From frankly3d at gmail.com Tue May 5 07:54:53 2009 From: frankly3d at gmail.com (Frank Murphy (Frankly3D)) Date: Tue, 05 May 2009 08:54:53 +0100 Subject: Fedora Stickers In-Reply-To: References: <49E85009.8020502@gmail.com> Message-ID: <49FFF0CD.50704@gmail.com> On 17/04/09 15:51, Clint Savage wrote: > On Fri, Apr 17, 2009 at 3:46 AM, Frank Murphy (Frankly3D) > wrote: If not, I fully encourage you to work with your > regional leaders to get them ordered and paid. > > Cheers, > > Clint > Went ahead and got them done, hope you don't mind. I took the voluntary effort literally. I can email a dodgy snap, of the sticker stuck on a former "Vis-something or other box" The particular person teaches ECDL (http://www.ecdl.ie/) Frank -- msn: frankly3d skype: frankly3d Still Learning From a.mani.cms at gmail.com Tue May 5 16:00:11 2009 From: a.mani.cms at gmail.com (Mani A) Date: Tue, 5 May 2009 21:30:11 +0530 Subject: Free Media Issues Message-ID: <78323d480905050900w33f90f5fiba6fbae5c8d9a955@mail.gmail.com> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 See this long thread titled 'What Now James?' in the freemedia list (private list) https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-freemedia-list A decision needs to taken. Best A. Mani -- A. Mani ASL, CLC, AMS, CMS http://amani.topcities.com -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux) iEYEARECAAYFAkoAY6gACgkQunMISzvdfU7P/ACgrJaAGK713MxOz1OzcXtEToVe cjsAn09q9IFB0NXjfcapFtlgyaA07OSQ =uTBw -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From stickster at gmail.com Tue May 5 16:14:18 2009 From: stickster at gmail.com (Paul W. Frields) Date: Tue, 5 May 2009 12:14:18 -0400 Subject: Free Media Issues In-Reply-To: <78323d480905050900w33f90f5fiba6fbae5c8d9a955@mail.gmail.com> References: <78323d480905050900w33f90f5fiba6fbae5c8d9a955@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <20090505161418.GK3448@localhost.localdomain> On Tue, May 05, 2009 at 09:30:11PM +0530, Mani A wrote: > -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- > Hash: SHA1 > > See this long thread titled 'What Now James?' in the freemedia list > (private list) > https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-freemedia-list > > A decision needs to taken. I would love to review this thread so we can talk about it in the Board meeting. However, I am currently waiting for my subscription request to be approved. If there is a maintainer listening who can do that, I'd appreciate it. -- Paul W. Frields http://paul.frields.org/ gpg fingerprint: 3DA6 A0AC 6D58 FEC4 0233 5906 ACDB C937 BD11 3717 http://redhat.com/ - - - - http://pfrields.fedorapeople.org/ irc.freenode.net: stickster @ #fedora-docs, #fedora-devel, #fredlug From matt at domsch.com Thu May 7 16:20:00 2009 From: matt at domsch.com (Matt Domsch) Date: Thu, 7 May 2009 11:20:00 -0500 Subject: Planning for Fedora Elections Message-ID: <20090507162000.GA10044@domsch.com> I'd like to start the planning process for the next round of Fedora elections. These are traditionally held a short time after the release of the Fedora distribution, therefore nominations must begin in the next week or so, culminating in elections in late June and into the first week in July. The first question is: what groups need to participate in the election this round? * I know the Board will have 3 seats opening, those held currently by Jesse Keating, Seth Vidal, and Tom Callaway. * I believe that FESCo has 5 seats opening. * I believe that FAMSCo is not needing to elect anyone, having filled all their seats in December 2008. Second, I have placed a proposed schedule which is merely my own guesswork for how long this should take. I'm very open to hearing your opinions for shorter or longer durations. (Canonical proposal is https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Elections ) Schedule (Proposed) * Nominations are open from 15 May through 12 June, 2009. * IRC Town Hall-style discussions with candidates for the various positions will be arranged for 14 June through 20 June. * The elections will take place 22 June through 6 July, 2008. I'd like to hear your thoughts on the above, and how to make this an engaging and effective election cycle. Thanks, Matt From fedora at leemhuis.info Thu May 7 16:48:50 2009 From: fedora at leemhuis.info (Thorsten Leemhuis) Date: Thu, 07 May 2009 18:48:50 +0200 Subject: Planning for Fedora Elections In-Reply-To: <20090507162000.GA10044@domsch.com> References: <20090507162000.GA10044@domsch.com> Message-ID: <4A0310F2.1080503@leemhuis.info> On 07.05.2009 18:20, Matt Domsch wrote: > I'd like to start the planning process for the next round of Fedora > elections. [...] Thx for your work! > Schedule (Proposed) > > * Nominations are open from 15 May through 12 June, 2009. > * IRC Town Hall-style discussions with candidates for the various > positions will be arranged for 14 June through 20 June. > * The elections will take place 22 June through 6 July, 2008. > > I'd like to hear your thoughts on the above, and how to make this an > engaging and effective election cycle. I (as a voter) have neither time nor interest for IRC meetings if there is no strong reason to participate. Same for skimming through the IRC logs later, as that in my experience is often way more confusing then helpful. IOW: IRC IMHO has a bad time/benefit ratio if what is being discussed is not really important for you. Sure, IRC has a lot of benefits, but mail has as well, that's why I suggest to let a some people(?) collect a few good questions with the help of the community. Then send them to the nominees that have to answer then within something like 3 or 4 days in private. Then put all the answers up on the net and give people a chance to read them. After that do the IRC Town Hall-style discussions for those that like then, They actually might be easier, as people can ask question like "you said foo to the answer bar in the pre-questioning by mail; could you please outline that a bit more into in regards to foobar?", which in the end might lead to a better IRC Town Hall-style discussion. Just my 2 cent. Cu knurd (?) yes, I'm willing to help with that if nobody else wants to do that From jonstanley at gmail.com Thu May 7 23:38:29 2009 From: jonstanley at gmail.com (Jon Stanley) Date: Thu, 7 May 2009 19:38:29 -0400 Subject: Planning for Fedora Elections In-Reply-To: <20090507162000.GA10044@domsch.com> References: <20090507162000.GA10044@domsch.com> Message-ID: On Thu, May 7, 2009 at 12:20 PM, Matt Domsch wrote: > * I believe that FESCo has 5 seats opening. Correct, the following seats will be up for election this cycle: * Kevin Fenzi * Dennis Gilmore * Bill Nottingham * Brian Pepple * David Woodhouse From frankly3d at gmail.com Fri May 8 06:57:09 2009 From: frankly3d at gmail.com (Frank Murphy (Frankly3D)) Date: Fri, 08 May 2009 07:57:09 +0100 Subject: Free Media Issues In-Reply-To: <20090505161418.GK3448@localhost.localdomain> References: <78323d480905050900w33f90f5fiba6fbae5c8d9a955@mail.gmail.com> <20090505161418.GK3448@localhost.localdomain> Message-ID: <4A03D7C5.9070808@gmail.com> On 05/05/09 17:14, Paul W. Frields wrote: > On Tue, May 05, 2009 at 09:30:11PM +0530, Mani A wrote: >> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- >> Hash: SHA1 >> >> See this long thread titled 'What Now James?' in the freemedia list >> (private list) >> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-freemedia-list >> >> A decision needs to taken. > > I would love to review this thread so we can talk about it in the > Board meeting. However, I am currently waiting for my subscription > request to be approved. If there is a maintainer listening who can do > that, I'd appreciate it. > When the Board does, get back to the Ambassador-List, with something re. this. Can it be more than the plain "Black & White" As there is a lot of passion involved. Frank -- msn: frankly3d skype: frankly3d Still Learning From christoph.wickert at googlemail.com Fri May 8 17:32:23 2009 From: christoph.wickert at googlemail.com (Christoph Wickert) Date: Fri, 08 May 2009 19:32:23 +0200 Subject: Yet another website? (Re: [Ambassadors] belux ambassadors meeting log 15th April 2009) In-Reply-To: <20090425162036.GB12588@localhost.localdomain> References: <1239825701.3201.1.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1239877579.3360.15.camel@localhost.localdomain> <3161376e0904160400h65e5888cs1c46e9132c333f79@mail.gmail.com> <1239881510.3360.20.camel@localhost.localdomain> <3161376e0904160503g2426238at8f9ff180f6984d25@mail.gmail.com> <1239884614.3360.51.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20090416174256.GA20209@hurricane.linuxnetz.de> <49E7C831.5020301@fedoraproject.org> <20090425162036.GB12588@localhost.localdomain> Message-ID: <1241803943.9533.16.camel@localhost.localdomain> Am Samstag, den 25.04.2009, 12:20 -0400 schrieb Paul W. Frields: > On Fri, Apr 17, 2009 at 05:37:13AM +0530, Rahul Sundaram wrote: > > On 04/17/2009 05:21 AM, Mike McGrath wrote: > > > On Thu, 16 Apr 2009, Robert Scheck wrote: > > > > > >> On Thu, 16 Apr 2009, Christoph Wickert wrote: > > >>> Let's face it: ATM the changes have caused confusion and discomfort in > > >>> the Fedora community. For example fedora.de has been taken offline > > >>> because of discrepancies between the trademark holder and the domain > > >>> owner. Robert as the domain owner is a well known and valuable > > >>> contributor of the project and all AFAIK all he did was redirecting to > > >>> fedoraproject.org. > > >> I'm really pissed, but still hope that Paul comes up with something soon. > > >> > > > > > > I'm not familiar with the text of the contract but I wanted to mention > > > something to those who might idly be following this thread to note that > > > Red Hat, as owners of the Fedora name, has to protect it everywhere it > > > knows about it. My understanding is if we don't protect it in one case, > > > we lose the protection everywhere. So even though the text of the > > > contract might be over zealous[1], the contract has to exist in some form. > > > As long as both sides stick to it, I'm sure a good middle ground will be > > > found. > > > > > > -Mike > > > > > > [1] I have no idea what the contract says > > > > Shouldn't it be made public? > > Refer to: > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Trademark_license_agreement Is this all you have to say about it? If so, you are proving what I wrote previously: "Things like these are hard to understand. There might be good reasons, but IMO the board does a bad job ATM in communicating their views to the outside world." I still don't get why Robert has to has to follow rules when mirroring fpo if these rules not even apply to the fpo website itself. Why are rules for community members stricter than for Red Hat or the Fedora Project? How are we supposed to understand the meaning of the agreement, when there are no translations? You cannot expect someone to sign a contract if he doesn't even understand it's content. To be honest: I don't understand this whole fedoracommunity.org thing, because the previous consensus was to collect everything at fpo. Again I kindly ask the board members to explain, when/how things have changed and point me to the relevant mails, irc logs or whatever. TIA, Christoph From stickster at gmail.com Fri May 8 17:46:41 2009 From: stickster at gmail.com (Paul W. Frields) Date: Fri, 8 May 2009 13:46:41 -0400 Subject: Board Public IRC meeting, 2009-05-05 Message-ID: <20090508174641.GC4080@localhost.localdomain> I apologize for this being late, a casualty of my travel schedule the last few days. = = = = = Summary from IRC meeting: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Board/Meetings/2009-05-05 * Export restrictions and [[FreeMedia]] project ** Board members explained that Fedora cannot violate US export restrictions ** No wiggle room but the Board is not happy with the state of export regulations as they pertain to FLOSS ** Board may investigate options for pursuing reform * PPC as a primary or secondary architecture ** PPC has heretofore remained primary because the Board made a decree that it would stay that way until there was some other successful, actively maintained secondary architecture *** That has not happened and PPC continues to have significant problems on a recurring basis *** Some Board members feel that Red Hat might devote additional release engineering resources if PPC became a secondary architecture *** Others feel that because there was no deadline set, moving PPC to a secondary architecture is somewhat bait and switch ** Board voted on mdomsch's motion to remove its block on PPC remaining a primary architecture -- not making it a secondary architecture, a decision that is under FESCo's purview *** Eight +1, one -1 (spot) ** Board voted against spot's motion creating a new block requiring PPC to remain a primary architecture for six months *** Six -1, three +1 (spot, notting, glezos) * No questions were left in the queue for the Board ** Board encourages people to direct follow-up to the open fedora-advisory-board list at *https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-advisory-board -- Paul W. Frields http://paul.frields.org/ gpg fingerprint: 3DA6 A0AC 6D58 FEC4 0233 5906 ACDB C937 BD11 3717 http://redhat.com/ - - - - http://pfrields.fedorapeople.org/ irc.freenode.net: stickster @ #fedora-docs, #fedora-devel, #fredlug From mmcgrath at redhat.com Fri May 8 18:13:11 2009 From: mmcgrath at redhat.com (Mike McGrath) Date: Fri, 8 May 2009 13:13:11 -0500 (CDT) Subject: Yet another website? (Re: [Ambassadors] belux ambassadors meeting log 15th April 2009) In-Reply-To: <1241803943.9533.16.camel@localhost.localdomain> References: <1239825701.3201.1.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1239877579.3360.15.camel@localhost.localdomain> <3161376e0904160400h65e5888cs1c46e9132c333f79@mail.gmail.com> <1239881510.3360.20.camel@localhost.localdomain> <3161376e0904160503g2426238at8f9ff180f6984d25@mail.gmail.com> <1239884614.3360.51.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20090416174256.GA20209@hurricane.linuxnetz.de> <49E7C831.5020301@fedoraproject.org> <20090425162036.GB12588@localhost.localdomain> <1241803943.9533.16.camel@localhost.localdomain> Message-ID: On Fri, 8 May 2009, Christoph Wickert wrote: > > Refer to: > > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Trademark_license_agreement > > Is this all you have to say about it? If so, you are proving what I > wrote previously: "Things like these are hard to understand. There might > be good reasons, but IMO the board does a bad job ATM in communicating > their views to the outside world." > I can't speak for the board but I'm pretty sure you're confusing legal constraints with the boards view. They don't write the law and I suspect at least some of them don't much like the laws they find themselves operating in. > I still don't get why Robert has to has to follow rules when mirroring > fpo if these rules not even apply to the fpo website itself. Why are > rules for community members stricter than for Red Hat or the Fedora > Project? How are we supposed to understand the meaning of the agreement, > when there are no translations? You cannot expect someone to sign a > contract if he doesn't even understand it's content. > I'd strongly recommend if you find anything you don't understand to discuss it with your lawyer. I'm a tech guy, not a legal guy so I don't bother pretending to understand how the law works. // just my two cents on the matter. -Mike From christoph.wickert at googlemail.com Fri May 8 18:30:46 2009 From: christoph.wickert at googlemail.com (Christoph Wickert) Date: Fri, 08 May 2009 20:30:46 +0200 Subject: Yet another website? (Re: [Ambassadors] belux ambassadors meeting log 15th April 2009) In-Reply-To: References: <1239825701.3201.1.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1239877579.3360.15.camel@localhost.localdomain> <3161376e0904160400h65e5888cs1c46e9132c333f79@mail.gmail.com> <1239881510.3360.20.camel@localhost.localdomain> <3161376e0904160503g2426238at8f9ff180f6984d25@mail.gmail.com> <1239884614.3360.51.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20090416174256.GA20209@hurricane.linuxnetz.de> <49E7C831.5020301@fedoraproject.org> <20090425162036.GB12588@localhost.localdomain> <1241803943.9533.16.camel@localhost.localdomain> Message-ID: <1241807446.9533.27.camel@localhost.localdomain> Am Freitag, den 08.05.2009, 13:13 -0500 schrieb Mike McGrath: > On Fri, 8 May 2009, Christoph Wickert wrote: > > > Refer to: > > > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Trademark_license_agreement > > > > Is this all you have to say about it? If so, you are proving what I > > wrote previously: "Things like these are hard to understand. There might > > be good reasons, but IMO the board does a bad job ATM in communicating > > their views to the outside world." > > > > I can't speak for the board but I'm pretty sure you're confusing legal > constraints with the boards view. Probably, but the problem is that the board does not outline it's view but only hands out a contract to sign. > > You cannot expect someone to sign a > > contract if he doesn't even understand it's content. > > > > I'd strongly recommend if you find anything you don't understand to > discuss it with your lawyer. So, a valuable community member (no, not me) who already spends a lot of time and money on Fedora even needs to pay for a lawyer? Even the lawyer will advise you not to sign anything but to get a certified translation first. People are waiting for that translation for months now. > // just my two cents on the matter. > > -Mike Thanks a lot Mike. I'd like to hear more opinions. Regards, Christoph From stickster at gmail.com Fri May 8 22:22:44 2009 From: stickster at gmail.com (Paul W. Frields) Date: Fri, 8 May 2009 18:22:44 -0400 Subject: Free Media Issues In-Reply-To: <4A03D7C5.9070808@gmail.com> References: <78323d480905050900w33f90f5fiba6fbae5c8d9a955@mail.gmail.com> <20090505161418.GK3448@localhost.localdomain> <4A03D7C5.9070808@gmail.com> Message-ID: <20090508222244.GN4080@localhost.localdomain> On Fri, May 08, 2009 at 07:57:09AM +0100, Frank Murphy (Frankly3D) wrote: > On 05/05/09 17:14, Paul W. Frields wrote: >> On Tue, May 05, 2009 at 09:30:11PM +0530, Mani A wrote: >>> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- >>> Hash: SHA1 >>> >>> See this long thread titled 'What Now James?' in the freemedia list >>> (private list) >>> https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-freemedia-list >>> >>> A decision needs to taken. >> >> I would love to review this thread so we can talk about it in the >> Board meeting. However, I am currently waiting for my subscription >> request to be approved. If there is a maintainer listening who can do >> that, I'd appreciate it. >> > > When the Board does, get back to the Ambassador-List, > with something re. this. > Can it be more than the plain "Black & White" > As there is a lot of passion involved. Unfortunately, the legal guidance in this case is just that -- black and white. The Fedora Project is treated as any US entity or person by US law. US law includes embargoes and other regulations that place severe restrictions on the export of certain types of materials, including some of the software found in Fedora, to specific nations. (Other general restrictions exist which probably apply to Fedora as well.) These nations are Cuba, Iran, North Korea, Libya, Sudan, and Syria. Therefore, we're strictly forbidden from exporting Fedora to those nations, or from aiding in their transference. For example, we cannot accept requests to ship media to those nations under any part of the Fedora Project. This is a very unfortunate situation, and despite the Board's sentiment, we're bound by the law. Just to be clear, this is not a new policy; these laws have existed for some time and Fedora has always observed them as far as I know. The discussion that took place in the Board's public IRC meeting can be found here, for those that are interested: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Board/Meetings/2009-05-05 If anyone knows about any existing export law reform initiatives in the US that concern public free software projects, please let me or any other Board member know. -- Paul W. Frields http://paul.frields.org/ gpg fingerprint: 3DA6 A0AC 6D58 FEC4 0233 5906 ACDB C937 BD11 3717 http://redhat.com/ - - - - http://pfrields.fedorapeople.org/ irc.freenode.net: stickster @ #fedora-docs, #fedora-devel, #fredlug From stickster at gmail.com Fri May 8 22:29:32 2009 From: stickster at gmail.com (Paul W. Frields) Date: Fri, 8 May 2009 18:29:32 -0400 Subject: Planning for Fedora Elections In-Reply-To: <20090507162000.GA10044@domsch.com> References: <20090507162000.GA10044@domsch.com> Message-ID: <20090508222932.GO4080@localhost.localdomain> On Thu, May 07, 2009 at 11:20:00AM -0500, Matt Domsch wrote: > I'd like to start the planning process for the next round of Fedora > elections. These are traditionally held a short time after the > release of the Fedora distribution, therefore nominations must begin > in the next week or so, culminating in elections in late June and into > the first week in July. > > The first question is: what groups need to participate in the election > this round? > > * I know the Board will have 3 seats opening, those held currently by > Jesse Keating, Seth Vidal, and Tom Callaway. The Board also has two appointed seats opening, one held by Chris Tyler and one by Harald Hoyer. As in previous election terms, the intent is to appoint a new Board member to fill one of these seats before elections, and then appoint the other afterward in an effort to achieve a good balance in the Board's membership. > * I believe that FESCo has 5 seats opening. > > * I believe that FAMSCo is not needing to elect anyone, having filled > all their seats in December 2008. > > Second, I have placed a proposed schedule which is merely my own > guesswork for how long this should take. I'm very open to hearing > your opinions for shorter or longer durations. > > (Canonical proposal is https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Elections ) > > Schedule (Proposed) > > * Nominations are open from 15 May through 12 June, 2009. > * IRC Town Hall-style discussions with candidates for the various > positions will be arranged for 14 June through 20 June. > * The elections will take place 22 June through 6 July, 2008. > > I'd like to hear your thoughts on the above, and how to make this an > engaging and effective election cycle. Matt, thank you for posting this -- I would also like to add a target date for a first Board appointment of 11 June, and the second by 9 July. -- Paul W. Frields http://paul.frields.org/ gpg fingerprint: 3DA6 A0AC 6D58 FEC4 0233 5906 ACDB C937 BD11 3717 http://redhat.com/ - - - - http://pfrields.fedorapeople.org/ irc.freenode.net: stickster @ #fedora-docs, #fedora-devel, #fredlug From stickster at gmail.com Fri May 8 23:07:02 2009 From: stickster at gmail.com (Paul W. Frields) Date: Fri, 8 May 2009 19:07:02 -0400 Subject: Release naming Message-ID: <20090508230702.GR4080@localhost.localdomain> To give the Artwork team sufficient time for theming the next release, should we start a naming process before the Fedora 11 GA release? The process is defined here: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Guidelines_for_release_names -- Paul W. Frields http://paul.frields.org/ gpg fingerprint: 3DA6 A0AC 6D58 FEC4 0233 5906 ACDB C937 BD11 3717 http://redhat.com/ - - - - http://pfrields.fedorapeople.org/ irc.freenode.net: stickster @ #fedora-docs, #fedora-devel, #fredlug From inode0 at gmail.com Fri May 8 23:10:03 2009 From: inode0 at gmail.com (inode0) Date: Fri, 8 May 2009 18:10:03 -0500 Subject: [Ambassadors] Re: Free Media Issues In-Reply-To: <20090508222244.GN4080@localhost.localdomain> References: <78323d480905050900w33f90f5fiba6fbae5c8d9a955@mail.gmail.com> <20090505161418.GK3448@localhost.localdomain> <4A03D7C5.9070808@gmail.com> <20090508222244.GN4080@localhost.localdomain> Message-ID: On Fri, May 8, 2009 at 5:22 PM, Paul W. Frields wrote: > The Fedora Project is treated as any US entity or person by US law. > US law includes embargoes and other regulations that place severe > restrictions on the export of certain types of materials, including > some of the software found in Fedora, to specific nations. ?(Other > general restrictions exist which probably apply to Fedora as well.) > These nations are Cuba, Iran, North Korea, Libya, Sudan, and Syria. > Therefore, we're strictly forbidden from exporting Fedora to those > nations, or from aiding in their transference. ?For example, we cannot > accept requests to ship media to those nations under any part of the > Fedora Project. Ok, with respect to distribution of media this is pretty clear. Although there is always this parenthetical "other restrictions" that remains a mystery to me. What are those restrictions? How do they apply to other areas of the Fedora Project? For example, in the Q1 events I see an event in Sudan. http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/FedoraEvents#FY10_Q1_.28March_2009_-_May_2009.29_3 What are Fedora representatives allowed to do at an event in one of these nations? My biggest question remains this. How can ambassadors know what they are allowed to do to help contributors from these nations to participate in the Fedora Project? John From ian at ianweller.org Fri May 8 23:27:35 2009 From: ian at ianweller.org (Ian Weller) Date: Fri, 8 May 2009 18:27:35 -0500 Subject: Release naming In-Reply-To: <20090508230702.GR4080@localhost.localdomain> References: <20090508230702.GR4080@localhost.localdomain> Message-ID: <20090508232735.GA6221@hovercraft.mobile.ianweller.org> On Fri, May 08, 2009 at 07:07:02PM -0400, Paul W. Frields wrote: > To give the Artwork team sufficient time for theming the next release, > should we start a naming process before the Fedora 11 GA release? > Yes, please start the ball rolling now. -- Ian Weller GnuPG fingerprint: E51E 0517 7A92 70A2 4226 B050 87ED 7C97 EFA8 4A36 -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 197 bytes Desc: not available URL: From stickster at gmail.com Fri May 8 23:37:40 2009 From: stickster at gmail.com (Paul W. Frields) Date: Fri, 8 May 2009 19:37:40 -0400 Subject: Yet another website? (Re: [Ambassadors] belux ambassadors meeting log 15th April 2009) In-Reply-To: <1241807446.9533.27.camel@localhost.localdomain> References: <1239881510.3360.20.camel@localhost.localdomain> <3161376e0904160503g2426238at8f9ff180f6984d25@mail.gmail.com> <1239884614.3360.51.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20090416174256.GA20209@hurricane.linuxnetz.de> <49E7C831.5020301@fedoraproject.org> <20090425162036.GB12588@localhost.localdomain> <1241803943.9533.16.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1241807446.9533.27.camel@localhost.localdomain> Message-ID: <20090508233740.GS4080@localhost.localdomain> On Fri, May 08, 2009 at 08:30:46PM +0200, Christoph Wickert wrote: > Am Freitag, den 08.05.2009, 13:13 -0500 schrieb Mike McGrath: > > On Fri, 8 May 2009, Christoph Wickert wrote: > > > > Refer to: > > > > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Trademark_license_agreement > > > > > > Is this all you have to say about it? If so, you are proving what I > > > wrote previously: "Things like these are hard to understand. There might > > > be good reasons, but IMO the board does a bad job ATM in communicating > > > their views to the outside world." > > > > > > > I can't speak for the board but I'm pretty sure you're confusing legal > > constraints with the boards view. > > Probably, but the problem is that the board does not outline it's view > but only hands out a contract to sign. Actually, it's important to recall here that Red Hat is the owner of the Fedora trademarks, and the Board is entrusted with helping to oversee their use. As written on the trademark guidelines page, https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Legal:Trademark_guidelines : "Red Hat enlists the assistance of the Fedora Project Board (hereinafter "Board") to oversee the trademark guidelines to ensure compliance by the community. The Board may grant permission for uses as explained below. The Board serves as the first line of mediation when questions of use arise." I am serving a dual purpose here, both as a liaison with Red Hat Legal on matters of trademark, and also reporting to the Board with information that will help in providing the oversight with which they're entrusted. > > > You cannot expect someone to sign a > > > contract if he doesn't even understand it's content. > > > > > > > I'd strongly recommend if you find anything you don't understand to > > discuss it with your lawyer. > > So, a valuable community member (no, not me) who already spends a lot of > time and money on Fedora even needs to pay for a lawyer? Even the lawyer > will advise you not to sign anything but to get a certified translation > first. People are waiting for that translation for months now. Not at all -- in fact, I continue to be available to answer specific questions about the language or the import of any part of the agreement. I've done this already for several people, and would be happy to continue to do so. Translations are, unfortunately, a non-trivial problem, because as the agreement states, the original English version is the canonical text. It is written in a specific way to conform to a long history of case law (beyond just Red Hat, of course). In translation, it is possible -- even when a translation is done by an attorney -- to introduce inconsistencies and confusion. And in that event, any advice received about the translation could be affected. There is only one person that I know of waiting for a translation, and as I informed him, I do not believe Red Hat is going to undertake the cost for that translation and certification. I suppose it would be possible for the Fedora Project to pay for that, but how many languages would we need to do this for? All of them? And what would we then have to cut from our spending to pay for such a translation? I think if there are concrete questions about the intent or meaning of anything in the agreement, we can freely discuss it here. Most of the language is fairly standard and, as I've explained to everyone who has requested or received it, is not designed to trick or damage anyone. The agreement represents a fair way of both: * giving the community much wider latitude than with the previous Fedora trademark guidelines, and * ensuring that the rights of the trademark owner are also preserved The work that the community does to promote Fedora over time using the trademarks has created much of the value in the Fedora brand. That is why I partnered with Red Hat Legal to substantially liberalize our trademark guidelines. They now reflect much more of the realistic uses to which the community puts the trademarks to grow the reputation and brand of Fedora. But it's also important to realize that when we associate ourselves with the Fedora trademark, we are entrusted with that value, and benefit from it ourselves. The agreement seeks to balance the value that each individual licensee derives from the trademarks with Red Hat's responsibility to the rest of the community (and its stakeholders) to preserve that value for continued use by others. -- Paul W. Frields http://paul.frields.org/ gpg fingerprint: 3DA6 A0AC 6D58 FEC4 0233 5906 ACDB C937 BD11 3717 http://redhat.com/ - - - - http://pfrields.fedorapeople.org/ irc.freenode.net: stickster @ #fedora-docs, #fedora-devel, #fredlug From stickster at gmail.com Fri May 8 23:52:34 2009 From: stickster at gmail.com (Paul W. Frields) Date: Fri, 8 May 2009 19:52:34 -0400 Subject: [Ambassadors] Re: Free Media Issues In-Reply-To: References: <78323d480905050900w33f90f5fiba6fbae5c8d9a955@mail.gmail.com> <20090505161418.GK3448@localhost.localdomain> <4A03D7C5.9070808@gmail.com> <20090508222244.GN4080@localhost.localdomain> Message-ID: <20090508235234.GU4080@localhost.localdomain> On Fri, May 08, 2009 at 06:10:03PM -0500, inode0 wrote: > On Fri, May 8, 2009 at 5:22 PM, Paul W. Frields wrote: > > The Fedora Project is treated as any US entity or person by US law. > > US law includes embargoes and other regulations that place severe > > restrictions on the export of certain types of materials, including > > some of the software found in Fedora, to specific nations. ?(Other > > general restrictions exist which probably apply to Fedora as well.) > > These nations are Cuba, Iran, North Korea, Libya, Sudan, and Syria. > > Therefore, we're strictly forbidden from exporting Fedora to those > > nations, or from aiding in their transference. ?For example, we cannot > > accept requests to ship media to those nations under any part of the > > Fedora Project. > > Ok, with respect to distribution of media this is pretty clear. > Although there is always this parenthetical "other restrictions" that > remains a mystery to me. What are those restrictions? How do they > apply to other areas of the Fedora Project? I don't know that I even understand all of them. The export laws are pretty detailed and numerous, which is why there are lawyers who specialize in them. I do know that certain kinds of software, like strong cryptography, are included. Other kinds of software, maybe even software in general, may be included as well. There may be simple exchanges of goods including computer media that are included. The practical point is that Fedora feels the impact on a lot of different levels. > For example, in the Q1 events I see an event in Sudan. > > http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/FedoraEvents#FY10_Q1_.28March_2009_-_May_2009.29_3 > > What are Fedora representatives allowed to do at an event in one of > these nations? The Fedora Project cannot give any monetary support to these events. Doing so would create a business relationship that violates the law. > My biggest question remains this. How can ambassadors know what they > are allowed to do to help contributors from these nations to > participate in the Fedora Project? IANAL, but speaking as the FPL, the Fedora Project itself should not be hosting materials that violate, or give the appearance that Fedora is violating, export restrictions. -- Paul W. Frields http://paul.frields.org/ gpg fingerprint: 3DA6 A0AC 6D58 FEC4 0233 5906 ACDB C937 BD11 3717 http://redhat.com/ - - - - http://pfrields.fedorapeople.org/ irc.freenode.net: stickster @ #fedora-docs, #fedora-devel, #fredlug From christoph.wickert at googlemail.com Sat May 9 02:05:05 2009 From: christoph.wickert at googlemail.com (Christoph Wickert) Date: Sat, 09 May 2009 04:05:05 +0200 Subject: Yet another website? (Re: [Ambassadors] belux ambassadors meeting log 15th April 2009) In-Reply-To: <20090508233740.GS4080@localhost.localdomain> References: <1239881510.3360.20.camel@localhost.localdomain> <3161376e0904160503g2426238at8f9ff180f6984d25@mail.gmail.com> <1239884614.3360.51.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20090416174256.GA20209@hurricane.linuxnetz.de> <49E7C831.5020301@fedoraproject.org> <20090425162036.GB12588@localhost.localdomain> <1241803943.9533.16.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1241807446.9533.27.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20090508233740.GS4080@localhost.localdomain> Message-ID: <1241834705.9533.142.camel@localhost.localdomain> First of all thanks for your answer, Paul. I won't go into details, because most things sound convincing and IANAL. But there are some things that are still not clear to me. Am Freitag, den 08.05.2009, 19:37 -0400 schrieb Paul W. Frields: > On Fri, May 08, 2009 at 08:30:46PM +0200, Christoph Wickert wrote: > > > So, a valuable community member (no, not me) who already spends a lot of > > time and money on Fedora even needs to pay for a lawyer? Even the lawyer > > will advise you not to sign anything but to get a certified translation > > first. People are waiting for that translation for months now. > > Not at all -- in fact, I continue to be available to answer specific > questions about the language or the import of any part of the > agreement. I've done this already for several people, and would be > happy to continue to do so. OK, let's take the question from my previous mail: Why are rules for community members stricter than for Red Hat or the Fedora Project? Or, to be more specific: How can community websites violate the trademark agreement by only mirroring fedoraproject.org? According to the trademark agreement community websites must label "Fedora" as trademarks, at least their first appearance on each page. Also each page needs a link to the fpo start page named "Fedora Project," "Official Fedora Project web site," or "Visit the official Fedora Project web site. We are not doing this at fpo ether, so it's impossible to mirror fpo to something outside of Fedora infrastructure. To fix this we need to fix the trademark agreement (unlikely) or fpo websites first (unlikely too). This is not only a technical requirement but also a moral commitment: We cannot expect the community to follow rules that the project does not honor itself. > Translations are, unfortunately, a non-trivial problem, because as the > agreement states, the original English version is the canonical text. > It is written in a specific way to conform to a long history of case > law (beyond just Red Hat, of course). In translation, it is possible > -- even when a translation is done by an attorney -- to introduce > inconsistencies and confusion. And in that event, any advice received > about the translation could be affected. > > There is only one person that I know of waiting for a translation, and > as I informed him, I do not believe Red Hat is going to undertake the > cost for that translation and certification. If you are talking about Robert: He is waiting for a translation for months and currently he has no other option as to close down fedora.de. So even if all this was done for the best and with good intentions, the outcome is a loss for all parties: Fedora, Red Hat and Robert. > I suppose it would be > possible for the Fedora Project to pay for that, but how many > languages would we need to do this for? All of them? And what would > we then have to cut from our spending to pay for such a translation? I'm afraid we need translations. Not sure if we need all of them, but if someone requests one, he needs to be able to get it (in time). And why do we need to cut that from our (=Fedoras) spending? Red Hat is the trademark owner, it's in their interest, so IMHO they should pay. > I think if there are concrete questions about the intent or meaning of > anything in the agreement, we can freely discuss it here. Most of the > language is fairly standard and, as I've explained to everyone who has > requested or received it, is not designed to trick or damage anyone. > The agreement represents a fair way of both: Sorry to interrupt you here, but I think we all agree that setting the pattern for the community more strict than for the project itself is not fair. But now to something different. I didn't want to focus on all this judicial stuff, instead I'd like to know more about the idea behind and the history of fedoracommunity.org. Who's idea was this? When was it discussed in public? If it was not discussed, was it at least announced? I just searched 65.000 Fedora related mails and could not find anything related (except this discussion of course). Is getting a *.fedoracomminity.org subdomain limited to the group of Fedora contributors or FAS account holders? How about content control? In the previous discussions about community websites the question emerged if we were allowed to link to rpmfusion or even livna. Can someone publish a "How to watch copy-protected DVDs with Fedora" article or similar on fedoracommunity.org or any other community website? Are we allowed to speak freely on these sites? According to the trademark guidelines Red Hat gives licenses "solely in connection with the promotion of the Fedora Project." When someone criticizes a decision or recent development in Fedora, this surely is not promotion any longer. Can Red Hat revoke the license because of that? As you see: There are still lots of open questions. Not necessarily about the trademark guidelines themselves but about community websites and how they are affected by the guidelines. Regards, Christoph From matt at domsch.com Sat May 9 04:40:09 2009 From: matt at domsch.com (Matt Domsch) Date: Fri, 8 May 2009 23:40:09 -0500 Subject: Yet another website? (Re: [Ambassadors] belux ambassadors meeting log 15th April 2009) In-Reply-To: <1241834705.9533.142.camel@localhost.localdomain> References: <1239884614.3360.51.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20090416174256.GA20209@hurricane.linuxnetz.de> <49E7C831.5020301@fedoraproject.org> <20090425162036.GB12588@localhost.localdomain> <1241803943.9533.16.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1241807446.9533.27.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20090508233740.GS4080@localhost.localdomain> <1241834705.9533.142.camel@localhost.localdomain> Message-ID: <20090509044009.GA3395@domsch.com> On Sat, May 09, 2009 at 04:05:05AM +0200, Christoph Wickert wrote: > OK, let's take the question from my previous mail: Why are > rules for community members stricter than for Red Hat or the Fedora > Project? Or, to be more specific: How can community websites violate the > trademark agreement by only mirroring fedoraproject.org? > > According to the trademark agreement community websites must label > "Fedora" as trademarks, at least their first appearance on each page. > Also each page needs a link to the fpo start page named "Fedora > Project," "Official Fedora Project web site," or "Visit the official > Fedora Project web site. We are not doing this at fpo ether, so it's > impossible to mirror fpo to something outside of Fedora infrastructure. As I understand it (IANAL), The Fedora Project itself is not a licensee under the Fedora trademark license. That would be similar to saying "Coca Cola must have a license from Coca Cola to produce Coca Cola products". Instead, The Fedora Project is legally an entity of Red Hat, whom also owns the trademark. Red Hat, and the Project directly, does not need a license to use the trademark. The Project works very hard to avoid bringing detriment to the trademark through its actions, but is not bound by the trademark license. [1] does note: As the trademark owner, Red Hat strives to use the Fedora Trademarks under the same guidelines as the rest of the community. Guidelines - not license. Now, I'll admit, the license clause about having specific words and specific links in specific places on licensee web pages could be annoying. There may even be room to adjust these requirements. But it's not more significant than "annoying". Instead of turning this into an "us vs. them" discussion, I'd much rather work to incorporate the efforts individuals bring, into the Project, rather than this mix of "I want to benefit the Project, and benefit from the Project, but I am not part of the Project" dichotomy that this line of argument fosters. > To fix this we need to fix the trademark agreement (unlikely) or fpo > websites first (unlikely too). This is not only a technical requirement > but also a moral commitment: We cannot expect the community to follow > rules that the project does not honor itself. I don't believe that this specific scenario requires a "fix". There is no significant need to mirror fpo's web site to something outside of Fedora Infrastructure, for the purpose of public publication, and to do so might only add to confusion ("what is the official site, fedoraproject.org or fedora.de? They both look the same."). There was almost a need several years ago, particularly on distribution release days, when there was concern that FI couldn't keep fpo functional due to the traffic load. That has been more than adequately addressed, thanks to the re-architecting of several key pieces by the FI team, and the donations of additional server and network capacity to FI by sponsors. > I'm afraid we need translations. Not sure if we need all of them, but if > someone requests one, he needs to be able to get it (in time). > > And why do we need to cut that from our (=Fedoras) spending? Red Hat is > the trademark owner, it's in their interest, so IMHO they should pay. I don't see that it is in Red Hat (or the Project)'s interest to try to let just anyone be a trademark licensee for any purpose, and to bear that expense. If that were the case, there would be no reason for a trademark, and nothing could really be done to protect such a trademark. I value you and Robert's contributions, and do want to see your continued participation. But there are lots of ways to participate besides running your own domain. > > I think if there are concrete questions about the intent or meaning of > > anything in the agreement, we can freely discuss it here. Most of the > > language is fairly standard and, as I've explained to everyone who has > > requested or received it, is not designed to trick or damage anyone. > > The agreement represents a fair way of both: > > Sorry to interrupt you here, but I think we all agree that setting the > pattern for the community more strict than for the project itself is not > fair. I agree it's not fair. Which is why, instead of trying to be "fair", we should be looking for ways in which contributors are brought under the umbrella of the Project, so as to reduce or eliminate the need for such a license. XX.fedoracommunity.org is a step in this direction. [2] notes: Not every local community requires a local domain. Many local communities can function perfectly well in the existing Fedora Project domain(s). Fedora already offers the ability for communities to provide complete translations for our main web site and other pages. We are also working on the capability to have a translated MediaWiki that will not require as much manual work on the part of translators. In addition, splitting off a domain has the tendency to keep local community members from getting up to date information that flows on the official Fedora channels. It multiplies the number of areas a community member needs to monitor and thus takes away from the time they could otherwise spend on contribution directly to Fedora. I'm sure we could all come up with even more reasons why having tons of separate Fedora-trademarked domains is a bad idea. But as noted, there are some good reasons to have such too. As I understand it, XX.fedoracommunity.org exists exactly so that groups within the Project can host content and capabilities that FI cannot presently provide, and that the content hosted there must comply with the trademark and logo usage guidelines. I don't believe the trademark license agreement, which is about domains using the trademark in their name, applies then. [1] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Legal/TrademarkGuidelines [2] http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Local_community_domains [3] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Trademark_license_agreement This is all my understanding. IANAL, I'm not speaking for anyone else, yada yada. Thanks, Matt From jwboyer at gmail.com Sat May 9 12:48:21 2009 From: jwboyer at gmail.com (Josh Boyer) Date: Sat, 9 May 2009 08:48:21 -0400 Subject: Release naming In-Reply-To: <20090508232735.GA6221@hovercraft.mobile.ianweller.org> References: <20090508230702.GR4080@localhost.localdomain> <20090508232735.GA6221@hovercraft.mobile.ianweller.org> Message-ID: <20090509124821.GA23445@hansolo.jdub.homelinux.org> On Fri, May 08, 2009 at 06:27:35PM -0500, Ian Weller wrote: >On Fri, May 08, 2009 at 07:07:02PM -0400, Paul W. Frields wrote: >> To give the Artwork team sufficient time for theming the next release, >> should we start a naming process before the Fedora 11 GA release? >> >Yes, please start the ball rolling now. I'll get something going on Monday. Bill already reminded me of this. josh From stickster at gmail.com Sun May 10 14:25:41 2009 From: stickster at gmail.com (Paul W. Frields) Date: Sun, 10 May 2009 10:25:41 -0400 Subject: Yet another website? (Re: [Ambassadors] belux ambassadors meeting log 15th April 2009) In-Reply-To: <20090509044009.GA3395@domsch.com> References: <20090416174256.GA20209@hurricane.linuxnetz.de> <49E7C831.5020301@fedoraproject.org> <20090425162036.GB12588@localhost.localdomain> <1241803943.9533.16.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1241807446.9533.27.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20090508233740.GS4080@localhost.localdomain> <1241834705.9533.142.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20090509044009.GA3395@domsch.com> Message-ID: <20090510142541.GA3447@localhost.localdomain> On Fri, May 08, 2009 at 11:40:09PM -0500, Matt Domsch wrote: > On Sat, May 09, 2009 at 04:05:05AM +0200, Christoph Wickert wrote: > > OK, let's take the question from my previous mail: Why are > > rules for community members stricter than for Red Hat or the Fedora > > Project? Or, to be more specific: How can community websites violate the > > trademark agreement by only mirroring fedoraproject.org? > > > > According to the trademark agreement community websites must label > > "Fedora" as trademarks, at least their first appearance on each page. > > Also each page needs a link to the fpo start page named "Fedora > > Project," "Official Fedora Project web site," or "Visit the official > > Fedora Project web site. We are not doing this at fpo ether, so it's > > impossible to mirror fpo to something outside of Fedora infrastructure. > > As I understand it (IANAL), The Fedora Project itself is not a > licensee under the Fedora trademark license. That would be similar to > saying "Coca Cola must have a license from Coca Cola to produce Coca > Cola products". Correct -- and in fact you see the same behavior on sites as varied as Disney, Nike, and BMW, just to name a few. The reason for having requirements on licensed sites is to address the possible confusion that could arise between the official site and one set up by a licensee. No such potential confusion exists on the official site; cocacola.com (or coke.com?) is owned by Coca Cola. > Instead, The Fedora Project is legally an entity of Red Hat, whom also > owns the trademark. Red Hat, and the Project directly, does not need > a license to use the trademark. The Project works very hard to avoid > bringing detriment to the trademark through its actions, but is not > bound by the trademark license. > > [1] does note: > As the trademark owner, Red Hat strives to use the Fedora Trademarks > under the same guidelines as the rest of the community. > > Guidelines - not license. This is all a correct reading. There's no intention to split hairs here -- in Fedora we always try to obey the rules for presenting the logo and other trademarks the same way others do. At particular times we do have to make small changes to accommodate certain designs. An example would be "glow" borders around the logo in specific places, to ensure it stands out appropriately. And the Project itself has to be free to make those alterations when it suits the design, the same way that Coca Cola is allowed to "morph" or alter their own logo when it suits a particular kind of advertising design. Nevertheless, we try not to go outside the guidelines as much as humanly possible, because we want to be using our logo in a way that gives good examples for everyone in the community. And lest anyone think we only pay attention to how volunteer community members treat the logo, I have also spent time over the last year policing usage by Red Hat as a community member, thus trying to keep things as equitable as possible. > Now, I'll admit, the license clause about having specific words and > specific links in specific places on licensee web pages could be > annoying. There may even be room to adjust these requirements. But > it's not more significant than "annoying". And the guidelines remain open to discussion for such changes. In fact, that language has already been changed at least once due to licensee critique and input, to be less confusing and annoying. [...snip...] > > I'm afraid we need translations. Not sure if we need all of them, but if > > someone requests one, he needs to be able to get it (in time). > > > > And why do we need to cut that from our (=Fedoras) spending? Red Hat is > > the trademark owner, it's in their interest, so IMHO they should pay. > > I don't see that it is in Red Hat (or the Project)'s interest to try > to let just anyone be a trademark licensee for any purpose, and to > bear that expense. If that were the case, there would be no reason > for a trademark, and nothing could really be done to protect such a > trademark. I value you and Robert's contributions, and do want to see > your continued participation. But there are lots of ways to > participate besides running your own domain. And to address the question of spending -- this discussion is being framed in a way that looks like Red Hat is the only party with an interest here, which isn't true. When a trademark owner licenses a trademark to someone, both parties have an interest. The trademark owner benefits from having their brand recognition and value expanded. The licensee benefits from associating with that brand and the positive qualities it holds. It's a two-way relationship. > > > I think if there are concrete questions about the intent or meaning of > > > anything in the agreement, we can freely discuss it here. Most of the > > > language is fairly standard and, as I've explained to everyone who has > > > requested or received it, is not designed to trick or damage anyone. > > > The agreement represents a fair way of both: > > > > Sorry to interrupt you here, but I think we all agree that setting the > > pattern for the community more strict than for the project itself is not > > fair. > > I agree it's not fair. Which is why, instead of trying to be "fair", > we should be looking for ways in which contributors are brought under > the umbrella of the Project, so as to reduce or eliminate the need for > such a license. XX.fedoracommunity.org is a step in this direction. > > > [2] notes: > Not every local community requires a local domain. Many local > communities can function perfectly well in the existing Fedora > Project domain(s). Fedora already offers the ability for communities > to provide complete translations for our main web site and other > pages. We are also working on the capability to have a translated > MediaWiki that will not require as much manual work on the part of > translators. > > In addition, splitting off a domain has the tendency to keep local > community members from getting up to date information that flows on > the official Fedora channels. It multiplies the number of areas a > community member needs to monitor and thus takes away from the time > they could otherwise spend on contribution directly to Fedora. > > I'm sure we could all come up with even more reasons why having tons > of separate Fedora-trademarked domains is a bad idea. > > But as noted, there are some good reasons to have such too. As I > understand it, XX.fedoracommunity.org exists exactly so that groups > within the Project can host content and capabilities that FI cannot > presently provide, and that the content hosted there must comply with > the trademark and logo usage guidelines. I don't believe the > trademark license agreement, which is about domains using the > trademark in their name, applies then. That's right -- the agreement isn't necessary for fedoracommunity.org, but the normal trademark guidelines apply, just as they would anywhere that uses, for example, the Fedora logo. These community domains, because (1) they are hosted outside the FI, and (2) their domain name *clearly* indicates they are not run by the official Fedora Project, can potentially host content that is not as strictly regulated. The fedoracommunity.org domain and available subdomains is something I talked directly to Red Hat Legal to establish. It seemed to me at the time that we needed an alternative for community members to have the power to set up a site that used the Fedora trademarks *without* having to deal with the license agreement. And given this conversation, it seems even more apparent that was a good solution. -- Paul W. Frields http://paul.frields.org/ gpg fingerprint: 3DA6 A0AC 6D58 FEC4 0233 5906 ACDB C937 BD11 3717 http://redhat.com/ - - - - http://pfrields.fedorapeople.org/ irc.freenode.net: stickster @ #fedora-docs, #fedora-devel, #fredlug From stickster at gmail.com Tue May 12 16:22:30 2009 From: stickster at gmail.com (Paul W. Frields) Date: Tue, 12 May 2009 12:22:30 -0400 Subject: Board meeting schedule change Message-ID: <20090512162230.GN15982@localhost.localdomain> Hello, For the next few weeks, the Fedora Project Board will meet on Thursdays at 1700 UTC (1:00pm US Eastern). By moving our time we were able to resolve an unavoidable conflict for one of the Board members. This new time will likely include the next public IRC meeting in April. We'll reconsider the meeting schedule (and the frequency of IRC meetings) when the new Board is seated after the upcoming elections. -- Paul W. Frields http://paul.frields.org/ gpg fingerprint: 3DA6 A0AC 6D58 FEC4 0233 5906 ACDB C937 BD11 3717 http://redhat.com/ - - - - http://pfrields.fedorapeople.org/ irc.freenode.net: stickster @ #fedora-docs, #fedora-devel, #fredlug -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: not available URL: From matt at domsch.com Thu May 14 18:35:06 2009 From: matt at domsch.com (Matt Domsch) Date: Thu, 14 May 2009 13:35:06 -0500 Subject: Planning for Fedora Elections In-Reply-To: <20090507162000.GA10044@domsch.com> References: <20090507162000.GA10044@domsch.com> Message-ID: <20090514183504.GB7721@domsch.com> On Thu, May 07, 2009 at 11:20:00AM -0500, Matt Domsch wrote: > I'd like to start the planning process for the next round of Fedora > elections. These are traditionally held a short time after the > release of the Fedora distribution, therefore nominations must begin > in the next week or so, culminating in elections in late June and into > the first week in July. > > The first question is: what groups need to participate in the election > this round? > The Board has 3 elected seats open. FESCo has 5 elected seats open. These are the only two elections I am aware we will run. In addition, with no objections raised so far, the Board discussed on today's call adjusting the schedule, such that it completes within 30 days of the release of Fedora 11. The 4 weeks I had allowed for nominations was also considered excessive. As such, the new schedule will be: * Nominations are open from 15 May through 29 May. Individuals may provide questions they would like candidates to answer. * IRC Town Hall-style discussions with candidates for the various positions will be arranged for 31 May through 6 June. Candidates will be given a set of written questions suggested above, to answer by public email if they wish. * The elections will take place 7 June through 22 June. Please see the Elections page [1] for links to each of the nominations pages, and where you may add your own questions you would like the candidates to present written answers to. Candidates may answer (or not) as they wish, by mail to fedora-advisory-board before the election period begins. Thanks, Matt [1] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Elections From matt at domsch.com Thu May 14 18:40:07 2009 From: matt at domsch.com (Matt Domsch) Date: Thu, 14 May 2009 13:40:07 -0500 Subject: Planning for Fedora Elections In-Reply-To: <4A0310F2.1080503@leemhuis.info> References: <20090507162000.GA10044@domsch.com> <4A0310F2.1080503@leemhuis.info> Message-ID: <20090514184006.GC7721@domsch.com> On Thu, May 07, 2009 at 06:48:50PM +0200, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote: > I (as a voter) have neither time nor interest for IRC meetings if there > is no strong reason to participate. Same for skimming through the IRC > logs later, as that in my experience is often way more confusing then > helpful. > > IOW: IRC IMHO has a bad time/benefit ratio if what is being discussed is > not really important for you. > > Sure, IRC has a lot of benefits, but mail has as well, that's why I > suggest to let a some people(??) collect a few good questions with the > help of the community. Then send them to the nominees that have to > answer then within something like 3 or 4 days in private. Then put all > the answers up on the net and give people a chance to read them. > > After that do the IRC Town Hall-style discussions for those that like > then, They actually might be easier, as people can ask question like > "you said foo to the answer bar in the pre-questioning by mail; could > you please outline that a bit more into in regards to foobar?", which in > the end might lead to a better IRC Town Hall-style discussion. > > Just my 2 cent. > > Cu > knurd > > (??) yes, I'm willing to help with that if nobody else wants to do that I've added a questionairre page to the Elections page, to which people may add questions they would like the candidates to answer. Candidates will be free to answer (or not) as they see fit (at their own peril of course). Thorsten, I would appreciate your assistance in a) publicizing this; and b) editing the list of questions at the time we'll hand them out. Thanks, Matt From stickster at gmail.com Thu May 14 18:46:06 2009 From: stickster at gmail.com (Paul W. Frields) Date: Thu, 14 May 2009 14:46:06 -0400 Subject: Fedora Board Recap 2009-05-14 Message-ID: <20090514184606.GK3514@localhost.localdomain> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Board/Meetings/2009-5-14 == Roll Call == * Attendees: Chris Tyler, Tom Callaway, Bill Nottingham, Seth Vidal, Chris Aillon, Harald Hoyer, Jesse Keating, Matt Domsch, Paul Frields * Regrets: John Poelstra, Dimitris Glezos * Minutes were recorded collaboratively using a gobby session == Export Restrictions == --could the Fedora Board be a catalyst for change? --where to start? * Paul: Start by looking for active groups ** If not, maybe we can form one? ** Paul would like to solicit one or two Board members to help with this particular activity ** Canadian FOSS exceptions: http://www.efc.ca/pages/doc/crypto-export.html *** Canada has a separate list of prohibited countries * We could do this as a community exercise, but it would be a difficult road if the people who show up to help are all from embargoed nations ** spot is not aware of any existing efforts (doesn't mean they don't exist) == Upcoming board elections == --email to f-a-b by Matt Domsch --terms are expiring for the following members Chris Tyler Harald Hoyer Jesse Keating Tom "Spot" Callaway Seth Vidal --are there any initiatives that the board would like to pursue before these members' terms are up? * Paul to send nomination announcement * Matt asked whether we should tighten up nomination period to 2 weeks ** IRC/town hall for one week, elections for 2 weeks, finishing on June 22 ** skvidal: When is the first test phase of F12? *** Feature freeze is July 28th == Toxicity == --If fedora has a person so toxic as to be destructive - what, if anything, can we do about it? * Tired of people using f-devel-l as a platform for antics ** We seem to be caught in a process quagmire ** It's been going on too long to be tolerated further ** Should we ban toxic people? *** Arbitrariness of applying a ban could lend credence to paranoia ** Do we need a code of conduct? *** Spot suggests "Be excellent to each other." ** Paul: There are just as many RHT'ers contributing to the negativity as volunteers ** Continued uncivil behavior without consequences has created an environment that breeds more uncivil behavior ** Need volunteers to enforce civility ** Spot: need a definition of the sorts of behavior that would lead to moderation/rebuke *** Obvious examples: **** serious threats of violence or other illegal actions **** profanity directed at people or groups (Carlin's 7 dirty words?) **** discrimination or libel based on race, creed, sex, orientation, employer, national origin ** Spot: one warning ** Jesse: warning == moderate for a day? ** Harald: is the warning public on the list? group: no. ** Pontification by Paul on not being evil to each other; the bell, book and candle. ** Chris Aillon: ACK on warning. iow, moderated for a day or until they ack, whichever is longer * Purpose is to improve the tone of discussions on the list The problem: The Board is disappointed at the degradation in tone and signal of some Fedora Project lists. The proposal (report this as intention to FAB and revisit next week): To resolve this, the Board appoints one or more Board members or other Board-approved volunteers to monitor Fedora Project mailing lists. The Board will warn violators of our "Be excellent to each other" policy in the form of a one-day list moderation (with notice to the poster). Messages not allowed through will be returned to the poster with explanation as to why they were not allowed. If after one day of moderation, the violation continues, the case will be brought to the Board for further action, which could include permanent moderation, complete removal from the project, or other remedies. Be Excellent to each other == No personal attacks, profanity directed at people or groups, serious threats of violence, or other things seen by the monitor as to be purposefully disrespectful. == Unfinished business == * "What is Fedora?": Refining Fedora's target audience and objectives ** http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Board/Meetings/2009-04-29 == Next Meeting == * Date: Thu 2009-05-21 * Time: 17:00 UTC -- Paul W. Frields http://paul.frields.org/ gpg fingerprint: 3DA6 A0AC 6D58 FEC4 0233 5906 ACDB C937 BD11 3717 http://redhat.com/ - - - - http://pfrields.fedorapeople.org/ irc.freenode.net: stickster @ #fedora-docs, #fedora-devel, #fredlug -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: not available URL: From stickster at gmail.com Thu May 14 18:46:25 2009 From: stickster at gmail.com (Paul W. Frields) Date: Thu, 14 May 2009 14:46:25 -0400 Subject: Proposal for ML conduct Message-ID: <20090514184625.GL3514@localhost.localdomain> The Board had a long discussion today about the increasingly toxic nature of discussions on Fedora Project mailing lists. The meeting minutes are available on the wiki[1], as always. I wanted to point specifically to the proposal currently before the Board. The problem: The Board is disappointed at the degradation in tone and signal of some Fedora Project lists. The proposal: To resolve this, the Board appoints one or more Board members or other Board-approved volunteers to monitor Fedora Project mailing lists. The Board will warn violators of our "Be excellent to each other" policy in the form of a one-day list moderation (with notice to the poster). Messages not allowed through will be returned to the poster with explanation as to why they were not allowed. If after one day of moderation, the violation continues, the case will be brought to the Board for further action, which could include permanent moderation, complete removal from the project, or other remedies. Being excellent to each other == No personal attacks, profanity directed at people or groups, serious threats of violence, or other things seen by the monitor as to be purposefully disrespectful. * * * [1] http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Board/Meetings/2009-05-14 -- Paul W. Frields http://paul.frields.org/ gpg fingerprint: 3DA6 A0AC 6D58 FEC4 0233 5906 ACDB C937 BD11 3717 http://redhat.com/ - - - - http://pfrields.fedorapeople.org/ irc.freenode.net: stickster @ #fedora-docs, #fedora-devel, #fredlug From a.badger at gmail.com Thu May 14 18:49:04 2009 From: a.badger at gmail.com (Toshio Kuratomi) Date: Thu, 14 May 2009 11:49:04 -0700 Subject: Planning for Fedora Elections In-Reply-To: <20090514183504.GB7721@domsch.com> References: <20090507162000.GA10044@domsch.com> <20090514183504.GB7721@domsch.com> Message-ID: <4A0C67A0.9040102@gmail.com> Matt Domsch wrote: > On Thu, May 07, 2009 at 11:20:00AM -0500, Matt Domsch wrote: >> I'd like to start the planning process for the next round of Fedora >> elections. These are traditionally held a short time after the >> release of the Fedora distribution, therefore nominations must begin >> in the next week or so, culminating in elections in late June and into >> the first week in July. >> >> The first question is: what groups need to participate in the election >> this round? >> > > The Board has 3 elected seats open. > FESCo has 5 elected seats open. > > These are the only two elections I am aware we will run. > > In addition, with no objections raised so far, the Board discussed on > today's call adjusting the schedule, such that it completes within 30 > days of the release of Fedora 11. The 4 weeks I had allowed for > nominations was also considered excessive. As such, the new schedule > will be: > > * Nominations are open from 15 May through 29 May. Individuals > may provide questions they would like candidates to answer. > * IRC Town Hall-style discussions with candidates for the various > positions will be arranged for 31 May through 6 June. Candidates > will be given a set of written questions suggested above, to > answer by public email if they wish. > * The elections will take place 7 June through 22 June. > > > Please see the Elections page [1] for links to each of the nominations > pages, and where you may add your own questions you would like the > candidates to present written answers to. Candidates may answer (or > not) as they wish, by mail to fedora-advisory-board before the > election period begins. > Is the fedora 12 name election going to be held at a different time? -Toshio -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 197 bytes Desc: OpenPGP digital signature URL: From stickster at gmail.com Thu May 14 20:12:46 2009 From: stickster at gmail.com (Paul W. Frields) Date: Thu, 14 May 2009 16:12:46 -0400 Subject: Planning for Fedora Elections In-Reply-To: <4A0C67A0.9040102@gmail.com> References: <20090507162000.GA10044@domsch.com> <20090514183504.GB7721@domsch.com> <4A0C67A0.9040102@gmail.com> Message-ID: <20090514201246.GR3514@localhost.localdomain> On Thu, May 14, 2009 at 11:49:04AM -0700, Toshio Kuratomi wrote: > Matt Domsch wrote: > > In addition, with no objections raised so far, the Board discussed on > > today's call adjusting the schedule, such that it completes within 30 > > days of the release of Fedora 11. The 4 weeks I had allowed for > > nominations was also considered excessive. As such, the new schedule > > will be: > > > > * Nominations are open from 15 May through 29 May. Individuals > > may provide questions they would like candidates to answer. > > * IRC Town Hall-style discussions with candidates for the various > > positions will be arranged for 31 May through 6 June. Candidates > > will be given a set of written questions suggested above, to > > answer by public email if they wish. > > * The elections will take place 7 June through 22 June. > > > > > > Please see the Elections page [1] for links to each of the nominations > > pages, and where you may add your own questions you would like the > > candidates to present written answers to. Candidates may answer (or > > not) as they wish, by mail to fedora-advisory-board before the > > election period begins. > > > Is the fedora 12 name election going to be held at a different time? We didn't discuss it -- but I think we're still well within a reasonable window to go through the naming process, if it's desirable to put all the elections together at one time (which I believe it is). I know that Josh was working on this last time we talked. I'll check in with him and one of us will post back with an update. -- Paul W. Frields http://paul.frields.org/ gpg fingerprint: 3DA6 A0AC 6D58 FEC4 0233 5906 ACDB C937 BD11 3717 http://redhat.com/ - - - - http://pfrields.fedorapeople.org/ irc.freenode.net: stickster @ #fedora-docs, #fedora-devel, #fredlug From jkeating at redhat.com Thu May 14 20:29:28 2009 From: jkeating at redhat.com (Jesse Keating) Date: Thu, 14 May 2009 13:29:28 -0700 Subject: Proposal for ML conduct In-Reply-To: <20090514184625.GL3514@localhost.localdomain> References: <20090514184625.GL3514@localhost.localdomain> Message-ID: <1242332968.6282.85.camel@localhost.localdomain> On Thu, 2009-05-14 at 14:46 -0400, Paul W. Frields wrote: > The Board will warn violators of our Crap, I missed this during the meeting. The person(s) tasked with monitoring the list will be the one to issue the warning and execute the moderation. They will be doing so on the board's behalf, but we won't require the board be notified in advance of every warning issued. -- 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 stickster at gmail.com Thu May 14 20:49:09 2009 From: stickster at gmail.com (Paul W. Frields) Date: Thu, 14 May 2009 16:49:09 -0400 Subject: Proposal for ML conduct In-Reply-To: <1242332968.6282.85.camel@localhost.localdomain> References: <20090514184625.GL3514@localhost.localdomain> <1242332968.6282.85.camel@localhost.localdomain> Message-ID: <20090514204909.GW3514@localhost.localdomain> On Thu, May 14, 2009 at 01:29:28PM -0700, Jesse Keating wrote: > On Thu, 2009-05-14 at 14:46 -0400, Paul W. Frields wrote: > > The Board will warn violators of our > > Crap, I missed this during the meeting. The person(s) tasked with > monitoring the list will be the one to issue the warning and execute the > moderation. They will be doing so on the board's behalf, but we won't > require the board be notified in advance of every warning issued. Not that you needed a +1, but yes, that's my recollection too. This comes from our meeting minutes; we can incorporate that change: * * * To resolve this, the Board appoints one or more Board members or other Board-approved volunteers to monitor Fedora Project mailing lists. The delegated monitors will warn violators of our "Be excellent to each other" policy in the form of a one-day list moderation (with notice to the poster). Messages not allowed through will be returned to the poster with explanation as to why they were not allowed. If after one day of moderation, the violation continues, the case will be brought to the Board for further action, which could include permanent moderation, complete removal from the project, or other remedies. Being excellent to each other == No personal attacks, profanity directed at people or groups, serious threats of violence, or other things seen by the monitor as to be purposefully disrespectful. * * * -- Paul W. Frields http://paul.frields.org/ gpg fingerprint: 3DA6 A0AC 6D58 FEC4 0233 5906 ACDB C937 BD11 3717 http://redhat.com/ - - - - http://pfrields.fedorapeople.org/ irc.freenode.net: stickster @ #fedora-docs, #fedora-devel, #fredlug From mmcgrath at redhat.com Thu May 14 21:55:12 2009 From: mmcgrath at redhat.com (Mike McGrath) Date: Thu, 14 May 2009 16:55:12 -0500 (CDT) Subject: Proposal for ML conduct In-Reply-To: <20090514204909.GW3514@localhost.localdomain> References: <20090514184625.GL3514@localhost.localdomain> <1242332968.6282.85.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20090514204909.GW3514@localhost.localdomain> Message-ID: On Thu, 14 May 2009, Paul W. Frields wrote: > On Thu, May 14, 2009 at 01:29:28PM -0700, Jesse Keating wrote: > > On Thu, 2009-05-14 at 14:46 -0400, Paul W. Frields wrote: > > > The Board will warn violators of our > > > > Crap, I missed this during the meeting. The person(s) tasked with > > monitoring the list will be the one to issue the warning and execute the > > moderation. They will be doing so on the board's behalf, but we won't > > require the board be notified in advance of every warning issued. > > Not that you needed a +1, but yes, that's my recollection too. This > comes from our meeting minutes; we can incorporate that change: > > * * * > To resolve this, the Board appoints one or more Board members or other > Board-approved volunteers to monitor Fedora Project mailing lists. > The delegated monitors will warn violators of our "Be excellent to > each other" policy in the form of a one-day list moderation (with > notice to the poster). Messages not allowed through will be returned > to the poster with explanation as to why they were not allowed. If > after one day of moderation, the violation continues, the case will be > brought to the Board for further action, which could include permanent > moderation, complete removal from the project, or other remedies. > > Being excellent to each other == No personal attacks, profanity > directed at people or groups, serious threats of violence, or other > things seen by the monitor as to be purposefully disrespectful. > > * * * > Opression sucks. Censorship sucks. Board members spending their time on jerk patrol sucks. I know I'm pointing out problems and not solutions, I apologize for that. -Mike From matt at domsch.com Thu May 14 22:00:37 2009 From: matt at domsch.com (Matt Domsch) Date: Thu, 14 May 2009 17:00:37 -0500 Subject: Proposal for ML conduct In-Reply-To: References: <20090514184625.GL3514@localhost.localdomain> <1242332968.6282.85.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20090514204909.GW3514@localhost.localdomain> Message-ID: <20090514220035.GE7721@domsch.com> On Thu, May 14, 2009 at 04:55:12PM -0500, Mike McGrath wrote: > > > Opression sucks. > Censorship sucks. > Board members spending their time on jerk patrol sucks. > > I know I'm pointing out problems and not solutions, I apologize for that. > > While I agree completely, when people aren't following the "be excellent to each other" (gotta love Bill & Ted) creed, it can not only distract, but cause otherwise well-behaved members to leave. This is unacceptable. -Matt From jkeating at redhat.com Thu May 14 22:01:45 2009 From: jkeating at redhat.com (Jesse Keating) Date: Thu, 14 May 2009 15:01:45 -0700 Subject: Proposal for ML conduct In-Reply-To: References: <20090514184625.GL3514@localhost.localdomain> <1242332968.6282.85.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20090514204909.GW3514@localhost.localdomain> Message-ID: <1242338505.3024.3.camel@localhost.localdomain> On Thu, 2009-05-14 at 16:55 -0500, Mike McGrath wrote: > > > Opression sucks. > Censorship sucks. > Board members spending their time on jerk patrol sucks. > > I know I'm pointing out problems and not solutions, I apologize for that. > > You're not alone in these feelings. What sucks more is that we can't seem to patrol ourselves, and it's gotten so bad that board members have been pinged by multiple people to step in and do something. So we're doing something. -- Jesse Keating Fedora -- Freedom? is a feature! identi.ca: http://identi.ca/jkeating -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 197 bytes Desc: This is a digitally signed message part URL: From smooge at gmail.com Thu May 14 23:22:04 2009 From: smooge at gmail.com (Stephen John Smoogen) Date: Thu, 14 May 2009 17:22:04 -0600 Subject: Proposal for ML conduct In-Reply-To: References: <20090514184625.GL3514@localhost.localdomain> <1242332968.6282.85.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20090514204909.GW3514@localhost.localdomain> Message-ID: <80d7e4090905141622o28be2fbcyb626feb3ce260b2c@mail.gmail.com> On Thu, May 14, 2009 at 3:55 PM, Mike McGrath wrote: > On Thu, 14 May 2009, Paul W. Frields wrote: > >> On Thu, May 14, 2009 at 01:29:28PM -0700, Jesse Keating wrote: >> > On Thu, 2009-05-14 at 14:46 -0400, Paul W. Frields wrote: >> > > The Board will warn violators of our >> > >> > Crap, I missed this during the meeting. ?The person(s) tasked with >> > monitoring the list will be the one to issue the warning and execute the >> > moderation. ?They will be doing so on the board's behalf, but we won't >> > require the board be notified in advance of every warning issued. >> >> Not that you needed a +1, but yes, that's my recollection too. ?This >> comes from our meeting minutes; we can incorporate that change: >> >> * * * >> To resolve this, the Board appoints one or more Board members or other >> Board-approved volunteers to monitor Fedora Project mailing lists. >> The delegated monitors will warn violators of our "Be excellent to >> each other" policy in the form of a one-day list moderation (with >> notice to the poster). ?Messages not allowed through will be returned >> to the poster with explanation as to why they were not allowed. ?If >> after one day of moderation, the violation continues, the case will be >> brought to the Board for further action, which could include permanent >> moderation, complete removal from the project, or other remedies. >> >> ? Being excellent to each other == No personal attacks, profanity >> ? directed at people or groups, serious threats of violence, or other >> ? things seen by the monitor as to be purposefully disrespectful. >> >> * * * >> > > > > Opression sucks. > Censorship sucks. > Board members spending their time on jerk patrol sucks. > > I know I'm pointing out problems and not solutions, I apologize for that. > > > The problem is that any community over X size is going to have to deal with this because self-regulation begins to fail. In many ways its all thermodynamics. -- 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 sundaram at fedoraproject.org Thu May 14 23:35:41 2009 From: sundaram at fedoraproject.org (Rahul Sundaram) Date: Fri, 15 May 2009 05:05:41 +0530 Subject: Proposal for ML conduct In-Reply-To: <20090514184625.GL3514@localhost.localdomain> References: <20090514184625.GL3514@localhost.localdomain> Message-ID: <4A0CAACD.50803@fedoraproject.org> On 05/15/2009 12:16 AM, Paul W. Frields wrote: > The Board had a long discussion today about the increasingly toxic > nature of discussions on Fedora Project mailing lists. The meeting > minutes are available on the wiki[1], as always. I wanted to point > specifically to the proposal currently before the Board. > > > The problem: The Board is disappointed at the degradation in tone and > signal of some Fedora Project lists. Why focus only on the mailing lists? How about IRC, forums or other means of communication? For the record, IRC conversations in #fedora have frequently been problematic as well. I think, you can bite the bullet and formalize a code of conduct now as I suggested a while back. If you are willing to ban a person for behaving rudely in a mailing list, I am sure that it can be used as a enforcing mechanism for a code of conduct. IIRC, that was the issue against it before. A question to think about: What do you when a Red Hat employee working full on time Fedora does this? Do you ban that person from the project as well? Not suggesting anyone is actually doing this. Just something to think about. Rahul From mmcgrath at redhat.com Thu May 14 23:44:13 2009 From: mmcgrath at redhat.com (Mike McGrath) Date: Thu, 14 May 2009 18:44:13 -0500 (CDT) Subject: Proposal for ML conduct In-Reply-To: <4A0CAACD.50803@fedoraproject.org> References: <20090514184625.GL3514@localhost.localdomain> <4A0CAACD.50803@fedoraproject.org> Message-ID: On Fri, 15 May 2009, Rahul Sundaram wrote: > On 05/15/2009 12:16 AM, Paul W. Frields wrote: > > The Board had a long discussion today about the increasingly toxic > > nature of discussions on Fedora Project mailing lists. The meeting > > minutes are available on the wiki[1], as always. I wanted to point > > specifically to the proposal currently before the Board. > > > > > > The problem: The Board is disappointed at the degradation in tone and > > signal of some Fedora Project lists. > > Why focus only on the mailing lists? How about IRC, forums or other > means of communication? For the record, IRC conversations in #fedora > have frequently been problematic as well. I think, you can bite the > bullet and formalize a code of conduct now as I suggested a while back. > If you are willing to ban a person for behaving rudely in a mailing > list, I am sure that it can be used as a enforcing mechanism for a code > of conduct. IIRC, that was the issue against it before. > > A question to think about: What do you when a Red Hat employee working > full on time Fedora does this? Do you ban that person from the project > as well? Not suggesting anyone is actually doing this. Just something to > think about. > I'd think last resort you go to management chain. I know I was a real prick to Rahul just earlier this week :) -Mike From matt at domsch.com Thu May 14 23:48:19 2009 From: matt at domsch.com (Matt Domsch) Date: Thu, 14 May 2009 18:48:19 -0500 Subject: Proposal for ML conduct In-Reply-To: <4A0CAACD.50803@fedoraproject.org> References: <20090514184625.GL3514@localhost.localdomain> <4A0CAACD.50803@fedoraproject.org> Message-ID: <20090514234819.GA15566@domsch.com> On Fri, May 15, 2009 at 05:05:41AM +0530, Rahul Sundaram wrote: > A question to think about: What do you when a Red Hat employee working > full on time Fedora does this? Do you ban that person from the project > as well? Not suggesting anyone is actually doing this. Just something to > think about. When it comes to employees of any company, Red Hat or otherwise, acting in a role on behalf of their company (and in reality, even when you claim otherwise), one should always watch your behavior. There are recourses available well beyond list moderation or account deactivation which employers can impose. If people thought I was acting terribly inappropriately, I have no doubt that someone here could get ahold of someone at my employer to convey that message... appropriately. From sundaram at fedoraproject.org Thu May 14 23:55:42 2009 From: sundaram at fedoraproject.org (Rahul Sundaram) Date: Fri, 15 May 2009 05:25:42 +0530 Subject: Proposal for ML conduct In-Reply-To: References: <20090514184625.GL3514@localhost.localdomain> <4A0CAACD.50803@fedoraproject.org> Message-ID: <4A0CAF7E.6030700@fedoraproject.org> On 05/15/2009 05:14 AM, Mike McGrath wrote: > I'd think last resort you go to management chain. I know I was a real > prick to Rahul just earlier this week :) I think, the recourse in that case should be explicitly mentioned. I personally rather not do that (never done it ever before) and just deal with the person directly. As far as you are concerned, I think we just have/had some misunderstandings. Me pissing off people even without deliberately intending to do so is nothing new. Feel free to get in touch with me offlist if you want to talk about it. Rahul From jwboyer at gmail.com Fri May 15 00:06:12 2009 From: jwboyer at gmail.com (Josh Boyer) Date: Thu, 14 May 2009 20:06:12 -0400 Subject: Proposal for ML conduct In-Reply-To: <1242338505.3024.3.camel@localhost.localdomain> References: <20090514184625.GL3514@localhost.localdomain> <1242332968.6282.85.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20090514204909.GW3514@localhost.localdomain> <1242338505.3024.3.camel@localhost.localdomain> Message-ID: <20090515000612.GA18678@hansolo.jdub.homelinux.org> On Thu, May 14, 2009 at 03:01:45PM -0700, Jesse Keating wrote: >On Thu, 2009-05-14 at 16:55 -0500, Mike McGrath wrote: >> >> >> Opression sucks. >> Censorship sucks. >> Board members spending their time on jerk patrol sucks. >> >> I know I'm pointing out problems and not solutions, I apologize for that. >> >> > >You're not alone in these feelings. What sucks more is that we can't >seem to patrol ourselves, and it's gotten so bad that board members have >been pinged by multiple people to step in and do something. So we're >doing something. Do you have examples of what the Board considers unacceptable? You don't need to highlight specific people, but I'm curious what has caused people to ask the Board to step in. josh From jkeating at redhat.com Fri May 15 00:17:17 2009 From: jkeating at redhat.com (Jesse Keating) Date: Thu, 14 May 2009 17:17:17 -0700 Subject: Proposal for ML conduct In-Reply-To: <20090515000612.GA18678@hansolo.jdub.homelinux.org> References: <20090514184625.GL3514@localhost.localdomain> <1242332968.6282.85.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20090514204909.GW3514@localhost.localdomain> <1242338505.3024.3.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20090515000612.GA18678@hansolo.jdub.homelinux.org> Message-ID: <1242346637.3024.8.camel@localhost.localdomain> On Thu, 2009-05-14 at 20:06 -0400, Josh Boyer wrote: > Do you have examples of what the Board considers unacceptable? You don't need > to highlight specific people, but I'm curious what has caused people to ask > the Board to step in. > There was recent swearing at each other, blatant personal attacks, and just a lot of mail that served no purpose other than to cause disrespect. -- 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 jkeating at redhat.com Fri May 15 00:20:08 2009 From: jkeating at redhat.com (Jesse Keating) Date: Thu, 14 May 2009 17:20:08 -0700 Subject: Proposal for ML conduct In-Reply-To: <4A0CAACD.50803@fedoraproject.org> References: <20090514184625.GL3514@localhost.localdomain> <4A0CAACD.50803@fedoraproject.org> Message-ID: <1242346808.3024.11.camel@localhost.localdomain> On Fri, 2009-05-15 at 05:05 +0530, Rahul Sundaram wrote: > > Why focus only on the mailing lists? How about IRC, forums or other > means of communication? For the record, IRC conversations in #fedora > have frequently been problematic as well. I think, you can bite the > bullet and formalize a code of conduct now as I suggested a while back. > If you are willing to ban a person for behaving rudely in a mailing > list, I am sure that it can be used as a enforcing mechanism for a code > of conduct. IIRC, that was the issue against it before. We're picking mailing lists to start with. There is already an effort in place to try and correct the IRC channel issues, we'd rather not step into that and distrupt the existing effort unless we absolutely have to. Forums are outside of the Fedora project space and we have no authority there. > > A question to think about: What do you when a Red Hat employee working > full on time Fedora does this? Do you ban that person from the project > as well? Not suggesting anyone is actually doing this. Just something to > think about. We would treat them the same way we would treat any other contributor. If the person in question looses their ability to do their job within Fedora, that's a matter the person will have to bring up with their management chain. However I strongly feel that there should be no different treatment no matter who you work for. -- 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 stickster at gmail.com Fri May 15 03:26:46 2009 From: stickster at gmail.com (Paul W. Frields) Date: Thu, 14 May 2009 23:26:46 -0400 Subject: Proposal for ML conduct In-Reply-To: References: <20090514184625.GL3514@localhost.localdomain> <1242332968.6282.85.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20090514204909.GW3514@localhost.localdomain> Message-ID: <20090515032646.GH3401@localhost.localdomain> On Thu, May 14, 2009 at 04:55:12PM -0500, Mike McGrath wrote: > > > > Opression sucks. > Censorship sucks. > Board members spending their time on jerk patrol sucks. > > I know I'm pointing out problems and not solutions, I apologize for that. > > I think all the Board members would prefer that this didn't seem so necessary. My greatest hope would be that everyone looks at the fact that it got to this point, and thinks, "Wow, maybe I should do a better job of thinking how I come across before I hit 'Send'," and we simply end up having written up a proposal for no reason. -- Paul W. Frields http://paul.frields.org/ gpg fingerprint: 3DA6 A0AC 6D58 FEC4 0233 5906 ACDB C937 BD11 3717 http://redhat.com/ - - - - http://pfrields.fedorapeople.org/ irc.freenode.net: stickster @ #fedora-docs, #fedora-devel, #fredlug From stickster at gmail.com Fri May 15 03:32:40 2009 From: stickster at gmail.com (Paul W. Frields) Date: Thu, 14 May 2009 23:32:40 -0400 Subject: Proposal for ML conduct In-Reply-To: <1242346808.3024.11.camel@localhost.localdomain> References: <20090514184625.GL3514@localhost.localdomain> <4A0CAACD.50803@fedoraproject.org> <1242346808.3024.11.camel@localhost.localdomain> Message-ID: <20090515033240.GI3401@localhost.localdomain> On Thu, May 14, 2009 at 05:20:08PM -0700, Jesse Keating wrote: > On Fri, 2009-05-15 at 05:05 +0530, Rahul Sundaram wrote: > > > > Why focus only on the mailing lists? How about IRC, forums or other > > means of communication? For the record, IRC conversations in #fedora > > have frequently been problematic as well. I think, you can bite the > > bullet and formalize a code of conduct now as I suggested a while back. > > If you are willing to ban a person for behaving rudely in a mailing > > list, I am sure that it can be used as a enforcing mechanism for a code > > of conduct. IIRC, that was the issue against it before. > > We're picking mailing lists to start with. There is already an effort > in place to try and correct the IRC channel issues, we'd rather not step > into that and distrupt the existing effort unless we absolutely have to. > Forums are outside of the Fedora project space and we have no authority > there. Kevin Fenzi has done a lot to get more people working as operators in IRC in #fedora, and it has helped significantly in the last year or so. There are still some times where things get out of hand there, and the ops do their best. At times, I've seen ops that lose their cool, and I continue to advise them that it's OK to walk away. Personally, and metaphorically speaking, I'd rather a desk go unmanned than have it manned by someone who doesn't want to be there. > > A question to think about: What do you when a Red Hat employee working > > full on time Fedora does this? Do you ban that person from the project > > as well? Not suggesting anyone is actually doing this. Just something to > > think about. > > We would treat them the same way we would treat any other contributor. > If the person in question looses their ability to do their job within > Fedora, that's a matter the person will have to bring up with their > management chain. However I strongly feel that there should be no > different treatment no matter who you work for. I agree with this. -- Paul W. Frields http://paul.frields.org/ gpg fingerprint: 3DA6 A0AC 6D58 FEC4 0233 5906 ACDB C937 BD11 3717 http://redhat.com/ - - - - http://pfrields.fedorapeople.org/ irc.freenode.net: stickster @ #fedora-docs, #fedora-devel, #fredlug From stickster at gmail.com Fri May 15 04:28:01 2009 From: stickster at gmail.com (Paul W. Frields) Date: Fri, 15 May 2009 00:28:01 -0400 Subject: Fedora Board elections Message-ID: <20090515042801.GO3401@localhost.localdomain> (In part this just a restatement of what Matt Domsch kindly and efficiently posted earlier.) The call for nominations for the Fedora Board elections is now open. There are three seats open for this election, currently held by Tom 'spot' Callaway, Jesse Keating, and Seth Vidal. Two appointed seats are open for this election, currently held by Harald Hoyer and Chris Tyler. General information about the Fedora Board can be found on the wiki[1], along with specific information about succession planning[2]. The timeline for elections will run as follows: 15 May - 29 May Nominations open. Interested candidates should register on the Board nominations page: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Board/Elections/Nominations Individuals who would like the nominees to answer questions may provide them through FAB, on the nominations page or its discussion (Talk) area, or by contacting any Board member. 31 May - 6 June Candidates will be asked to answer the written questions provided though public email to fedora-advisory-board at redhat.com. First appointment made on or about June 4. 7 June - 22 June Elections open. The election procedures are documented on the wiki as well[3]. Final appointment made on or about June 25. A summary of Board matters for the past session will be posted shortly. * * * [1] http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Board [2] http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Board/SuccessionPlanning [3] http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Board/Elections -- 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 kevin at tummy.com Fri May 15 04:59:51 2009 From: kevin at tummy.com (Kevin Fenzi) Date: Thu, 14 May 2009 22:59:51 -0600 Subject: Proposal for ML conduct In-Reply-To: <20090515033240.GI3401@localhost.localdomain> References: <20090514184625.GL3514@localhost.localdomain> <4A0CAACD.50803@fedoraproject.org> <1242346808.3024.11.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20090515033240.GI3401@localhost.localdomain> Message-ID: <20090514225951.50bb6053@ohm.scrye.com> On Thu, 14 May 2009 23:32:40 -0400 "Paul W. Frields" wrote: > On Thu, May 14, 2009 at 05:20:08PM -0700, Jesse Keating wrote: > > On Fri, 2009-05-15 at 05:05 +0530, Rahul Sundaram wrote: > > > > > > Why focus only on the mailing lists? How about IRC, forums or > > > other means of communication? For the record, IRC conversations > > > in #fedora have frequently been problematic as well. I think, you > > > can bite the bullet and formalize a code of conduct now as I > > > suggested a while back. If you are willing to ban a person for > > > behaving rudely in a mailing list, I am sure that it can be used > > > as a enforcing mechanism for a code of conduct. IIRC, that was > > > the issue against it before. > > > > We're picking mailing lists to start with. There is already an > > effort in place to try and correct the IRC channel issues, we'd > > rather not step into that and distrupt the existing effort unless > > we absolutely have to. Forums are outside of the Fedora project > > space and we have no authority there. > > Kevin Fenzi has done a lot to get more people working as operators in > IRC in #fedora, and it has helped significantly in the last year or > so. Yeah, we are trying. It's worth pointing out that any help is welcome... stop by our weekly meetings in #fedora-meeting (thursdays at 16:30 UTC) or join the channel and let us know you are willing to help out. I personally think things have improved dramatically. I hope we can continue to improve it over time. We do have guidelines we enforce for the channel, possibly similar to what is being proposed here for the mailing lists. Continued profanity, flooding the channel, giving harmful advice to others and such behavior will cause warnings or removal from the channel. I do think that what has helped more than the above is simply having people around and willing to help and answer questions and solve problems. When you see that going on, it's much easier to join in helping than join in hindering. If instead you see people being negative and unhelpfull it's much easier to spiral into that kind of behavior. I would love to see the mailing list evolve this way, ie: make the list a good resource and others will start treating it that was as well, and those hindering will look out of place and ignored. > There are still some times where things get out of hand there, > and the ops do their best. At times, I've seen ops that lose their > cool, and I continue to advise them that it's OK to walk away. > Personally, and metaphorically speaking, I'd rather a desk go unmanned > than have it manned by someone who doesn't want to be there. Absolutely. kevin -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 198 bytes Desc: not available URL: From fedora at leemhuis.info Fri May 15 05:21:34 2009 From: fedora at leemhuis.info (Thorsten Leemhuis) Date: Fri, 15 May 2009 07:21:34 +0200 Subject: Proposal for ML conduct In-Reply-To: <20090514184625.GL3514@localhost.localdomain> References: <20090514184625.GL3514@localhost.localdomain> Message-ID: <4A0CFBDE.1050008@leemhuis.info> On 14.05.2009 20:46, Paul W. Frields wrote: > The Board had a long discussion today about the increasingly toxic > nature of discussions on Fedora Project mailing lists. The meeting > minutes are available on the wiki[1], as always. I wanted to point > specifically to the proposal currently before the Board. > > > The problem: The Board is disappointed at the degradation in tone and > signal of some Fedora Project lists. I completely agree that there is a problem but sorry, I strongly dislike how the board acted/acts here. IMHO those that complained should have first made attemts to discuss a proper solution on the effected lists (which didn't really happen afaics) before going to the board for asking for help. Everything that comes from the board like this feels like "some magic group at the top of the hierarchy decided something without even bothering those that are effected first". That is IMHO not how community project should act. IOW: yes, we need a board for the hard decisions, but it IMHO should only get involved after other ways to solve the problem have failed. Otherwise the contributors feel like small unwanted bees that are needed to do the leg-work, but there opinion doesn't count. > The proposal: > > To resolve this, the Board appoints one or more Board members or other > Board-approved volunteers to monitor Fedora Project mailing lists. > The Board will warn violators of our "Be excellent to each other" > policy in the form of a one-day list moderation (with notice to the > poster). Messages not allowed through will be returned to the poster > with explanation as to why they were not allowed. If after one day of > moderation, the violation continues, the case will be brought to the > Board for further action, which could include permanent moderation, > complete removal from the project, or other remedies. > > Being excellent to each other == No personal attacks, profanity > directed at people or groups, serious threats of violence, or other > things seen by the monitor as to be purposefully disrespectful. > > > * * * Counter proposal: Let the community regulate itself. Ran all the mails through a procmail recipe or something like that adds to links at the bottom of all mails like this: ** You mostly agree with the poster? Click here: http://ml.fedoraproject.org/&status=likedit You think the poster was not nice to others http://ml.fedoraproject.org/&status=notnicetoothers Check how others see this mail: http://ml.fedoraproject.org/&status=query ** Of course we need a small app on the server to count that. If someone then was "not nice to others" then at least some of the people will click the link. The one that wrote the mail gets direct feedback from those that read the mail and not from a magic board police guard that should use his time for better things. CU knurd From fedora at leemhuis.info Fri May 15 05:26:17 2009 From: fedora at leemhuis.info (Thorsten Leemhuis) Date: Fri, 15 May 2009 07:26:17 +0200 Subject: Planning for Fedora Elections In-Reply-To: <20090514184006.GC7721@domsch.com> References: <20090507162000.GA10044@domsch.com> <4A0310F2.1080503@leemhuis.info> <20090514184006.GC7721@domsch.com> Message-ID: <4A0CFCF9.5090107@leemhuis.info> On 14.05.2009 20:40, Matt Domsch wrote: > On Thu, May 07, 2009 at 06:48:50PM +0200, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote: >> I (as a voter) have neither time nor interest for IRC meetings if there >> is no strong reason to participate. Same for skimming through the IRC >> logs later, as that in my experience is often way more confusing then >> helpful. >> >> IOW: IRC IMHO has a bad time/benefit ratio if what is being discussed is >> not really important for you. >> >> Sure, IRC has a lot of benefits, but mail has as well, that's why I >> suggest to let a some people(??) collect a few good questions with the >> help of the community. Then send them to the nominees that have to >> answer then within something like 3 or 4 days in private. Then put all >> the answers up on the net and give people a chance to read them. >> >> After that do the IRC Town Hall-style discussions for those that like >> then, They actually might be easier, as people can ask question like >> "you said foo to the answer bar in the pre-questioning by mail; could >> you please outline that a bit more into in regards to foobar?", which in >> the end might lead to a better IRC Town Hall-style discussion. > > I've added a questionairre page to the Elections page, to which people may add questions they > would like the candidates to answer. Candidates will be free to answer > (or not) as they see fit (at their own peril of course). Thorsten, I > would appreciate your assistance in a) publicizing this; and b) > editing the list of questions at the time we'll hand them out. Will do, but I dislike something. From the other mail you send five minutes earlier to this list: """ * IRC Town Hall-style discussions with candidates for the various positions will be arranged for 31 May through 6 June. Candidates will be given a set of written questions suggested above, to answer by public email if they wish. """ I'd highly prefer if those mails could be private. Otherwise those that answer at the end of the given timeframe can take the answers from those that answered earlier for help and I'd consider that a bit unfair for those that send in their answers early. CU knurd From jkeating at redhat.com Fri May 15 05:43:34 2009 From: jkeating at redhat.com (Jesse Keating) Date: Thu, 14 May 2009 22:43:34 -0700 Subject: Proposal for ML conduct In-Reply-To: <4A0CFBDE.1050008@leemhuis.info> References: <20090514184625.GL3514@localhost.localdomain> <4A0CFBDE.1050008@leemhuis.info> Message-ID: <1242366214.3024.25.camel@localhost.localdomain> On Fri, 2009-05-15 at 07:21 +0200, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote: > I completely agree that there is a problem but sorry, I strongly dislike > how the board acted/acts here. > > IMHO those that complained should have first made attemts to discuss a > proper solution on the effected lists (which didn't really happen > afaics) before going to the board for asking for help. Everything that > comes from the board like this feels like "some magic group at the top > of the hierarchy decided something without even bothering those that are > effected first". That is IMHO not how community project should act. This isn't the first time we've tried to fix things. Previously we tried to employ a manner of policing ones self, by responding to the negative posts and pointing out in public that the actions were not appreciated. It hasn't worked. It's not really the board's fault that people got tired of nothing happening on the lists and brought it to the project overseers. We're trying to get something in place to correct the problem ASAP. > > IOW: yes, we need a board for the hard decisions, but it IMHO should > only get involved after other ways to solve the problem have failed. > Otherwise the contributors feel like small unwanted bees that are needed > to do the leg-work, but there opinion doesn't count. > > > The proposal: > > > > To resolve this, the Board appoints one or more Board members or other > > Board-approved volunteers to monitor Fedora Project mailing lists. > > The Board will warn violators of our "Be excellent to each other" > > policy in the form of a one-day list moderation (with notice to the > > poster). Messages not allowed through will be returned to the poster > > with explanation as to why they were not allowed. If after one day of > > moderation, the violation continues, the case will be brought to the > > Board for further action, which could include permanent moderation, > > complete removal from the project, or other remedies. > > > > Being excellent to each other == No personal attacks, profanity > > directed at people or groups, serious threats of violence, or other > > things seen by the monitor as to be purposefully disrespectful. > > > > > > * * * > > Counter proposal: Let the community regulate itself. Ran all the mails > through a procmail recipe or something like that adds to links at the > bottom of all mails like this: > > ** > You mostly agree with the poster? Click here: > http://ml.fedoraproject.org/&status=likedit > > You think the poster was not nice to others > http://ml.fedoraproject.org/&status=notnicetoothers > > Check how others see this mail: > http://ml.fedoraproject.org/&status=query > ** > > Of course we need a small app on the server to count that. > > If someone then was "not nice to others" then at least some of the > people will click the link. The one that wrote the mail gets direct > feedback from those that read the mail and not from a magic board police > guard that should use his time for better things. > Are you willing to spend the time to create the app, and create it in such a way that it can't be 'gamed' to silence somebody without proper reason? Would you have it done in the next week? There isn't a reason why something like this couldn't be created at some point, but I doubt that it'll be ready to use in the next week. If it ever were, the board could seriously look at dropping the human monitors and turning the lists over to self policing via karma. Until then, I think we have to move forward with what we can accomplish after our next board meeting. -- 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 fedora at leemhuis.info Fri May 15 06:04:33 2009 From: fedora at leemhuis.info (Thorsten Leemhuis) Date: Fri, 15 May 2009 08:04:33 +0200 Subject: Proposal for ML conduct In-Reply-To: <1242366214.3024.25.camel@localhost.localdomain> References: <20090514184625.GL3514@localhost.localdomain> <4A0CFBDE.1050008@leemhuis.info> <1242366214.3024.25.camel@localhost.localdomain> Message-ID: <4A0D05F1.4040806@leemhuis.info> On 15.05.2009 07:43, Jesse Keating wrote: > On Fri, 2009-05-15 at 07:21 +0200, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote: >> I completely agree that there is a problem but sorry, I strongly dislike >> how the board acted/acts here. >> >> IMHO those that complained should have first made attemts to discuss a >> proper solution on the effected lists (which didn't really happen >> afaics) before going to the board for asking for help. Everything that >> comes from the board like this feels like "some magic group at the top >> of the hierarchy decided something without even bothering those that are >> effected first". That is IMHO not how community project should act. > This isn't the first time we've tried to fix things. Haven't seen anything recently. > Previously we > tried to employ a manner of policing ones self, by responding to the > negative posts and pointing out in public that the actions were not > appreciated. It hasn't worked. Then try again. The whole situation feels like children fighting with each other and somebody running for his mummy for help. But we are not children. And I for one don't want mummy to get involved, as that always makes the others feel unwell and in the end it afaics often creates new, bigger problems (which I'd say seems likely here afaics). > It's not really the board's fault that > people got tired of nothing happening on the lists and brought it to the > project overseers. We're trying to get something in place to correct > the problem ASAP. It's been a problem for years, so I can't see why we need ASAP suddenly. >> IOW: yes, we need a board for the hard decisions, but it IMHO should >> only get involved after other ways to solve the problem have failed. >> Otherwise the contributors feel like small unwanted bees that are needed >> to do the leg-work, but there opinion doesn't count. >> >>> The proposal: >>> >>> To resolve this, the Board appoints one or more Board members or other >>> Board-approved volunteers to monitor Fedora Project mailing lists. >>> The Board will warn violators of our "Be excellent to each other" >>> policy in the form of a one-day list moderation (with notice to the >>> poster). Messages not allowed through will be returned to the poster >>> with explanation as to why they were not allowed. If after one day of >>> moderation, the violation continues, the case will be brought to the >>> Board for further action, which could include permanent moderation, >>> complete removal from the project, or other remedies. >>> >>> Being excellent to each other == No personal attacks, profanity >>> directed at people or groups, serious threats of violence, or other >>> things seen by the monitor as to be purposefully disrespectful. >>> >>> >>> * * * >> >> Counter proposal: Let the community regulate itself. Ran all the mails >> through a procmail recipe or something like that adds to links at the >> bottom of all mails like this: >> >> ** >> You mostly agree with the poster? Click here: >> http://ml.fedoraproject.org/&status=likedit >> >> You think the poster was not nice to others >> http://ml.fedoraproject.org/&status=notnicetoothers >> >> Check how others see this mail: >> http://ml.fedoraproject.org/&status=query >> ** >> >> Of course we need a small app on the server to count that. >> >> If someone then was "not nice to others" then at least some of the >> people will click the link. The one that wrote the mail gets direct >> feedback from those that read the mail and not from a magic board police >> guard that should use his time for better things. >> > > Are you willing to spend the time to create the app, You know me for a while, you should know that I don't have the skills for that. ;-) > and create it in such a way that it can't be 'gamed' > to silence somebody without proper reason? No. > Would you have it done in the next week? I don't see a need for next week. > [...] CU knurd From jkeating at redhat.com Fri May 15 06:31:53 2009 From: jkeating at redhat.com (Jesse Keating) Date: Thu, 14 May 2009 23:31:53 -0700 Subject: Proposal for ML conduct In-Reply-To: <4A0D05F1.4040806@leemhuis.info> References: <20090514184625.GL3514@localhost.localdomain> <4A0CFBDE.1050008@leemhuis.info> <1242366214.3024.25.camel@localhost.localdomain> <4A0D05F1.4040806@leemhuis.info> Message-ID: <1242369113.3024.53.camel@localhost.localdomain> On Fri, 2009-05-15 at 08:04 +0200, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote: > > But we are not children. And I for one don't want mummy to get involved, > as that always makes the others feel unwell and in the end it afaics > often creates new, bigger problems (which I'd say seems likely here > afaics). > > > It's not really the board's fault that > > people got tired of nothing happening on the lists and brought it to the > > project overseers. We're trying to get something in place to correct > > the problem ASAP. > > It's been a problem for years, so I can't see why we need ASAP suddenly. The need for this week is exactly that it's been a problem for years, and frankly we're tired of it. Any other OSS project the trouble people would have been bounced, years ago, without question. Only here in Fedora we're drowning in our own bureaucracy too scared to do anything because somebody in the project might disagree with it. The board has been elected to oversee the project, to make the hard decisions, to intervene when compromise cannot be met, to drive the project somewhere, and to be the responsible parties for what happens within Fedora. We're not happy with what is happening within Fedora, and instead of throwing more red tape around and creating yet another committee to somehow democratically clean up the behavior on a few mailing lists, we're going to saddle one or two people with the responsibility of being list nannies. With any luck, just the act of appointing somebody and letting it be known that what you do and say on lists are not going unnoticed will have an effect on what people do and say on lists, thus rendering the nanny unnecessary, or at least idle. Kind of like having an obvious traffic cop posted somewhere. You know (s)he's there so you slow down. (S)He may never pull anybody over, but for the entire day people went the speed limit. Mission accomplished. If we have to give people a gentle reminder from time to time, we will. Things went from bad to much much worse in a very short amount of time, at least in our perspective. Waiting longer to fix things doesn't feel like the answer. -- 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 fedora at leemhuis.info Fri May 15 06:56:52 2009 From: fedora at leemhuis.info (Thorsten Leemhuis) Date: Fri, 15 May 2009 08:56:52 +0200 Subject: Proposal for ML conduct In-Reply-To: <1242369113.3024.53.camel@localhost.localdomain> References: <20090514184625.GL3514@localhost.localdomain> <4A0CFBDE.1050008@leemhuis.info> <1242366214.3024.25.camel@localhost.localdomain> <4A0D05F1.4040806@leemhuis.info> <1242369113.3024.53.camel@localhost.localdomain> Message-ID: <4A0D1234.7020506@leemhuis.info> On 15.05.2009 08:31, Jesse Keating wrote: > On Fri, 2009-05-15 at 08:04 +0200, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote: > [...] > Things went from bad to much much worse in a very short amount of time, > at least in our perspective. Waiting longer to fix things doesn't feel > like the answer. Dictating something from the top without bothering to ask those that are effected by the decision(?) imho isn't either. CU knurd (?) e.g. ask on fedora-devel-list for options before making the rules official, as not everyone is on this list. And yes, I'm well aware that doing that might yet again create a bumpy discussion, but in the end you can at least say "okay, you wanted it like this" and "we gave you the chance to come up with something better" ;-) Especially the latter is something really important. From mspevack at redhat.com Fri May 15 10:20:55 2009 From: mspevack at redhat.com (Max Spevack) Date: Fri, 15 May 2009 12:20:55 +0200 (CEST) Subject: Proposal for ML conduct In-Reply-To: <20090515033240.GI3401@localhost.localdomain> References: <20090514184625.GL3514@localhost.localdomain> <4A0CAACD.50803@fedoraproject.org> <1242346808.3024.11.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20090515033240.GI3401@localhost.localdomain> Message-ID: On Thu, 14 May 2009, Paul W. Frields wrote: >> We would treat them the same way we would treat any other >> contributor. If the person in question looses their ability to do >> their job within Fedora, that's a matter the person will have to >> bring up with their management chain. However I strongly feel that >> there should be no different treatment no matter who you work for. > > I agree with this. "Don't kickban me, bro!" I hardly ever post on this list anymore, and I can't simply come in with a troll about tazing, so I guess I am supposed to add something serious to this thread. I don't read fedora-devel-list. But as a community-type guy who's also still involved in some parts of Fedora as part of his job, I hear a lot of people complaining about the tone of emails, both on the lists and in private. We've got public flamewars in fedora-devel-list. We've got kickbans in the Cobbler community (perhaps that's been resolved, perhaps it's still ongoing) which have rolled over into Planet Fedora. We've got people who complain about every decision that the Art team makes. We've got a smattering of private issues in different areas, which remain private because that is what they are. None of this is any surprise. Disagreements -- strong disagreements -- will always happen in our community, but that doesn't mean that people should ratchet up the flame-meter to a level of 8 or 9 out of 10. We're definitely seeing a lot more agita than I would think is healthy. Here's my advice to everyone. BE TOUGH MINDED. === Some people will disagree with this next statement, but I believe that there is absolutely a double-standard when it comes to treating others, and here it is: Volunteers should treat others with respect. People who are paid by Red Hat to be here should bend over backwards to treat others with respect. That doesn't mean you are not allowed to disagree or pushback, but if participating in the Fedora community is what Red Hat pays you to do, then whether you like it or not, you are representing Red Hat's brand to the rest of the world every time you say something, whether you say it from your redhat.com address or your private address, and whether you say "this is only my opinion" or not ahead of time. Being a jerk is always bad. But it's even worse when you're effectively being a jerk on paid time to someone else who is only being a jerk in their free time. This all said, if the flames deteriorate beyond business into something personal, that's simply unacceptable. "Don't be a jerk" is Fedora's code of conduct. If those personal attacks happen in public, it's pretty easy to deal with the situation, because people will see it and the offending party will probably get reprimanded by several folks who are looking to keep things civil. If it happens in private, then it's obviously more dicey, but there are still plenty of options. I shall now resume lurking. --Max From jspaleta at gmail.com Fri May 15 10:55:04 2009 From: jspaleta at gmail.com (Jeff Spaleta) Date: Fri, 15 May 2009 02:55:04 -0800 Subject: Proposal for ML conduct In-Reply-To: <20090515000612.GA18678@hansolo.jdub.homelinux.org> References: <20090514184625.GL3514@localhost.localdomain> <1242332968.6282.85.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20090514204909.GW3514@localhost.localdomain> <1242338505.3024.3.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20090515000612.GA18678@hansolo.jdub.homelinux.org> Message-ID: <604aa7910905150355i68aacde7u25fd63ecbd79c76a@mail.gmail.com> On Thu, May 14, 2009 at 4:06 PM, Josh Boyer wrote: > Do you have examples of what the Board considers unacceptable? ?You don't need > to highlight specific people, but I'm curious what has caused people to ask > the Board to step in. If there is a need to point to specific behaviour without wanted to call individuals out, I'm more than happy to assume the role of "bad actor" in a staged, scripted interaction so that people can point to me specifically as an example of wrong action. -jef From jwboyer at gmail.com Fri May 15 11:58:00 2009 From: jwboyer at gmail.com (Josh Boyer) Date: Fri, 15 May 2009 07:58:00 -0400 Subject: Proposal for ML conduct In-Reply-To: <4A0D1234.7020506@leemhuis.info> References: <20090514184625.GL3514@localhost.localdomain> <4A0CFBDE.1050008@leemhuis.info> <1242366214.3024.25.camel@localhost.localdomain> <4A0D05F1.4040806@leemhuis.info> <1242369113.3024.53.camel@localhost.localdomain> <4A0D1234.7020506@leemhuis.info> Message-ID: <20090515115800.GA22202@hansolo.jdub.homelinux.org> On Fri, May 15, 2009 at 08:56:52AM +0200, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote: > On 15.05.2009 08:31, Jesse Keating wrote: >> On Fri, 2009-05-15 at 08:04 +0200, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote: >> [...] >> Things went from bad to much much worse in a very short amount of time, >> at least in our perspective. Waiting longer to fix things doesn't feel >> like the answer. > > Dictating something from the top without bothering to ask those that are > effected by the decision(?) imho isn't either. I seem to recall it being asked, perhaps not directly, in the past. The standard response was 'create a code of conduct'. Except those don't really help anything, other than to allow a nanny to point back to it and say "Now, now Billy. That isn't nice and you shouldn't be doing that. See, it says so right here in our handbook." So the nanny still exists. But in this case, I think _our_ nannies will be a bit more constructive when pointing out errors to people. It won't be 'go read this blanket statement about what we find acceptable.' It will instead be directed to the person, why it was unacceptable, etc. Sure, you can do that with a code of conduct to, but if the end result is the same then why bother to spend the weeks/months to get one drafted, vetted, and approved? I don't think the Board is acting inappropriately here. Why don't we give them a chance to do what they are elected to do and lead an initiative. Wait and see how it turns out, and if it seems to be completely wrong _then_ we can call them to task and start discussing the need for something else. josh From matt at domsch.com Fri May 15 12:05:38 2009 From: matt at domsch.com (Matt Domsch) Date: Fri, 15 May 2009 07:05:38 -0500 Subject: Planning for Fedora Elections In-Reply-To: <4A0CFCF9.5090107@leemhuis.info> References: <20090507162000.GA10044@domsch.com> <4A0310F2.1080503@leemhuis.info> <20090514184006.GC7721@domsch.com> <4A0CFCF9.5090107@leemhuis.info> Message-ID: <20090515120538.GA16624@domsch.com> On Fri, May 15, 2009 at 07:26:17AM +0200, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote: > On 14.05.2009 20:40, Matt Domsch wrote: > >I've added a questionairre page to the Elections page, to which people may > >add questions they > >would like the candidates to answer. Candidates will be free to answer > >(or not) as they see fit (at their own peril of course). Thorsten, I > >would appreciate your assistance in a) publicizing this; and b) > >editing the list of questions at the time we'll hand them out. > > Will do, but I dislike something. From the other mail you send five > minutes earlier to this list: > """ > * IRC Town Hall-style discussions with candidates for the various > positions will be arranged for 31 May through 6 June. Candidates > will be given a set of written questions suggested above, to > answer by public email if they wish. > """ > I'd highly prefer if those mails could be private. Otherwise those that > answer at the end of the given timeframe can take the answers from those > that answered earlier for help and I'd consider that a bit unfair for > those that send in their answers early. You wish for the responses to be sent to a person privately, who will collect them, and then at the appointed time, publish all the answers publicly? That makes sense. -Matt From tburke at redhat.com Fri May 15 12:05:33 2009 From: tburke at redhat.com (Tim Burke) Date: Fri, 15 May 2009 08:05:33 -0400 Subject: Proposal for ML conduct In-Reply-To: <20090515033240.GI3401@localhost.localdomain> References: <20090514184625.GL3514@localhost.localdomain> <4A0CAACD.50803@fedoraproject.org> <1242346808.3024.11.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20090515033240.GI3401@localhost.localdomain> Message-ID: <4A0D5A8D.3010000@redhat.com> Paul W. Frields wrote: >>> A question to think about: What do you when a Red Hat employee working >>> full on time Fedora does this? Do you ban that person from the project >>> as well? Not suggesting anyone is actually doing this. Just something to >>> think about. >>> >> We would treat them the same way we would treat any other contributor. >> If the person in question looses their ability to do their job within >> Fedora, that's a matter the person will have to bring up with their >> management chain. However I strongly feel that there should be no >> different treatment no matter who you work for. >> > > I agree with this. > > +1 as RH management, I agree in professional standards From markmc at redhat.com Fri May 15 12:08:00 2009 From: markmc at redhat.com (Mark McLoughlin) Date: Fri, 15 May 2009 13:08:00 +0100 Subject: Proposal for ML conduct In-Reply-To: <20090514184625.GL3514@localhost.localdomain> References: <20090514184625.GL3514@localhost.localdomain> Message-ID: <1242389280.25932.15.camel@blaa> Hey, I'm glad to see some positivity in this - i.e. "be excellent to each other". Personally, I really like GNOME's Code of Conduct, particularly "Assume people mean well": http://live.gnome.org/CodeOfConduct Note the subtle difference of tone - "Here's what we consider excellent behaviour" versus "Here's what we consider unacceptable behaviour". Cheers, Mark. From markmc at redhat.com Fri May 15 12:08:12 2009 From: markmc at redhat.com (Mark McLoughlin) Date: Fri, 15 May 2009 13:08:12 +0100 Subject: Proposal for ML conduct In-Reply-To: <20090514204909.GW3514@localhost.localdomain> References: <20090514184625.GL3514@localhost.localdomain> <1242332968.6282.85.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20090514204909.GW3514@localhost.localdomain> Message-ID: <1242389292.25932.16.camel@blaa> On Thu, 2009-05-14 at 16:49 -0400, Paul W. Frields wrote: > The delegated monitors will warn violators of our "Be excellent to > each other" policy in the form of a one-day list moderation (with > notice to the poster). Messages not allowed through will be returned > to the poster with explanation as to why they were not allowed. So, the monitor will send a private email to the poster and put the poster under moderation. How could this process be more open? How can we allow the poster to defend themselves publicly? How can monitors avoid being accused of acting unreasonably? A fedora-moderators list? Uggh. Cheers, Mark. From skvidal at fedoraproject.org Fri May 15 13:10:52 2009 From: skvidal at fedoraproject.org (Seth Vidal) Date: Fri, 15 May 2009 09:10:52 -0400 (EDT) Subject: Proposal for ML conduct In-Reply-To: <1242389292.25932.16.camel@blaa> References: <20090514184625.GL3514@localhost.localdomain> <1242332968.6282.85.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20090514204909.GW3514@localhost.localdomain> <1242389292.25932.16.camel@blaa> Message-ID: > On Thu, 2009-05-14 at 16:49 -0400, Paul W. Frields wrote: > >> The delegated monitors will warn violators of our "Be excellent to >> each other" policy in the form of a one-day list moderation (with >> notice to the poster). Messages not allowed through will be returned >> to the poster with explanation as to why they were not allowed. > > So, the monitor will send a private email to the poster and put the > poster under moderation. > > How could this process be more open? It doesn't need to be. > > How can we allow the poster to defend themselves publicly? They have no right to a public defense - this isn't a court of law, we are not a gov't. There are no rights here. > How can monitors avoid being accused of acting unreasonably? By not acting unreasonably. And if someone thinks they are being messed with by a monitor then they can bring it to the board. -sv From markmc at redhat.com Fri May 15 07:59:38 2009 From: markmc at redhat.com (Mark McLoughlin) Date: Fri, 15 May 2009 08:59:38 +0100 Subject: Proposal for ML conduct In-Reply-To: <20090514184625.GL3514@localhost.localdomain> References: <20090514184625.GL3514@localhost.localdomain> Message-ID: <1242374378.3254.19.camel@blaa> Hey, I'm glad to see some positivity in this - i.e. "be excellent to each other". Personally, I really like GNOME's Code of Conduct, particularly "Assume people mean well": http://live.gnome.org/CodeOfConduct Note the subtle difference of tone - "Here's what we consider excellent behaviour" versus "Here's what we consider unacceptable behaviour". Cheers, Mark. From markmc at redhat.com Fri May 15 08:06:21 2009 From: markmc at redhat.com (Mark McLoughlin) Date: Fri, 15 May 2009 08:06:21 +0000 Subject: Proposal for ML conduct In-Reply-To: <20090514204909.GW3514@localhost.localdomain> References: <20090514184625.GL3514@localhost.localdomain> <1242332968.6282.85.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20090514204909.GW3514@localhost.localdomain> Message-ID: <1242374781.3254.26.camel@blaa> On Thu, 2009-05-14 at 16:49 -0400, Paul W. Frields wrote: > The delegated monitors will warn violators of our "Be excellent to > each other" policy in the form of a one-day list moderation (with > notice to the poster). Messages not allowed through will be returned > to the poster with explanation as to why they were not allowed. So, the monitor will send a private email to the poster and put the poster under moderation. How could this process be more open? How can we allow the poster to defend themselves publicly? How can monitors avoid being accused of acting unreasonably? A fedora-moderators list? Uggh. Cheers, Mark. From luis.villa at gmail.com Fri May 15 14:32:11 2009 From: luis.villa at gmail.com (Luis Villa) Date: Fri, 15 May 2009 10:32:11 -0400 Subject: Proposal for ML conduct In-Reply-To: <1242374378.3254.19.camel@blaa> References: <20090514184625.GL3514@localhost.localdomain> <1242374378.3254.19.camel@blaa> Message-ID: <2cb10c440905150732t374db69ck7643b8f8d9666a5@mail.gmail.com> On Fri, May 15, 2009 at 3:59 AM, Mark McLoughlin wrote: > Hey, > > I'm glad to see some positivity in this - i.e. "be excellent to each > other". > > Personally, I really like GNOME's Code of Conduct, particularly "Assume > people mean well": > > ?http://live.gnome.org/CodeOfConduct > > Note the subtle difference of tone - "Here's what we consider excellent > behaviour" versus "Here's what we consider unacceptable behaviour". Though note also that I'm not sure it has actually helped much. ;) Luis From jkeating at redhat.com Fri May 15 15:20:07 2009 From: jkeating at redhat.com (Jesse Keating) Date: Fri, 15 May 2009 08:20:07 -0700 Subject: Proposal for ML conduct In-Reply-To: <4A0D1234.7020506@leemhuis.info> References: <20090514184625.GL3514@localhost.localdomain> <4A0CFBDE.1050008@leemhuis.info> <1242366214.3024.25.camel@localhost.localdomain> <4A0D05F1.4040806@leemhuis.info> <1242369113.3024.53.camel@localhost.localdomain> <4A0D1234.7020506@leemhuis.info> Message-ID: <1242400807.3024.55.camel@localhost.localdomain> On Fri, 2009-05-15 at 08:56 +0200, Thorsten Leemhuis wrote: > Dictating something from the top without bothering to ask those that are > effected by the decision(?) imho isn't either. > > CU > knurd > > (?) e.g. ask on fedora-devel-list for options before making the rules > official, as not everyone is on this list. And yes, I'm well aware that > doing that might yet again create a bumpy discussion, but in the end you > can at least say "okay, you wanted it like this" and "we gave you the > chance to come up with something better" ;-) Especially the latter is > something really important. Nearly, if not, all members of the board are also subscribers to the list. I think we're uniquely suited to gather opinions amongst our selves (as well as the community via f-a-b and the meeting minutes) about how we'd like to see the issue resolved. Remember, the board is made of many volunteers as well. -- 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 notting at redhat.com Fri May 15 15:39:38 2009 From: notting at redhat.com (Bill Nottingham) Date: Fri, 15 May 2009 11:39:38 -0400 Subject: Proposal for ML conduct In-Reply-To: <4A0D05F1.4040806@leemhuis.info> References: <20090514184625.GL3514@localhost.localdomain> <4A0CFBDE.1050008@leemhuis.info> <1242366214.3024.25.camel@localhost.localdomain> <4A0D05F1.4040806@leemhuis.info> Message-ID: <20090515153937.GA32168@nostromo.devel.redhat.com> Thorsten Leemhuis (fedora at leemhuis.info) said: > But we are not children. However... the constant need to get the last word in, even if it doesn't make sense? The need to do the equivalent of responding "I hate broccoli!" any time broccoli is mentioned? Insisting that all policies be adopted to the developer's particular workflow, as if the world revolves around them? We may not be children, but in a lot of cases, we're certainly acting like them. Bill From lyos.gemininorezel at gmail.com Fri May 15 16:52:38 2009 From: lyos.gemininorezel at gmail.com (Lyos Gemini Norezel) Date: Fri, 15 May 2009 12:52:38 -0400 Subject: Proposal for ML conduct In-Reply-To: References: <20090514184625.GL3514@localhost.localdomain> <1242332968.6282.85.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20090514204909.GW3514@localhost.localdomain> Message-ID: <4A0D9DD6.6090004@gmail.com> Mike McGrath wrote: > > > > Opression sucks. > Censorship sucks. > Board members spending their time on jerk patrol sucks. > > I know I'm pointing out problems and not solutions, I apologize for that. > > > > -Mike > I agree with Mike, and I want to make my own stance on this issue very clear. I have something of a gift... I am able to communicate quickly and effectively on all levels of discourse. >From the severely mentally retarded, to the most intelligent scientists... I can communicate at their level of discourse, using only the words they'll understand. The consequence of this 'gift', is a severe aversion to words and phrases meant to "beat around the bush", ie., hint at the proper word, wherein such words might be offensive. (Another consequence of such a gift, is an aversion to the 'willfully ignorant'... ie., those who can learn but refuse to. I find this group offensive regardless of their intelligence/lack thereof) Hence, when talking to the average 'Joe Idiot', cursing is not only commonplace, but demanded for quick and effective communication. I will not censor myself/limit my ability to communicate to suit the P.C. pussies. Those who take offence to this can */_kiss my ass_/*. I do not bow to oppression or censorship. I am a free man today, I will remain free _/*at all costs*/_. Lyos Gemini Norezel /"You see, if religious values are to trump everything in this world as they, currently, seem to be doing... well then, I claim free speech as my religion. Yes, I'll have a slice of that pie too, thank you. Along with all the other attendant rights and privileges, of course. Because I can assure you that I venerate free speech as highly anybody on this planet venerates their god or their scripture or their prophet, and any attempt to suppress free speech is deeply insulting and grossly offensive to me on a personal level; I feel violated to the very core of my being which seriously hurts my feelings. Whenever I hear free speech being compromised or restricted, or even heavily criticized, I take that as a grave personal affront and as a grotesquely insensitive attack on my most cherished values. Freedom of thought, freedom of speech, freedom of identity... this is my holy trinity. Each one an intrinsic aspect of my God... Freedom, the holiest of holies. Yes it bloody well is, it is absolutely sacred and inviolable beyond any negotiation or compromise now and forever... Amen. Sorry to be so unreasonable about it, but you know how it is with religion." -- Pat Condell ( http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8bzTA_D5NpU )/ -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: Lyos_GeminiNorezel.vcf Type: text/x-vcard Size: 428 bytes Desc: not available URL: From skvidal at fedoraproject.org Fri May 15 16:56:44 2009 From: skvidal at fedoraproject.org (Seth Vidal) Date: Fri, 15 May 2009 12:56:44 -0400 (EDT) Subject: Proposal for ML conduct In-Reply-To: <4A0D9DD6.6090004@gmail.com> References: <20090514184625.GL3514@localhost.localdomain> <1242332968.6282.85.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20090514204909.GW3514@localhost.localdomain> <4A0D9DD6.6090004@gmail.com> Message-ID: On Fri, 15 May 2009, Lyos Gemini Norezel wrote: > > The consequence of this 'gift', is a severe aversion to words and phrases meant to "beat around the bush", ie., hint at > the proper word, wherein such words might be offensive. > (Another consequence of such a gift, is an aversion to the 'willfully ignorant'... ie., those who can learn but refuse > to. I find this group offensive regardless of their intelligence/lack thereof) > > Hence, when talking to the average 'Joe Idiot', cursing is not only commonplace, but demanded for quick and effective > communication. > > I will not censor myself/limit my ability to communicate to suit the P.C. pussies. > Those who take offence to this can kiss my ass. > > I do not bow to oppression or censorship. > > I am a free man today, I will remain free at all costs. okay. you can be free. But you have to understand that if you're abusive or aggressive on fedora mailing lists then your posts will be moderated. You have no right to free speech on infrastructure provided by fedora. -sv From ajax at redhat.com Fri May 15 17:25:57 2009 From: ajax at redhat.com (Adam Jackson) Date: Fri, 15 May 2009 13:25:57 -0400 Subject: Proposal for ML conduct In-Reply-To: <1242374378.3254.19.camel@blaa> References: <20090514184625.GL3514@localhost.localdomain> <1242374378.3254.19.camel@blaa> Message-ID: <1242408357.21675.428.camel@atropine.boston.devel.redhat.com> On Fri, 2009-05-15 at 08:59 +0100, Mark McLoughlin wrote: > Hey, > > I'm glad to see some positivity in this - i.e. "be excellent to each > other". > > Personally, I really like GNOME's Code of Conduct, particularly "Assume > people mean well": > > http://live.gnome.org/CodeOfConduct > > Note the subtle difference of tone - "Here's what we consider excellent > behaviour" versus "Here's what we consider unacceptable behaviour". Yeah. My personal mental model of the rules was always along the lines of: 1) Don't be an ass. 2) If you find yourself trying to explain why your behaviour doesn't violate rule 1, it does, and you're doing it again. But I like the positive formulation better. The trick with positive forms is they need to be lead by example, and culturally speaking very few communities have people who go out of their way to be positive all the time every time. I don't know how we cultivate that, but we ought to. - ajax -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 197 bytes Desc: This is a digitally signed message part URL: From caillon at redhat.com Fri May 15 19:06:25 2009 From: caillon at redhat.com (Christopher Aillon) Date: Fri, 15 May 2009 12:06:25 -0700 Subject: Proposal for ML conduct In-Reply-To: <20090514220035.GE7721@domsch.com> References: <20090514184625.GL3514@localhost.localdomain> <1242332968.6282.85.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20090514204909.GW3514@localhost.localdomain> <20090514220035.GE7721@domsch.com> Message-ID: <4A0DBD31.5020102@redhat.com> On 05/14/2009 03:00 PM, Matt Domsch wrote: > On Thu, May 14, 2009 at 04:55:12PM -0500, Mike McGrath wrote: >> >> >> Opression sucks. >> Censorship sucks. >> Board members spending their time on jerk patrol sucks. >> >> I know I'm pointing out problems and not solutions, I apologize for that. >> >> > > While I agree completely, when people aren't following the "be > excellent to each other" (gotta love Bill& Ted) creed, it can not > only distract, but cause otherwise well-behaved members to leave. > This is unacceptable. Or prevent others from joining. Also unacceptable. From caillon at redhat.com Fri May 15 19:27:18 2009 From: caillon at redhat.com (Christopher Aillon) Date: Fri, 15 May 2009 12:27:18 -0700 Subject: Proposal for ML conduct In-Reply-To: <4A0D9DD6.6090004@gmail.com> References: <20090514184625.GL3514@localhost.localdomain> <1242332968.6282.85.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20090514204909.GW3514@localhost.localdomain> <4A0D9DD6.6090004@gmail.com> Message-ID: <4A0DC216.9070601@redhat.com> On 05/15/2009 09:52 AM, Lyos Gemini Norezel wrote: > Yes, I'll have a slice of that pie too, thank you. Along with all the > other attendant rights and privileges, of course. If the free speech pie is made with good ingredients, everyone will want it. If the free speech pie is made with rusty nails, cyanide, motor oil and battery acid, I'm sure as hell not going to eat it. > Because I can assure you that I venerate free speech as highly anybody > on this planet venerates their god or > their scripture or their prophet, and any attempt to suppress free > speech is deeply insulting and grossly offensive > to me on a personal level; I feel violated to the very core of my being > which seriously hurts my feelings. > > Whenever I hear free speech being compromised or restricted, or even > heavily criticized, I take that as a grave > personal affront and as a grotesquely insensitive attack on my most > cherished values. There are people who feel violated to the very core of their being which seriously hurts their feelings. Several people have taken great offense recently at ML discussions when they have been personally attacked. A friend was looking for information on Fedora for some reason, google pointed her to a thread, and she now has a sour impression of Fedora based solely on the ML being so vile. It's one thing to say what you want, it's another thing to intentionally hurt others and even more so to intentionally hurt people while the whole world watches. From stickster at gmail.com Fri May 15 20:14:28 2009 From: stickster at gmail.com (Paul W. Frields) Date: Fri, 15 May 2009 16:14:28 -0400 Subject: Release naming In-Reply-To: <20090509124821.GA23445@hansolo.jdub.homelinux.org> References: <20090508230702.GR4080@localhost.localdomain> <20090508232735.GA6221@hovercraft.mobile.ianweller.org> <20090509124821.GA23445@hansolo.jdub.homelinux.org> Message-ID: <20090515201428.GY3432@localhost.localdomain> On Sat, May 09, 2009 at 08:48:21AM -0400, Josh Boyer wrote: > On Fri, May 08, 2009 at 06:27:35PM -0500, Ian Weller wrote: > >On Fri, May 08, 2009 at 07:07:02PM -0400, Paul W. Frields wrote: > >> To give the Artwork team sufficient time for theming the next release, > >> should we start a naming process before the Fedora 11 GA release? > >> > >Yes, please start the ball rolling now. > > I'll get something going on Monday. Bill already reminded me of this. Josh and I exchanged some email this morning, and I've started this wiki page: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Name_suggestions_for_Fedora_12 Josh is going to put together a schedule, which can go directly on that page in the appropriate section. -- Paul W. Frields http://paul.frields.org/ gpg fingerprint: 3DA6 A0AC 6D58 FEC4 0233 5906 ACDB C937 BD11 3717 http://redhat.com/ - - - - http://pfrields.fedorapeople.org/ irc.freenode.net: stickster @ #fedora-docs, #fedora-devel, #fredlug From christoph.wickert at googlemail.com Fri May 15 21:09:17 2009 From: christoph.wickert at googlemail.com (Christoph Wickert) Date: Fri, 15 May 2009 23:09:17 +0200 Subject: Release naming In-Reply-To: <20090515201428.GY3432@localhost.localdomain> References: <20090508230702.GR4080@localhost.localdomain> <20090508232735.GA6221@hovercraft.mobile.ianweller.org> <20090509124821.GA23445@hansolo.jdub.homelinux.org> <20090515201428.GY3432@localhost.localdomain> Message-ID: <1242421757.3495.20.camel@localhost.localdomain> Am Freitag, den 15.05.2009, 16:14 -0400 schrieb Paul W. Frields: > On Sat, May 09, 2009 at 08:48:21AM -0400, Josh Boyer wrote: > > On Fri, May 08, 2009 at 06:27:35PM -0500, Ian Weller wrote: > > >On Fri, May 08, 2009 at 07:07:02PM -0400, Paul W. Frields wrote: > > >> To give the Artwork team sufficient time for theming the next release, > > >> should we start a naming process before the Fedora 11 GA release? > > >> > > >Yes, please start the ball rolling now. > > > > I'll get something going on Monday. Bill already reminded me of this. > > Josh and I exchanged some email this morning, and I've started this > wiki page: > > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Name_suggestions_for_Fedora_12 How is one supposed to point out the link between the names in this table? Example: If I suggest "Diego" and add "is a soccer player", then most likely nobody will realize that Leonidas da Silva or Leonidas Kampantais also were soccer players. Regards, Christoph From luis at tieguy.org Fri May 15 21:43:24 2009 From: luis at tieguy.org (Luis Villa) Date: Fri, 15 May 2009 17:43:24 -0400 Subject: Proposal for ML conduct In-Reply-To: <20090514184625.GL3514@localhost.localdomain> References: <20090514184625.GL3514@localhost.localdomain> Message-ID: <2cb10c440905151443s10fa60ebyae847a036690ddca@mail.gmail.com> If you can't tell the difference between being a free man and being an asshole, a community may not be the right place for you. Or at least, it probably shouldn't be. Or to put it another way: The Fedora community exists to work together towards some common goals. Sometimes, in the name of reaching those goals, you have to be polite and adult towards others so that you can work efficiently and constructively with those other people even when you disagree with them, and work with them in the future after you have stopped disagreeing. This use of words like 'freedom' and 'oppression'?suggests to me that some people think their highest reason for being here is about them. It's not about you, it's about working together to build something bigger and better than you. And if you can't play nicely with others in the name of those bigger and better things, or don't understand why sometimes you have to play nice in order to get to those bigger and better things, then maybe this isn't the right place for you. I'd note that while Seth's point about you not having any 'rights' to be 'free' on fedora's infrastructure is technically correct, I think it's beside the point. If you feel that those 'rights' are really important to you, then whether or not you technically have those rights is less important than the fact that you may not understand the entire point of coming together as a community to create and build software. It's like the right to set someone's house on fire- whether or not you have the legal right to set the house on fire, the fact that you're even talking about it suggests that you're missing the point. Luis On Fri, May 15, 2009 at 12:52 PM, Lyos Gemini Norezel? wrote: > Mike McGrath wrote: > > > > Opression sucks. > Censorship sucks. > Board members spending their time on jerk patrol sucks. > > I know I'm pointing out problems and not solutions, I apologize for that. > > > > -Mike > > > I agree with Mike, and I want to make my own stance on this issue very > clear. > > I have something of a gift... I am able to communicate quickly and > effectively on all levels of discourse. > > >From the severely mentally retarded, to the most intelligent scientists... > I can communicate at their level of discourse, using only the words they'll > understand. > > The consequence of this 'gift', is a severe aversion to words and phrases > meant to "beat around the bush", ie., hint at the proper word, wherein such > words might be offensive. > (Another consequence of such a gift, is an aversion to the 'willfully > ignorant'... ie., those who can learn but refuse to. I find this group > offensive regardless of their intelligence/lack thereof) > > Hence, when talking to the average 'Joe Idiot', cursing is not only > commonplace, but demanded for quick and effective communication. > > I will not censor myself/limit my ability to communicate to suit the P.C. > pussies. > Those who take offence to this can kiss my ass. > > I do not bow to oppression or censorship. > > I am a free man today, I will remain free at all costs. > > Lyos Gemini Norezel > > > > "You see, if religious values are to trump everything in this world as they, > currently, seem to be doing... > well then, I claim free speech as my religion. > > Yes, I'll have a slice of that pie too, thank you. Along with all the other > attendant rights and privileges, of course. > > Because I can assure you that I venerate free speech as highly anybody on > this planet venerates their god or > their scripture or their prophet, and any attempt to suppress free speech is > deeply insulting and grossly offensive > to me on a personal level; I feel violated to the very core of my being > which seriously hurts my feelings. > > Whenever I hear free speech being compromised or restricted, or even heavily > criticized, I take that as a grave > personal affront and as a grotesquely insensitive attack on my most > cherished values. > > Freedom of thought, freedom of speech, freedom of identity... this is my > holy trinity. > > Each one an intrinsic aspect of my God... Freedom, the holiest of holies. > Yes it bloody well is, it is absolutely sacred and inviolable beyond any > negotiation or compromise now and forever... Amen. > > Sorry to be so unreasonable about it, but you know how it is with religion." > -- Pat Condell ( http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8bzTA_D5NpU ) > > _______________________________________________ > fedora-advisory-board mailing list > fedora-advisory-board at redhat.com > http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-advisory-board > > From jwboyer at gmail.com Fri May 15 21:58:20 2009 From: jwboyer at gmail.com (Josh Boyer) Date: Fri, 15 May 2009 17:58:20 -0400 Subject: Release naming In-Reply-To: <1242421757.3495.20.camel@localhost.localdomain> References: <20090508230702.GR4080@localhost.localdomain> <20090508232735.GA6221@hovercraft.mobile.ianweller.org> <20090509124821.GA23445@hansolo.jdub.homelinux.org> <20090515201428.GY3432@localhost.localdomain> <1242421757.3495.20.camel@localhost.localdomain> Message-ID: <20090515215820.GD6310@yoda.jdub.homelinux.org> On Fri, May 15, 2009 at 11:09:17PM +0200, Christoph Wickert wrote: >Am Freitag, den 15.05.2009, 16:14 -0400 schrieb Paul W. Frields: >> On Sat, May 09, 2009 at 08:48:21AM -0400, Josh Boyer wrote: >> > On Fri, May 08, 2009 at 06:27:35PM -0500, Ian Weller wrote: >> > >On Fri, May 08, 2009 at 07:07:02PM -0400, Paul W. Frields wrote: >> > >> To give the Artwork team sufficient time for theming the next release, >> > >> should we start a naming process before the Fedora 11 GA release? >> > >> >> > >Yes, please start the ball rolling now. >> > >> > I'll get something going on Monday. Bill already reminded me of this. >> >> Josh and I exchanged some email this morning, and I've started this >> wiki page: >> >> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Name_suggestions_for_Fedora_12 > >How is one supposed to point out the link between the names in this >table? > >Example: If I suggest "Diego" and add "is a soccer player", then most >likely nobody will realize that Leonidas da Silva or Leonidas Kampantais >also were soccer players. Take a look at how most did it here: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Name_suggestions_for_Fedora_11 just follow the examples that were approved there. Also, I think we'll get the implication simply from the 'is a' rule that what the link is also should apply to the previous release. Humans still do the checking here, so there is some amount of intelligence that can be counted on :). josh From a.mani.cms at gmail.com Fri May 15 22:24:19 2009 From: a.mani.cms at gmail.com (Mani A) Date: Sat, 16 May 2009 03:54:19 +0530 Subject: Proposal for ML conduct Message-ID: <78323d480905151524s319873c0t734d2509af21c944@mail.gmail.com> Jesse Keating wrote: > Nearly, if not, all members of the board are also subscribers to the > list. ?I think we're uniquely suited to gather opinions amongst our > selves (as well as the community via f-a-b and the meeting minutes) > about how we'd like to see the issue resolved. ?Remember, the board is > made of many volunteers as well. I think we should act. Mailing list moderation is definitely needed, but I think a separate group of moderators (including board members and others) should be constituted. Moderation can be a time consuming affair. Among the different lists, fedora-test, freemedia and fedora-doc are usually ok. Some users simply do not follow ML etiquette in Ambassadors, Marketing, Fedora India, fedora doc and more. Moderators should also deal with this. Most low volume lists are usually ok. But for lists like devel and user more than one moderator may be required. Best A. Mani -- A. Mani ASL, CLC, AMS, CMS http://amani.topcities.com From jkeating at redhat.com Fri May 15 23:33:20 2009 From: jkeating at redhat.com (Jesse Keating) Date: Fri, 15 May 2009 16:33:20 -0700 Subject: Proposal for ML conduct In-Reply-To: <2cb10c440905151443s10fa60ebyae847a036690ddca@mail.gmail.com> References: <20090514184625.GL3514@localhost.localdomain> <2cb10c440905151443s10fa60ebyae847a036690ddca@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <1242430400.3024.79.camel@localhost.localdomain> On Fri, 2009-05-15 at 17:43 -0400, Luis Villa wrote: > If you can't tell the difference between being a free man and being an > asshole, a community may not be the right place for you. Or at least, > it probably shouldn't be. Thanks Luis, your entire mail was very well put! -- 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 inode0 at gmail.com Sat May 16 04:37:21 2009 From: inode0 at gmail.com (inode0) Date: Fri, 15 May 2009 23:37:21 -0500 Subject: Fedora Board Recap 2009-04-29 In-Reply-To: <49F8EE3B.1040209@redhat.com> References: <49F8EE3B.1040209@redhat.com> Message-ID: On Wed, Apr 29, 2009 at 7:18 PM, John Poelