gmail.com (Stephen John Smoogen) Date: Wed, 11 Mar 2009 10:41:22 -0600 Subject: Fedora's LWN subscription In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <80d7e4090903110941o4411c600ma1b39b9baca06836@mail.gmail.com> On Wed, Mar 11, 2009 at 9:30 AM, Max Spevack wrote: > Just over a year ago, we[1] purchased a group subscription to LWN for 75 > accounts. ?The purpose of these accounts was to ensure that Fedora > contributors who might otherwise not have access to LWN's premium material > would have the ability to access it. > > We just renewed the subscription, and this seems like a good time to clean > it up. > > We have been using 73 of the 75 accounts. ?Of those 73, there are 18 who > have not logged in since September 1, 2008 (just over 6 months). > > As the administrator of the subscription, I'd like to propose the following: > > * remove those people's subscriptions, giving us 20 total subscriptions free > to allocate. > > * advertise on Planet and fedora-announce-list to see if there are new > Fedora folks in the past year who would like a subscription, and distribute > them. > > I'd like to be fair about distribution, so I was thinking to set up a wiki > page where people could request a subscription, and give it a deadline. > ?Once the deadline hits, have a little lottery if there are more requests > than there are open subscriptions. > > Repeat every 6 months. > > Thoughts, comments, or objections? > My main thought is thank you. I really appreciate my subscription, and have tried to use it everyday (and every Thursday when the weekly paper goes out.) Being able to keep up with LWN has been my best way to keep up with whats going on outside of my little window of academia and has made sure I am aware of changes occuring in the Linux world. Again thank you. Stephen -- Stephen J Smoogen. -- BSD/GNU/Linux How far that little candle throws his beams! So shines a good deed in a naughty world. = Shakespeare. "The Merchant of Venice" From notting at redhat.com Wed Mar 11 16:46:24 2009 From: notting at redhat.com (Bill Nottingham) Date: Wed, 11 Mar 2009 12:46:24 -0400 Subject: Fedora's LWN subscription In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <20090311164624.GA11142@nostromo.devel.redhat.com> > As the administrator of the subscription, I'd like to propose the > following: > > * remove those people's subscriptions, giving us 20 total subscriptions > free to allocate. > > * advertise on Planet and fedora-announce-list to see if there are new > Fedora folks in the past year who would like a subscription, and > distribute them. > > I'd like to be fair about distribution, so I was thinking to set up a > wiki page where people could request a subscription, and give it a > deadline. Once the deadline hits, have a little lottery if there are > more requests than there are open subscriptions. > > Repeat every 6 months. > > Thoughts, comments, or objections? Seems fine, although you may want to warn people that you're removing their subscriptions as they don't use them. Bill From foss.mailinglists at gmail.com Wed Mar 11 16:55:00 2009 From: foss.mailinglists at gmail.com (Sankarshan Mukhopadhyay) Date: Wed, 11 Mar 2009 22:25:00 +0530 Subject: Fedora's LWN subscription In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <35586fc00903110955j175a60c2id9bda1225f3920c5@mail.gmail.com> On Wed, Mar 11, 2009 at 9:00 PM, Max Spevack wrote: > As the administrator of the subscription, I'd like to propose the following: > > * remove those people's subscriptions, giving us 20 total subscriptions free > to allocate. > > * advertise on Planet and fedora-announce-list to see if there are new > Fedora folks in the past year who would like a subscription, and distribute > them. A heads-up followed by a house-cleaning perhaps ? Or, something to the effect of "we notice that you have not been using the subscription for a period of xy months, and, hence we are re-allocating the subscription ... " etc. All said, a sound plan. I know of a couple of folks who appreciate the LWN availability via The Fedora Project. -- http://www.gutenberg.net - Fine literature digitally re-published http://www.plos.org - Public Library of Science http://www.creativecommons.org - Flexible copyright for creative work From mmcgrath at redhat.com Wed Mar 11 17:54:31 2009 From: mmcgrath at redhat.com (Mike McGrath) Date: Wed, 11 Mar 2009 12:54:31 -0500 (CDT) Subject: Fedora's LWN subscription In-Reply-To: <20090311164624.GA11142@nostromo.devel.redhat.com> References: <20090311164624.GA11142@nostromo.devel.redhat.com> Message-ID: On Wed, 11 Mar 2009, Bill Nottingham wrote: > > As the administrator of the subscription, I'd like to propose the > > following: > > > > * remove those people's subscriptions, giving us 20 total subscriptions > > free to allocate. > > > > * advertise on Planet and fedora-announce-list to see if there are new > > Fedora folks in the past year who would like a subscription, and > > distribute them. > > > > I'd like to be fair about distribution, so I was thinking to set up a > > wiki page where people could request a subscription, and give it a > > deadline. Once the deadline hits, have a little lottery if there are > > more requests than there are open subscriptions. > > > > Repeat every 6 months. > > > > Thoughts, comments, or objections? > > Seems fine, although you may want to warn people that you're removing > their subscriptions as they don't use them. > Whatever you do don't ask them to change their lwn password. -Mike From fedora at leemhuis.info Wed Mar 11 17:59:38 2009 From: fedora at leemhuis.info (Thorsten Leemhuis) Date: Wed, 11 Mar 2009 18:59:38 +0100 Subject: Fedora's LWN subscription In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <49B7FC0A.8050008@leemhuis.info> On 11.03.2009 16:30, Max Spevack wrote: > [...] > We have been using 73 of the 75 accounts. Of those 73, there are 18 who > have not logged in since September 1, 2008 (just over 6 months). > > As the administrator of the subscription, I'd like to propose the > following: > > * remove those people's subscriptions, giving us 20 total subscriptions > free to allocate. > > * advertise on Planet and fedora-announce-list to see if there are new > Fedora folks in the past year who would like a subscription, and > distribute them. > > I'd like to be fair about distribution, so I was thinking to set up a > wiki page where people could request a subscription, and give it a > deadline. Once the deadline hits, have a little lottery if there are > more requests than there are open subscriptions. > > Repeat every 6 months. > > Thoughts, comments, or objections? Just wondering: What about the opposite direction? E.g. people that still log into their Fedora-sponsored lwn.net account but stopped to log in/contributing to Fedora? CU knurd From bandolerojr91 at yahoo.com Wed Mar 11 20:22:26 2009 From: bandolerojr91 at yahoo.com (bandolerojr91 at yahoo.com) Date: Wed, 11 Mar 2009 20:22:26 +0000 Subject: Fedora's LWN subscription Message-ID: <115674434-1236802961-cardhu_decombobulator_blackberry.rim.net-1898152554-@bxe1090.bisx.prod.on.blackberry> It seems like a great idea max but maybe you should rinse and repeat it every 4 months. The LWN subscription should be for people willing to dedicate time to the fedora project. Asking for someone to login once out of 4 months cant be that extreme of a request.. Would you all agree?? Thanks, Joseph Perez ------Original Message------ From: Max Spevack Sender: fedora-advisory-board-bounces at redhat.com To: fedora-advisory-board at redhat.com ReplyTo: fedora-advisory-board at redhat.com Sent: Mar 11, 2009 11:30 AM Subject: Fedora's LWN subscription Just over a year ago, we[1] purchased a group subscription to LWN for 75 accounts. The purpose of these accounts was to ensure that Fedora contributors who might otherwise not have access to LWN's premium material would have the ability to access it. We just renewed the subscription, and this seems like a good time to clean it up. We have been using 73 of the 75 accounts. Of those 73, there are 18 who have not logged in since September 1, 2008 (just over 6 months). As the administrator of the subscription, I'd like to propose the following: * remove those people's subscriptions, giving us 20 total subscriptions free to allocate. * advertise on Planet and fedora-announce-list to see if there are new Fedora folks in the past year who would like a subscription, and distribute them. I'd like to be fair about distribution, so I was thinking to set up a wiki page where people could request a subscription, and give it a deadline. Once the deadline hits, have a little lottery if there are more requests than there are open subscriptions. Repeat every 6 months. Thoughts, comments, or objections? --Max [1] The purchase was made from the budget of Red Hat's Community Architecture team. _______________________________________________ fedora-advisory-board mailing list fedora-advisory-board at redhat.com http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-advisory-board Sent from my BlackBerry? wireless handheld From fedora at leemhuis.info Thu Mar 12 05:41:17 2009 From: fedora at leemhuis.info (Thorsten Leemhuis) Date: Thu, 12 Mar 2009 06:41:17 +0100 Subject: Fedora's LWN subscription In-Reply-To: <49B7FC0A.8050008@leemhuis.info> References: <49B7FC0A.8050008@leemhuis.info> Message-ID: <49B8A07D.40003@leemhuis.info> On 11.03.2009 18:59, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote: > On 11.03.2009 16:30, Max Spevack wrote: > > [...] >> We have been using 73 of the 75 accounts. Of those 73, there are 18 who >> have not logged in since September 1, 2008 (just over 6 months). /me on the next morning now thinks "not logged in" might actually mean "not logged in to FAS" and not "not logged into their LWN.net account" (which for my brain was and still is the obvious, because that para and the ones before it talked about LWN-accounts) Then this question... > Just wondering: What about the opposite direction? E.g. people that > still log into their Fedora-sponsored lwn.net account but stopped to log > in/contributing to Fedora? ...doesn't make any sense at all ;-) Sorry for the noise. CU knurd From chitlesh.goorah at gmail.com Thu Mar 12 18:09:26 2009 From: chitlesh.goorah at gmail.com (Chitlesh GOORAH) Date: Thu, 12 Mar 2009 19:09:26 +0100 Subject: Fedora's LWN subscription In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <50baabb30903121109g6d45aed2q9975c70b70d8b53e@mail.gmail.com> On Wed, Mar 11, 2009 at 4:30 PM, Max Spevack wrote: > We have been using 73 of the 75 accounts. ?Of those 73, there are 18 who > have not logged in since September 1, 2008 (just over 6 months). Hello Max, You can remove my account "Clunixchit". I don't find useful LWN to me. regards, Chitlesh From inode0 at gmail.com Fri Mar 13 14:14:48 2009 From: inode0 at gmail.com (inode0) Date: Fri, 13 Mar 2009 09:14:48 -0500 Subject: Elections, Accountability, and Education Message-ID: I would like to encourage the board to give some consideration to a problem I perceive to exist in the standard operating procedure of the board in the execution of its duties. While I intend to frame the issue in terms of the board, it also applies in differing degrees to the various steering committees as well. One problem the board has been addressing is the disappointing turnout of eligible voters in Fedora elections. Initiatives like the election townhalls I think are brilliant and I thank the board and especially I thank Matt Domsch for the effort during the last election cycle to use townhall meetings to allow the Fedora community to meet and learn at least some of the views of the candidates running for elected positions. I think of the townhalls as having the goal of increasing participation in elections, but having the immediate and important purpose of educating the electorate about the candidates and about issues relevant to these offices. Election turnout does not only depend on an educated electorate. For a voter to feel empowered and engaged by an election process the voter must feel in control. One prerequisite of this is that the voter understands the candidates and issues, efforts by the board have been directed at this part of the equation. Another is that the voter can hold those elected accountable for their actions while serving in the elected position. The board clearly makes efforts in this area too, the monthly public meetings (normally in a question and answer format) and the great minutes provided from the non-public meetings by John Poelstra are examples. I want to thank John in particular for these minutes as they are crucial to our knowing what was discussed by the board generally and what decisions the board made each meeting as a body. As a voter and as an engaged observer of the governance of the Fedora Project, I do feel there is more that can and should be done. My specific request to the board is that it make a renewed effort to increase the transparency of its non-public meetings with special attention given to the deliberations and voting done by the board. While it is often hard to look at things through someone else's eyes I'd like to ask you to try. Look over the first 40 minutes or so from the IRC log of the last public meeting imaging you are not a board member but rather someone keenly interested in the business of board (perhaps someone who voted for you in the last election). https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Board/Meetings/2009-03-03 Seeing the public discussion of these issues was the best part of this or any public board meeting I've attended. The open deliberation and the public votes cast allow me to both hold individual members of the board accountable for their actions on the board and also educates me about important considerations that need to be given to these issues that I might not have been aware of previously. Comparing these 40 minutes with the information I receive by reading the minutes of the private board meetings I'd like to make two observations. First, John does a great job summarizing the discussion that took place in the minutes but that summary rarely includes who said what. That is still quite valuable and helps educate the reader of the minutes about the nuances of the issue and the board's collective thinking about the problem. Accountability isn't something we can hold the board collectively responsible for though since we don't vote for the board collectively. Who said what is critical to our understanding of each individual member of the board and to our ability to hold them accountable in subsequent elections. (In case this "accountability" theme sounds negative I want to be clear everyone understands that it isn't negative. It is more likely by increasing my awareness of the individual participation of board members that I will say this member is great, I want to vote *for* him next time.) My second observation about the minutes are that board decisions are announced collectively. When the decision is unanimous it seems to be expressed in the minutes as something like "the board unanimously decided X." I can only presume that when the decision omits any mention of unanimity that there was some dissent among board members although I am not given any sense of either who dissented or to what degree the board was in disagreement. The public votes cast in the first 40 minutes of the last public meeting stand in stark contrast to this. I know exactly who voted and how they voted as well as knowing the collective vote of the board as a whole. Having elected officials generally cast their votes in public seems natural to me, promotes individual accountability to the voter, and doesn't stand at odds with our project's very public stated goal of doing its business in an open and transparent manner. I do understand that there are costs associated with doing more of the business of the board in public. I understand transcribing and summarizing business done on conference calls is difficult and unpleasant work. I understand not all board business can be done in public. But I ask the board to take some time now to consider whether there are some steps it can take to make the routine business of the board more transparent to the Fedora community. I believe casting routine votes in public and having deliberations done in public are both incredibly valuable to the community. And that general request I'd like to make to the steering committees and other parts of the project too. Ask yourself if there is something more you could do to increase the degree of transparency in the doing of your Fedora business. Thanks, John From poelstra at redhat.com Mon Mar 16 22:42:55 2009 From: poelstra at redhat.com (John Poelstra) Date: Mon, 16 Mar 2009 15:42:55 -0700 Subject: Elections, Accountability, and Education In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <49BED5EF.1070401@redhat.com> inode0 said the following on 03/13/2009 07:14 AM Pacific Time: Disclaimer: I take the notes for the board meetings. I am not a board member and I do not participate in the discussions. > Comparing these 40 minutes with the information I receive by reading > the minutes of the private board meetings I'd like to make two > observations. First, John does a great job summarizing the discussion > that took place in the minutes but that summary rarely includes who > said what. That is still quite valuable and helps educate the reader > of the minutes about the nuances of the issue and the board's > collective thinking about the problem. Accountability isn't something > we can hold the board collectively responsible for though since we > don't vote for the board collectively. Who said what is critical to > our understanding of each individual member of the board and to our > ability to hold them accountable in subsequent elections. (In case > this "accountability" theme sounds negative I want to be clear > everyone understands that it isn't negative. It is more likely by > increasing my awareness of the individual participation of board > members that I will say this member is great, I want to vote *for* him > next time.) I appreciate your appreciation :) Anyone that has taken notes for a meeting knows that really well written notes can take a long time to do even when the final products doesn't look like it. In the past it has not been unusual to spend the same amount of time writing the notes after the meeting as the meeting itself. So two hours can easily evaporate from a work day just for one meeting. I can't imagine how much time it would take to transcribe the view points of nine different people as they engage in vigorous debate. While this might provide value for some issues I don't think it is sustainable or provides a very good ROI on the use of time. I think I see what you are getting at here and I think it is reasonable. It sounds like you want to know that your elected representative did what you elected them to do. One idea I have here would be listing the board member that sponsored or brought up a certain topic for discussion or decision. Over time this might provide an indication of board member involvement in driving different issues? > My second observation about the minutes are that board decisions are > announced collectively. When the decision is unanimous it seems to be > expressed in the minutes as something like "the board unanimously > decided X." I can only presume that when the decision omits any > mention of unanimity that there was some dissent among board members > although I am not given any sense of either who dissented or to what > degree the board was in disagreement. The public votes cast in the > first 40 minutes of the last public meeting stand in stark contrast to > this. I know exactly who voted and how they voted as well as knowing > the collective vote of the board as a whole. Having elected officials > generally cast their votes in public seems natural to me, promotes > individual accountability to the voter, and doesn't stand at odds with > our project's very public stated goal of doing its business in an open > and transparent manner. An interesting question here would be ask the board exactly what their decision making style is and which style they apply to which types of decisions. A "majority vote" is NOT "consensus". It is a majority vote. My observation is that the board usually seeks to reach a consensus and when they cannot turn to a vote. Consensus as defined in class I recently took is: "The entire group *owns* and *support* the decision". This is not the same as a majority vote where the "yes" votes win and the motion passes. I wonder if the board would consider it reasonable to record the "yes" and "no" votes by member when the vote is not unanimous? I also do not think that someone should be able to abstain (which I think is more an indication of lack of resolve or ambivalence). If we elect people to make hard decisions they should do so... not ride the middle or "decide not to decide". > I do understand that there are costs associated with doing more of the > business of the board in public. I understand transcribing and > summarizing business done on conference calls is difficult and > unpleasant work. I understand not all board business can be done in > public. At what point is the cost too high? My own measure is the amount of time to create the minutes exceeds the length of the meeting. Thanks for your thoughtful questions and suggestions. John From jkeating at redhat.com Mon Mar 16 23:38:48 2009 From: jkeating at redhat.com (Jesse Keating) Date: Mon, 16 Mar 2009 16:38:48 -0700 Subject: Elections, Accountability, and Education In-Reply-To: <49BED5EF.1070401@redhat.com> References: <49BED5EF.1070401@redhat.com> Message-ID: <1237246728.3823.0.camel@localhost.localdomain> On Mon, 2009-03-16 at 15:42 -0700, John Poelstra wrote: > I wonder if the board would consider it reasonable to record the "yes" > and "no" votes by member when the vote is not unanimous? I also do not > think that someone should be able to abstain (which I think is more an > indication of lack of resolve or ambivalence). If we elect people to > make hard decisions they should do so... not ride the middle or "decide > not to decide". I would not be opposed to this. -- Jesse Keating Fedora -- Freedom? is a feature! identi.ca: http://identi.ca/jkeating -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 197 bytes Desc: This is a digitally signed message part URL: From tburke at redhat.com Mon Mar 16 23:56:12 2009 From: tburke at redhat.com (Tim Burke) Date: Mon, 16 Mar 2009 19:56:12 -0400 Subject: Elections, Accountability, and Education In-Reply-To: <49BED5EF.1070401@redhat.com> References: <49BED5EF.1070401@redhat.com> Message-ID: <49BEE71C.9050304@redhat.com> John Poelstra wrote: > > I wonder if the board would consider it reasonable to record the "yes" > and "no" votes by member when the vote is not unanimous? I also do not > think that someone should be able to abstain (which I think is more an > indication of lack of resolve or ambivalence). If we elect people to > make hard decisions they should do so... not ride the middle or > "decide not to decide". > Alternatively, perhaps abstain can be accompanied with a reason. For example, a case where a board member does not consider him/herself to be an informed enough expert on the topic and doesn't want a comparatively uninformed vote to tip the balance. In this case, which is better (or what is the expectation) a) expect that all board members are required to invest whatever time it takes to thoroughly understand ALL issues b) force board members to cast ill-informed votes c) allow board members to respectfully abstain in cases where they are honestly not well versed enough on the topic; deferring to the expertiese of others. From stickster at gmail.com Tue Mar 17 00:10:06 2009 From: stickster at gmail.com (Paul W. Frields) Date: Mon, 16 Mar 2009 20:10:06 -0400 Subject: Elections, Accountability, and Education In-Reply-To: <49BEE71C.9050304@redhat.com> References: <49BED5EF.1070401@redhat.com> <49BEE71C.9050304@redhat.com> Message-ID: <20090317001006.GB4115@localhost.localdomain> On Mon, Mar 16, 2009 at 07:56:12PM -0400, Tim Burke wrote: > John Poelstra wrote: >> >> I wonder if the board would consider it reasonable to record the "yes" >> and "no" votes by member when the vote is not unanimous? I also do not >> think that someone should be able to abstain (which I think is more an >> indication of lack of resolve or ambivalence). If we elect people to >> make hard decisions they should do so... not ride the middle or "decide >> not to decide". >> > Alternatively, perhaps abstain can be accompanied with a reason. For > example, a case where a board member does not consider him/herself to be > an informed enough expert on the topic and doesn't want a comparatively > uninformed vote to tip the balance. In this case, which is better (or > what is the expectation) > > a) expect that all board members are required to invest whatever time it > takes to thoroughly understand ALL issues > > b) force board members to cast ill-informed votes > > c) allow board members to respectfully abstain in cases where they are > honestly not well versed enough on the topic; deferring to the expertiese > of others. It's pretty rare for us to have votes where *both* (1) a Board member doesn't understand the issue at hand, *and* (2) no one else in the call can resolve that member's understanding by answering questions. By which I mean, if one doesn't understand the issue, abstention is not as good as saying, "Can someone explain $ISSUE to me?". Typically we try not to push things to voting or decisions when there are major questions still floating around. It's unfair not just to the Board members but to the community too. For these reasons, I think (a) is best but the expectation is on the Board as a whole to have a shared understanding of the issues. -- 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 jonstanley at gmail.com Tue Mar 17 00:44:13 2009 From: jonstanley at gmail.com (Jon Stanley) Date: Mon, 16 Mar 2009 20:44:13 -0400 Subject: Elections, Accountability, and Education In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: On Fri, Mar 13, 2009 at 10:14 AM, inode0 wrote: > And that general request I'd like to make to the steering committees > and other parts of the project too. Ask yourself if there is something > more you could do to increase the degree of transparency in the doing > of your Fedora business. When I took over as chair of FESCo, I started using our trac instance (https://fedorahosted.org/fesco) for meeting planning. This had two advantages: 1) It makes my life sane 2) It increases transparency of what we do. At any time, you can tell what's before us at the next meeting by going to https://fedorahosted.org/fesco/report/9 (though I must admit it's not as updated as it could be at times - though right now it's perfect). Aside from that, all of our meetings are held in public, and most (I say most because there's the occasional thing that can't be - often related to a specific individual's conduct, etc) of our business is transacted in public. For full disclosure, there is one class of business that we take on that is deliberated in private and voted on in public, and should continue in this way - sponsor nominations (and now provenpackager requests - essentially the same process gets followed). However, the scope of the individuals involved in the deliberations are wider than just FESCo - it extends to all current sponsors. The reason for private deliberation is that we don't want any hard feelings, etc when negative information has to be discussed, and the free flow of information in making that decision is essential. From jwboyer at gmail.com Tue Mar 17 01:33:01 2009 From: jwboyer at gmail.com (Josh Boyer) Date: Mon, 16 Mar 2009 21:33:01 -0400 Subject: Elections, Accountability, and Education In-Reply-To: <20090317001006.GB4115@localhost.localdomain> References: <49BED5EF.1070401@redhat.com> <49BEE71C.9050304@redhat.com> <20090317001006.GB4115@localhost.localdomain> Message-ID: <20090317013301.GA8055@zod.rchland.ibm.com> On Mon, Mar 16, 2009 at 08:10:06PM -0400, Paul W. Frields wrote: >On Mon, Mar 16, 2009 at 07:56:12PM -0400, Tim Burke wrote: >> John Poelstra wrote: >>> >>> I wonder if the board would consider it reasonable to record the "yes" >>> and "no" votes by member when the vote is not unanimous? I also do not >>> think that someone should be able to abstain (which I think is more an >>> indication of lack of resolve or ambivalence). If we elect people to >>> make hard decisions they should do so... not ride the middle or "decide >>> not to decide". >>> >> Alternatively, perhaps abstain can be accompanied with a reason. For >> example, a case where a board member does not consider him/herself to be >> an informed enough expert on the topic and doesn't want a comparatively >> uninformed vote to tip the balance. In this case, which is better (or >> what is the expectation) >> >> a) expect that all board members are required to invest whatever time it >> takes to thoroughly understand ALL issues >> >> b) force board members to cast ill-informed votes >> >> c) allow board members to respectfully abstain in cases where they are >> honestly not well versed enough on the topic; deferring to the expertiese >> of others. > >It's pretty rare for us to have votes where *both* (1) a Board member >doesn't understand the issue at hand, *and* (2) no one else in the >call can resolve that member's understanding by answering questions. >By which I mean, if one doesn't understand the issue, abstention is >not as good as saying, "Can someone explain $ISSUE to me?". > >Typically we try not to push things to voting or decisions when there >are major questions still floating around. It's unfair not just to >the Board members but to the community too. For these reasons, I >think (a) is best but the expectation is on the Board as a whole to >have a shared understanding of the issues. There are cases where abstain is the right answer. For example, conflict of interest. It's quite rare, but it can (and has) happen. josh From matt at domsch.com Tue Mar 17 03:01:30 2009 From: matt at domsch.com (Matt Domsch) Date: Mon, 16 Mar 2009 21:01:30 -0600 Subject: Elections, Accountability, and Education In-Reply-To: <49BED5EF.1070401@redhat.com> References: <49BED5EF.1070401@redhat.com> Message-ID: <20090317030130.GB22888@domsch.com> On Mon, Mar 16, 2009 at 03:42:55PM -0700, John Poelstra wrote: > >My second observation about the minutes are that board decisions are > >announced collectively. This is actually something I pushed for when we first formed the Board. While there is discussion, debate, and a healthy exchange of viewpoints, in the end, when a decision _is_ made, it reflects the view of the Board as a whole, nearly always by concensus. Individuals on the Board may of course speak in public about their views on various points and topics, speaking for themselves, but I don't want "the Board" decisions to become a US Supreme Court-style 5-4 decision with dissenters writing their own dissent. Decisions exceedingly rarely break this way in practice that I've seen, and it only serves to polarize. IMHO. This is also why, in general, the current FPL publishes Board decisions. Regardless of the debate, we're still friends who can work together for a common good, and I feel we need to present a common, non-polarizing front, which I think we've done a good job at. > At what point is the cost too high? My own measure is the amount of time > to create the minutes exceeds the length of the meeting. This is my concern. While I enjoy the IRC meetings, we cover fewer topics, in less detail, than we do in concalls. Summarizing concalls is hard work; summarizing with even more detail - ugg. John has done an admirable job at this, kudos to him. -Matt From sundaram at fedoraproject.org Tue Mar 17 07:27:30 2009 From: sundaram at fedoraproject.org (Rahul Sundaram) Date: Tue, 17 Mar 2009 12:57:30 +0530 Subject: Elections, Accountability, and Education In-Reply-To: <1237246728.3823.0.camel@localhost.localdomain> References: <49BED5EF.1070401@redhat.com> <1237246728.3823.0.camel@localhost.localdomain> Message-ID: <49BF50E2.3010107@fedoraproject.org> Jesse Keating wrote: > On Mon, 2009-03-16 at 15:42 -0700, John Poelstra wrote: >> I wonder if the board would consider it reasonable to record the "yes" >> and "no" votes by member when the vote is not unanimous? I also do not >> think that someone should be able to abstain (which I think is more an >> indication of lack of resolve or ambivalence). If we elect people to >> make hard decisions they should do so... not ride the middle or "decide >> not to decide". > > I would not be opposed to this. I would note that, this was brought up in this before, agreed upon and never really implemented sometime back. Thread starts at http://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-advisory-board/2008-January/msg00252.html Rahul From stickster at gmail.com Tue Mar 17 13:44:38 2009 From: stickster at gmail.com (Paul W. Frields) Date: Tue, 17 Mar 2009 09:44:38 -0400 Subject: Elections, Accountability, and Education In-Reply-To: <20090317013301.GA8055@zod.rchland.ibm.com> References: <49BED5EF.1070401@redhat.com> <49BEE71C.9050304@redhat.com> <20090317001006.GB4115@localhost.localdomain> <20090317013301.GA8055@zod.rchland.ibm.com> Message-ID: <20090317134438.GF17102@localhost.localdomain> On Mon, Mar 16, 2009 at 09:33:01PM -0400, Josh Boyer wrote: > On Mon, Mar 16, 2009 at 08:10:06PM -0400, Paul W. Frields wrote: > >On Mon, Mar 16, 2009 at 07:56:12PM -0400, Tim Burke wrote: > >> John Poelstra wrote: > >>> > >>> I wonder if the board would consider it reasonable to record the "yes" > >>> and "no" votes by member when the vote is not unanimous? I also do not > >>> think that someone should be able to abstain (which I think is more an > >>> indication of lack of resolve or ambivalence). If we elect people to > >>> make hard decisions they should do so... not ride the middle or "decide > >>> not to decide". > >>> > >> Alternatively, perhaps abstain can be accompanied with a reason. For > >> example, a case where a board member does not consider him/herself to be > >> an informed enough expert on the topic and doesn't want a comparatively > >> uninformed vote to tip the balance. In this case, which is better (or > >> what is the expectation) > >> > >> a) expect that all board members are required to invest whatever time it > >> takes to thoroughly understand ALL issues > >> > >> b) force board members to cast ill-informed votes > >> > >> c) allow board members to respectfully abstain in cases where they are > >> honestly not well versed enough on the topic; deferring to the expertiese > >> of others. > > > >It's pretty rare for us to have votes where *both* (1) a Board member > >doesn't understand the issue at hand, *and* (2) no one else in the > >call can resolve that member's understanding by answering questions. > >By which I mean, if one doesn't understand the issue, abstention is > >not as good as saying, "Can someone explain $ISSUE to me?". > > > >Typically we try not to push things to voting or decisions when there > >are major questions still floating around. It's unfair not just to > >the Board members but to the community too. For these reasons, I > >think (a) is best but the expectation is on the Board as a whole to > >have a shared understanding of the issues. > > There are cases where abstain is the right answer. For example, > conflict of interest. It's quite rare, but it can (and has) happen. That's a very good exception that proves the general rule. Thanks for bringing it up. -- 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 notting at redhat.com Tue Mar 17 13:51:07 2009 From: notting at redhat.com (Bill Nottingham) Date: Tue, 17 Mar 2009 09:51:07 -0400 Subject: Elections, Accountability, and Education In-Reply-To: <20090317030130.GB22888@domsch.com> References: <49BED5EF.1070401@redhat.com> <20090317030130.GB22888@domsch.com> Message-ID: <20090317135107.GA11328@nostromo.devel.redhat.com> Matt Domsch (matt at domsch.com) said: > > At what point is the cost too high? My own measure is the amount of time > > to create the minutes exceeds the length of the meeting. > > This is my concern. While I enjoy the IRC meetings, we cover fewer > topics, in less detail, than we do in concalls. Summarizing concalls > is hard work; summarizing with even more detail - ugg. John has done > an admirable job at this, kudos to him. I'd agree - I admire the transparency of IRC meetings, however, the bandwidth of them is problematic. The fact that the FESCo meeting is now two hours every week is somewhat frustrating, but it needs to be that long just to get through the agenda over IRC. I think we can do a bit better to try and document where we have contrasting views - our move to attempt to do some summarization via gobby may help with that. But as stated before, oftentimes there isn't any information to put about votes, just because there aren't any votes. Bill From jkeating at redhat.com Tue Mar 17 15:49:26 2009 From: jkeating at redhat.com (Jesse Keating) Date: Tue, 17 Mar 2009 08:49:26 -0700 Subject: Elections, Accountability, and Education In-Reply-To: <49BF50E2.3010107@fedoraproject.org> References: <49BED5EF.1070401@redhat.com> <1237246728.3823.0.camel@localhost.localdomain> <49BF50E2.3010107@fedoraproject.org> Message-ID: <1237304966.3823.16.camel@localhost.localdomain> On Tue, 2009-03-17 at 12:57 +0530, Rahul Sundaram wrote: > I would note that, this was brought up in this before, agreed upon and > never really implemented sometime back. Thread starts at > > http://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-advisory-board/2008-January/msg00252.html This is probably for reasons already mentioned in this thread, it is a rare rare event that we don't reach unanimous decisions within the board. -- Jesse Keating Fedora -- Freedom? is a feature! identi.ca: http://identi.ca/jkeating -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 197 bytes Desc: This is a digitally signed message part URL: From sundaram at fedoraproject.org Tue Mar 17 15:58:01 2009 From: sundaram at fedoraproject.org (Rahul Sundaram) Date: Tue, 17 Mar 2009 21:28:01 +0530 Subject: Elections, Accountability, and Education In-Reply-To: <1237304966.3823.16.camel@localhost.localdomain> References: <49BED5EF.1070401@redhat.com> <1237246728.3823.0.camel@localhost.localdomain> <49BF50E2.3010107@fedoraproject.org> <1237304966.3823.16.camel@localhost.localdomain> Message-ID: <49BFC889.30705@fedoraproject.org> Jesse Keating wrote: > On Tue, 2009-03-17 at 12:57 +0530, Rahul Sundaram wrote: >> I would note that, this was brought up in this before, agreed upon and >> never really implemented sometime back. Thread starts at >> >> http://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-advisory-board/2008-January/msg00252.html > > This is probably for reasons already mentioned in this thread, it is a > rare rare event that we don't reach unanimous decisions within the > board. True but there *are* such events and the meeting mins haven't recorded them. Rahul From inode0 at gmail.com Tue Mar 17 18:03:55 2009 From: inode0 at gmail.com (inode0) Date: Tue, 17 Mar 2009 13:03:55 -0500 Subject: Elections, Accountability, and Education In-Reply-To: <49BED5EF.1070401@redhat.com> References: <49BED5EF.1070401@redhat.com> Message-ID: On Mon, Mar 16, 2009 at 5:42 PM, John Poelstra wrote: > inode0 said the following on 03/13/2009 07:14 AM Pacific Time: > > > > Disclaimer: I take the notes for the board meetings. ?I am not a board > member and I do not participate in the discussions. > >> Comparing these 40 minutes with the information I receive by reading >> the minutes of the private board meetings I'd like to make two >> observations. First, John does a great job summarizing the discussion >> that took place in the minutes but that summary rarely includes who >> said what. That is still quite valuable and helps educate the reader >> of the minutes about the nuances of the issue and the board's >> collective thinking about the problem. Accountability isn't something >> we can hold the board collectively responsible for though since we >> don't vote for the board collectively. Who said what is critical to >> our understanding of each individual member of the board and to our >> ability to hold them accountable in subsequent elections. (In case >> this "accountability" theme sounds negative I want to be clear >> everyone understands that it isn't negative. It is more likely by >> increasing my awareness of the individual participation of board >> members that I will say this member is great, I want to vote *for* him >> next time.) > > I appreciate your appreciation :) > > Anyone that has taken notes for a meeting knows that really well written > notes can take a long time to do even when the final products doesn't look > like it. ?In the past it has not been unusual to spend the same amount of > time writing the notes after the meeting as the meeting itself. ?So two > hours can easily evaporate from a work day just for one meeting. ?I can't > imagine how much time it would take to transcribe the view points of nine > different people as they engage in vigorous debate. ?While this might > provide value for some issues I don't think it is sustainable or provides a > very good ROI on the use of time. I do summaries for another meeting and I completely understand how long they take to do. And I want to really stress that while I talked a lot about the minutes that was only because they are the primary way we get information about the non-public meetings held by the board. I tried to stay away from making suggestions and I'm afraid that left the suggestion that I thought the minutes should be "fixed" in some way. I really don't think the minutes need to be changed in any burdensome way. The fundamental issue is one of wanting the business of the board and the activities of the individual board members (especially during the deliberation process) to be more transparent to those who elect them. Any step in that direction will be welcome and it could come from having one meeting each month be held in public, either on IRC or with the public allowed to eavesdrop in some way on a conference call (live or by way of podcast or perhaps some other fashion) or in others ways I'm not bright enough to think up. Honestly, I would personally be delighted to trade the current monthly public meeting, which isn't normally a meeting at all, with a real meeting. I learn a lot more about the board and its way of conducting affairs on my behalf from seeing them work for 45 minutes than I do from asking them questions once a month which I could just as easily ask on this mailing list. John From inode0 at gmail.com Tue Mar 17 18:40:38 2009 From: inode0 at gmail.com (inode0) Date: Tue, 17 Mar 2009 13:40:38 -0500 Subject: Elections, Accountability, and Education In-Reply-To: <20090317030130.GB22888@domsch.com> References: <49BED5EF.1070401@redhat.com> <20090317030130.GB22888@domsch.com> Message-ID: On Mon, Mar 16, 2009 at 10:01 PM, Matt Domsch wrote: > On Mon, Mar 16, 2009 at 03:42:55PM -0700, John Poelstra wrote: >> >My second observation about the minutes are that board decisions are >> >announced collectively. > > This is actually something I pushed for when we first formed the > Board. ?While there is discussion, debate, and a healthy exchange of > viewpoints, in the end, when a decision _is_ made, it reflects the > view of the Board as a whole, nearly always by concensus. ?Individuals > on the Board may of course speak in public about their views on > various points and topics, speaking for themselves, but I don't want > "the Board" decisions to become a US Supreme Court-style 5-4 decision > with dissenters writing their own dissent. ?Decisions exceedingly > rarely break this way in practice that I've seen, and it only serves > to polarize. ?IMHO. ?This is also why, in general, the current FPL > publishes Board decisions. ?Regardless of the debate, we're still > friends who can work together for a common good, and I feel we need to > present a common, non-polarizing front, which I think we've done a > good job at. I can understand this way of thinking at that time better than I can today. It probably would have had a very negative community response to see a vote of 5-4 where 5 appointed members voted one way and 4 elected members voted the other way. Over time I think things have changed. Red Hat has shown a lot of good will by reducing the number of appointed seats and by appointing community members who don't work for them. The community has shown a lot of good will as well by electing many people who are employed by Red Hat. With the composition of the current board I don't see how a close vote on an issue would be particularly polarizing or traumatic to the community. Rather I see it as the what it is. A close vote on an issue that has some unusual properties, maybe at the edge of the Fedora philosophy. And those are exactly the sorts of cases that are useful to me as a voter. A unanimous vote isn't very interesting. What can I learn from that? >> At what point is the cost too high? My own measure is the amount of time >> to create the minutes exceeds the length of the meeting. > > This is my concern. ?While I enjoy the IRC meetings, we cover fewer > topics, in less detail, than we do in concalls. ?Summarizing concalls > is hard work; summarizing with even more detail - ugg. ?John has done > an admirable job at this, kudos to him. FESCo seems to manage to do most of its business and I believe all of its voting in public. So I'm not getting the sense that adding some inefficiency and inconvenience to the board in the conduct of some part of its business is so insurmountable an obstacle. How strongly do we believe in transparent governance? Opting out when there is a legal or sensitive issue is one thing, opting out because being transparent is more inconvenient than the alternative is another. John From jkeating at redhat.com Tue Mar 17 18:58:01 2009 From: jkeating at redhat.com (Jesse Keating) Date: Tue, 17 Mar 2009 11:58:01 -0700 Subject: Elections, Accountability, and Education In-Reply-To: References: <49BED5EF.1070401@redhat.com> <20090317030130.GB22888@domsch.com> Message-ID: <1237316281.3823.32.camel@localhost.localdomain> On Tue, 2009-03-17 at 13:40 -0500, inode0 wrote: > > FESCo seems to manage to do most of its business and I believe all of > its voting in public. So I'm not getting the sense that adding some > inefficiency and inconvenience to the board in the conduct of some > part of its business is so insurmountable an obstacle. > > How strongly do we believe in transparent governance? Opting out when > there is a legal or sensitive issue is one thing, opting out because > being transparent is more inconvenient than the alternative is > another. There is a difference here. The board constantly deals with things of a nature that can't be made public at the time of the board meeting. FESCo /never/ has that, as whenever it runs into a legal issue, it gets bounced up to the board (or just fedora legal directly). We are going to make a concerted effort to provide more visibility into the non-sensitive matters that are discussed at board meetings, but we'll continue to do the meetings in a phone manner due to the high bandwidth and better feel for what is being said. -- Jesse Keating Fedora -- Freedom? is a feature! identi.ca: http://identi.ca/jkeating -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 197 bytes Desc: This is a digitally signed message part URL: From poelstra at redhat.com Tue Mar 17 21:45:10 2009 From: poelstra at redhat.com (John Poelstra) Date: Tue, 17 Mar 2009 14:45:10 -0700 Subject: Fedora Board Recap 2009-03-17 Message-ID: <49C019E6.2010008@redhat.com> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Board/Meetings/2009-03-17 == Roll Call == * Board Members: Paul Frields, Seth Vidal, Chris Aillon, Chris Tyler, Jesse Keating, Matt Domsch, Bill Nottingham, and Spot Callaway * Regrets: Harald Hoyer, Dimitris Glezos * Secretary: John Poelstra == Contributions from Embargoed Nations == * Topic proposed by Paul Frields * Paul and Spot are consulting with Red Hat legal and discussions continue * Will report back when more information is available == What is Fedora == * Continuing discussion centered around the ''Four Foundations'' ** https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Foundations * Are there values currently reflected in Fedora that are not captured by the ''Four Foundations''? ** Request that the board offers feedback on the wiki pages by 2009-03-22 * Planned progression is: *# Mission Statement (done) *# Core Values (in progress now) *# Vision Statements (TBD) * Next step Paul will review the discussion or changes on the wiki until 2009-03-22 and then send round-up to the list == Involvement of the Board in Future Security Incidents == * Topic proposed by Dimitris Glezos (2009-02-03) ** Dimitris was unable to attend today's meeting * Should the board be notified in the instance of future events? * Several noted that Mike McGrath is working on security policy as part of the CSI (Community Services Infrastructure) documentation, and security policy, including incident reporting, is part of that set of docs * '''NEXT ACTIONS''' ** Invite Mike McGrath to discuss his thoughts and status of an incident reporting policy, and target completion date for written policy ** Once ready, have Mike present the policy to board for discussion == Board Transparency == * Background: https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-advisory-board/2009-March/msg00049.html * The board has attempted to be more transparent by capturing minutes with gobby * Tracking individual votes is something we can implement when there are actual votes ** Most decisions are reached at by consensus where a straight up/down vote is not taken * Abstaining ** Should be reserved for conflict of interest, otherwise if a member needs more info, ask for it in the meeting ** Is really most relevant in cases where we have to take votes; Board often uses consensus to present unified leadership * A quorum is required for all decisions made by the board * The Board will start capturing discussion points per member at the next meeting == Misc. == * Brief discussion of Beta status ** Main concern is anaconda storage testing and issues * Release readiness meeting with all the teams tomorrow From inode0 at gmail.com Tue Mar 17 22:58:56 2009 From: inode0 at gmail.com (inode0) Date: Tue, 17 Mar 2009 17:58:56 -0500 Subject: Elections, Accountability, and Education In-Reply-To: <1237316281.3823.32.camel@localhost.localdomain> References: <49BED5EF.1070401@redhat.com> <20090317030130.GB22888@domsch.com> <1237316281.3823.32.camel@localhost.localdomain> Message-ID: 2009/3/17 Jesse Keating : > On Tue, 2009-03-17 at 13:40 -0500, inode0 wrote: >> >> FESCo seems to manage to do most of its business and I believe all of >> its voting in public. So I'm not getting the sense that adding some >> inefficiency and inconvenience to the board in the conduct of some >> part of its business is so insurmountable an obstacle. >> >> How strongly do we believe in transparent governance? Opting out when >> there is a legal or sensitive issue is one thing, opting out because >> being transparent is more inconvenient than the alternative is >> another. > > There is a difference here. ?The board constantly deals with things of a > nature that can't be made public at the time of the board meeting. > FESCo /never/ has that, as whenever it runs into a legal issue, it gets > bounced up to the board (or just fedora legal directly). Right, I understand that legal matters get bumped up to the board. FESCo also deals privately with non-legal matters that in their judgment are too sensitive for whatever reason to discuss in public so they also need to juggle some. I'm curious and I suspect most of us non-board members don't really understand to what extent the board deals with legal matters. Could you give us a rough estimate of the percentage of time that the board spends in meetings dealing with legal matters? I know it would likely vary greatly, but something of a "typical" meeting. > We are going to make a concerted effort to provide more visibility into > the non-sensitive matters that are discussed at board meetings, but > we'll continue to do the meetings in a phone manner due to the high > bandwidth and better feel for what is being said. Thanks, I appreciate your consideration and efforts in this regard very much. John From jonstanley at gmail.com Tue Mar 17 23:13:37 2009 From: jonstanley at gmail.com (Jon Stanley) Date: Tue, 17 Mar 2009 19:13:37 -0400 Subject: Elections, Accountability, and Education In-Reply-To: References: <49BED5EF.1070401@redhat.com> <20090317030130.GB22888@domsch.com> <1237316281.3823.32.camel@localhost.localdomain> Message-ID: On Tue, Mar 17, 2009 at 6:58 PM, inode0 wrote: > Right, I understand that legal matters get bumped up to the board. > FESCo also deals privately with non-legal matters that in their > judgment are too sensitive for whatever reason to discuss in public so > they also need to juggle some. I'd just like to emphasize that this is an exceedingly rare event, except for sponsor nominations as earlier in the thread (which were also unfortunately a rare event until this week.....but that's another topic). In both sponsor nominations and every other item that we've dealt with in private in my time on FESCo, there's a specific, identifiable individual involved - we don't want to go smearing private dirt in public. From jkeating at redhat.com Tue Mar 17 23:19:35 2009 From: jkeating at redhat.com (Jesse Keating) Date: Tue, 17 Mar 2009 16:19:35 -0700 Subject: Elections, Accountability, and Education In-Reply-To: References: <49BED5EF.1070401@redhat.com> <20090317030130.GB22888@domsch.com> <1237316281.3823.32.camel@localhost.localdomain> Message-ID: <1237331975.5139.0.camel@localhost.localdomain> On Tue, 2009-03-17 at 17:58 -0500, inode0 wrote: > I'm curious and I suspect most of us non-board members don't really > understand to what extent the board deals with legal matters. Could > you give us a rough estimate of the percentage of time that the board > spends in meetings dealing with legal matters? I know it would likely > vary greatly, but something of a "typical" meeting. Lately our meetings seem to be split between defining what is Fedora, figuring out how we can be more transparent in our meetings, and dealing with ongoing legal issues. -- Jesse Keating Fedora -- Freedom? is a feature! identi.ca: http://identi.ca/jkeating -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 197 bytes Desc: This is a digitally signed message part URL: From dimitris at glezos.com Wed Mar 18 08:50:34 2009 From: dimitris at glezos.com (Dimitris Glezos) Date: Wed, 18 Mar 2009 10:50:34 +0200 Subject: Elections, Accountability, and Education In-Reply-To: <1237316281.3823.32.camel@localhost.localdomain> References: <49BED5EF.1070401@redhat.com> <20090317030130.GB22888@domsch.com> <1237316281.3823.32.camel@localhost.localdomain> Message-ID: <6d4237680903180150v50e6d935n190f31c5f9d01262@mail.gmail.com> 2009/3/17 Jesse Keating : > On Tue, 2009-03-17 at 13:40 -0500, inode0 wrote: >> >> FESCo seems to manage to do most of its business and I believe all of >> its voting in public. So I'm not getting the sense that adding some >> inefficiency and inconvenience to the board in the conduct of some >> part of its business is so insurmountable an obstacle. >> >> How strongly do we believe in transparent governance? Opting out when >> there is a legal or sensitive issue is one thing, opting out because >> being transparent is more inconvenient than the alternative is >> another. > > There is a difference here. ?The board constantly deals with things of a > nature that can't be made public at the time of the board meeting. > FESCo /never/ has that, as whenever it runs into a legal issue, it gets > bounced up to the board (or just fedora legal directly). > > We are going to make a concerted effort to provide more visibility into > the non-sensitive matters that are discussed at board meetings, but > we'll continue to do the meetings in a phone manner due to the high > bandwidth and better feel for what is being said. I'm thinking that it would be perfectly reasonable to actually have our IRC clients open on #fedora-board-meeting in _every_ meeting and board memebers randomly transcribing the important bits of the meeting, others filling up. I'm pretty sure we can handle this, since always only one person is talking at the same time. In these bits we could include the votes too. -? -- Dimitris Glezos Jabber ID: glezos at jabber.org, GPG: 0xA5A04C3B http://dimitris.glezos.com/ "He who gives up functionality for ease of use loses both and deserves neither." (Anonymous) -- From poelstra at redhat.com Wed Mar 18 18:13:25 2009 From: poelstra at redhat.com (John Poelstra) Date: Wed, 18 Mar 2009 11:13:25 -0700 Subject: Fedora 11 Beta Release Readiness Meeting Message-ID: <49C139C5.6090508@redhat.com> Fedora 11 Beta Release Readiness Meeting 2009-03-18 Notes recorded collaboratively by all attendees using gobby == Invitees == Ambassadors -- David Nalley (present) Artwork/Design -- M?ir?n Duffy (present) Documentation -- Eric Christensen (present) FESCo -- Jon Stanley (present) Fedora Engineering Manager -- Tom "Spot" Callaway (present) Fedora Project Leader -- Paul Frields (present) Infrastructure -- Mike McGrath (present) Marketing -- Jack Aboutboul (present) Quality -- James Laska (present) Release Engineering -- Jesse Keating (present) Translation -- Diego B?rigo Zacar?o (present) Websites -- Ricky Zhou (present) Facilitator -- John Poelstra (present) == Agenda/Notes == 1) Are there any known reasons we will not be able to release on Tuesday, March 24, 2009? --if "yes," what are our contingency plans? * Waiting on a "known good" anaconda for the beta tree * Last possible date for a good anaconda is tomorrow (2009-03-18) otherwise release will have to slip ** Need communicate (if necessary) with FESCo before their meeting * Anaconda storage rewrite still landing code as of yesterday ** Upstream release didn't quite make Wed 2009-03-18 Rawhide ** Need a good idea of what's known not working, and what's thought to be properly working so we can compare with Rawhide and Beta ** We have ~1 day to get a good sense of which bugs need to be addressed, and get test results on outstanding areas ** Add to the release notes or "known bugs" section as issues are found--easy to remove if they are solved later ** Jesse to contact anaconda team ** jlaska: Mixed feelings on whether we can do that by COB tomorrow * FESCo covered ext4 at last week's meeting ** Eric Sandeen thinks it's good to go ** some apps still requiring FS to play nanny 2) Discuss or announce topics or issues that all of the teams on the call would benefit from knowing about. * Marketing talking points are ready https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/F11_Talking_Points * News distribution network https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Marketing_news_distribution_network * Look into potential translation issues ** Jack will send email to fedora-marketing-list at redhat.com ** Diego will followup and see what can be done * Art team needs a slogan from Marketing to integrate into the release (GA) banner/website * sparks: Release notes https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_11_Beta_release_notes ** need more details on network changes ** Jack is going to give a look and see what other things can be added * Infrastructure tickets - https://fedorahosted.org/fedora-infrastructure/report/9 ** Everything in good shape... working on some low risk behind the scenes changes like disk space, etc. * Ambassadors in good shape, though work (??) is light at this point in the release cycle ** will increase as we get closer to the final release * Websites only one page (+ 1 banner) to change so looking good * Kind, fair, polite critique of the new F11 background artwork would be greatly appreciated * Docs team will create the release announcement and would like input from the marketing team ** Sparks will steal from last Beta release. (http://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-announce-list/2008-September/msg00016.html) 3) What things should we be planning for now that we have not previously discussed that will make the final release of Fedora 11 better than any past release? * Spot: Most of the things that can be done will mostly need to happen after beta--testing of release, etc. * Spot/Jlaska: Good list of test days coming up--best we've had so far (https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA/Test_Days/F11) ** Two open slots (2009-05-07 and 2009-05-21) - no objections to hosting events on other days than Thursday ** To propose a test day ... https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA/Test_Days/Create * Jon Stanley: Can we make the audio from these meetings more widely available to community as discussed at the F11 Alpha meeting? ** John Poelstra had requested ability after last meeting in infrastructure ticket: https://fedorahosted.org/fedora-infrastructure/ticket/1160 ** John to talk with Mike after the meeting From stickster at gmail.com Tue Mar 24 22:10:16 2009 From: stickster at gmail.com (Paul W. Frields) Date: Tue, 24 Mar 2009 18:10:16 -0400 Subject: Fedora Board Recap 2009-03-24 Message-ID: <20090324221016.GA1812@localhost.localdomain> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Board/Meetings/2009-03-24 == Roll Call == * Board Members: Paul Frields, Seth Vidal, Chris Aillon, Chris Tyler, Jesse Keating, Matt Domsch, Bill Nottingham, Harald Hoyer, Dimitris Glezos, Spot Callaway * Secretary: Paul Frields (filling in for John Poelstra, sadly missed) == Involvement of the Board in Future Security Incidents == * Topic proposed by Dimitris Glezos (2009-02-03) * Should the board be notified in the instance of future events? * Several noted that Mike McGrath is working on security policy as part of the CSI (Community Services Infrastructure) documentation, and security policy, including incident reporting, is part of that set of docs * pfrields: Mike was unavailable because of prior conflicts but we can invite him to next available call * glezos: response in this matter continues to affect our community image ** How do we deal with this next time? What needs to change? Answering these questions ''clearly'' is of key importance * notting: As said, 'security policy, including incident reporting, is part of that set of docs' - "how we deal with this" is the goal of the document. * glezos: The way we dealt with the incident affected and affects Fedora's image ** This is somewhat of a crisis management issue ** discuss with Mike: *** servers co-located with RH in PHX -- have policy in place that addresses them *** servers outside any RH-owned colo -- have Fedora (& Board) be most accountable *** strategy for increasing server location on which Fedora (& Board) can be most accountable * notting: fundamental conflict with budget - we're unlikely to get tens of terabytes of storage in multiple GEOs randomly donated * pfrields: timeline for community expectations * glezos: basis to expand services to other places, i.e. move away from colo's? * mdomsch: PHX and other colo's provide a high degree of service that are hard to get elsewhere * skvidal: Because RHEL is downstream of Fedora, if we have reason to believe there's risk to Fedora, Red Hat is a natural stakeholder * spot: No reason we couldn't give Red Hat a timeline for our announcements * glezos: Can we at least ensure Board has a seat at the table in any decision making? * spot: If we go beyond the borders of Fedora, the situation generally demands NDAs ''NEXT ACTIONS:'' * Invite Mike McGrath on list and at 2009-04-14 meeting, to discuss his thoughts, status of an incident reporting policy, and target completion date for written policy * Once ready, have Mike present the policy to Board for discussion == Contributions from Embargoed Nations == * Topic proposed by Paul Frields * Paul and Spot are consulting with Red Hat legal and discussions continue * Long discussion about speculations on what exactly the law requires and how it ties our hands in many ways (all Board members contributed) * Ongoing discussions on what is allowed to be used from upstream servers, and how Fedora cannot police upstream projects * Translations a good example of universal, non-code bits * Overall, Board continues to desire a fair policy for all potential contributors ''NEXT ACTIONS:'' * Spot and Paul to report back with more information as it becomes available. == What is Fedora == * Continuing discussion centered around the ''Four Foundations'' ** https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Foundations * Are there values currently reflected in Fedora that are not captured by the ''Four Foundations''? ** Request that the board offers feedback on the wiki pages by 2009-03-22 * Planned progression is: *# Mission Statement (done) *# Core Values (done) *# Vision Statements (in progress) * Core values have been agreed upon in [[Foundations]] page ** mdomsch: comment on discussion page, edit in as appropriate * pfrields: Next, take ideas from [[Objectives]], combine and/or flesh them out as needed, to provide rationale for decision making by Board ** This will help community members in cases where the Board has to take a position of supporting certain initiatives * mdomsch, pfrields: Basic rule: contributors should ''always'' be empowered to try new things, even if they don't fall under the Fedora umbrella ''NEXT ACTIONS:'' * Paul to start ball rolling with email that takes a bite-sized chunk of page, suggests changes, and sets deadline. * Board members to respond with discussion. -- Paul W. Frields http://paul.frields.org/ gpg fingerprint: 3DA6 A0AC 6D58 FEC4 0233 5906 ACDB C937 BD11 3717 http://redhat.com/ - - - - http://pfrields.fedorapeople.org/ irc.freenode.net: stickster @ #fedora-docs, #fedora-devel, #fredlug -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: not available URL: From mmcgrath at redhat.com Tue Mar 24 23:09:40 2009 From: mmcgrath at redhat.com (Mike McGrath) Date: Tue, 24 Mar 2009 18:09:40 -0500 (CDT) Subject: Fedora Board Recap 2009-03-24 In-Reply-To: <20090324221016.GA1812@localhost.localdomain> References: <20090324221016.GA1812@localhost.localdomain> Message-ID: On Tue, 24 Mar 2009, Paul W. Frields wrote: > == Involvement of the Board in Future Security Incidents == > * Topic proposed by Dimitris Glezos (2009-02-03) > * Should the board be notified in the instance of future events? > * Several noted that Mike McGrath is working on security policy as part of the CSI (Community Services Infrastructure) documentation, and security policy, including incident reporting, is part of that set of docs > For those not familiar here is the security policy at present: http://infrastructure.fedoraproject.org/csi/security-policy/ It's still being worked on, for example the addition of incident reporting. -Mike From inode0 at gmail.com Wed Mar 25 00:54:00 2009 From: inode0 at gmail.com (inode0) Date: Tue, 24 Mar 2009 19:54:00 -0500 Subject: Fedora Board Recap 2009-03-24 In-Reply-To: <20090324221016.GA1812@localhost.localdomain> References: <20090324221016.GA1812@localhost.localdomain> Message-ID: 2009/3/24 Paul W. Frields : > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Board/Meetings/2009-03-24 > ... snip ... inode0 thanks the board for the new additions to this week's recap. John From stickster at gmail.com Wed Mar 25 02:50:48 2009 From: stickster at gmail.com (Paul W. Frields) Date: Tue, 24 Mar 2009 22:50:48 -0400 Subject: Fedora Board Recap 2009-03-24 In-Reply-To: References: <20090324221016.GA1812@localhost.localdomain> Message-ID: <20090325025048.GD4684@localhost.localdomain> On Tue, Mar 24, 2009 at 07:54:00PM -0500, inode0 wrote: > 2009/3/24 Paul W. Frields : > > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Board/Meetings/2009-03-24 > > ... snip ... > > inode0 thanks the board for the new additions to this week's recap. I was hoping you'd notice! :-) -- 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 Fri Mar 27 13:48:40 2009 From: stickster at gmail.com (Paul W. Frields) Date: Fri, 27 Mar 2009 09:48:40 -0400 Subject: Reminder: Fedora Board IRC meeting 1800 UTC 2009-04-07 Message-ID: <20090327134840.GA4201@localhost.localdomain> The Board is holding its monthly public meeting on Tuesday, 7 April 2009, at 1800 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 5 May 2009. For these meetings, the public is invited to do the following: * Join #fedora-board-meeting to see the Board's conversation. * Join #fedora-board-public to discuss topics and post questions. This channel is read/write for everyone. **CHANGE OF SOP: We're trying something new (albeit in a minor way) in this meeting. The moderator will still be available to gather input from the #fedora-board-public channel, but will voice people, one at a time, in the queue in the #fedora-board-meeting channel. We'll limit time per voice as needed to give everyone in the queue a chance to be heard. If this process works well, we'll use it at later meetings and note the change on the wiki. The Board may reserve some time at the top of the hour to cover any agenda items as appropriate. 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 jchadima at redhat.com Mon Mar 30 13:21:51 2009 From: jchadima at redhat.com (Jan Chadima) Date: Mon, 30 Mar 2009 09:21:51 -0400 (EDT) Subject: Secandary architecture proposal ... parisc In-Reply-To: <2006108667.717781238419222290.JavaMail.root@zmail04.collab.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com> Message-ID: <1842008333.718061238419311929.JavaMail.root@zmail04.collab.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com> Hello we want to make secondary fedora architecture on HP parisc. We have built some rpms on an old hp workstation now. We try to port the architecture dependent ones. We plan to be able boot from cd in an month or two. The project page is http://www.benhur.prf.cuni.cz/medved-7/wydobitki/?path=fedora-parisc . We want to invite another developers to contribute. Now we are only two, we want to organize a Fedora SIG and if possible Fedora secondary architecture. Could you please point me to some information how to do it or document how to do it? Thanx in advance Jan F. Chadima Ales Snuparek From mmcgrath at redhat.com Tue Mar 31 12:09:32 2009 From: mmcgrath at redhat.com (Mike McGrath) Date: Tue, 31 Mar 2009 07:09:32 -0500 (CDT) Subject: Secandary architecture proposal ... parisc In-Reply-To: <1842008333.718061238419311929.JavaMail.root@zmail04.collab.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com> References: <1842008333.718061238419311929.JavaMail.root@zmail04.collab.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com> Message-ID: On Mon, 30 Mar 2009, Jan Chadima wrote: > Hello > we want to make secondary fedora architecture on HP parisc. We have built some rpms on an old hp workstation now. We try to port the architecture dependent ones. We plan to be able boot from cd in an month or two. The project page is http://www.benhur.prf.cuni.cz/medved-7/wydobitki/?path=fedora-parisc > . We want to invite another developers to contribute. > > Now we are only two, we want to organize a Fedora SIG and if possible Fedora secondary architecture. > Could you please point me to some information how to do it or document how to do it? > > Thanx in advance > Jan F. Chadima > Ales Snuparek > Your best bet on secondary arch discussions is on the secondary arch list. Take a look at: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/fedora-secondary-list -Mike From poelstra at redhat.com Tue Mar 31 20:10:55 2009 From: poelstra at redhat.com (John Poelstra) Date: Tue, 31 Mar 2009 13:10:55 -0700 Subject: Fedora Board Recap 2009-03-31 Message-ID: <49D278CF.7020808@redhat.com> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Board/Meetings/2009-03-31 == Roll Call == * Attendees: Paul Frields, Bill Nottingham, Jesse Keating, Seth Vidal, Chris Aillon, Dimitris Glezos, Chris Tyler, Spot Callaway * Regrets: Harald Hoyer, Matt Domsch * Secretary: John Poelstra * Short meeting--approximately 35 minutes == Discussion of Intrusion Announcement == * Paul noted that he is happy that the announcement is out and on to other things == Next steps in WIF (What is Fedora?) process == * Paul needs another week to pull information and proposed objectives for next discussions == Work of Fedora QA Team == * Dimitris noted lots of new and good efforts QA team has underway ** Dimitris would like to understand better how resources are allocated and how the team works ** Hopefully to learn what great things have happened and see if we can apply them to other teams as well * Best to have in an IRC meeting where the QA team can all participate * Jesse will reach out to James Laska to attend next IRC board meeting on 2009-04-07 == Next Meeting == * Date: 2009-04-07 * Time: 18:00 UTC * Location: irc.freenode.net ** Moderated channel for board answers: #fedora-board-meeting ** Public channel to ask questions: #fedora-board-public From fhornain at gmail.com Tue Mar 31 19:44:04 2009 From: fhornain at gmail.com (Frederic Hornain) Date: Tue, 31 Mar 2009 21:44:04 +0200 Subject: Community domain request Message-ID: <3161376e0903311244ha0215d5k1d40cfbe39678f8a@mail.gmail.com> Dear *, I officially request the following domain name be.fedoracommunity.org for Belgium. Thanks for you time and your efforts. Frederic Hornain Fedora Belgium ----------------------------------------------------- Fedora-ambassadors-list mailing list Fedora-ambassadors-list at redhat.com -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: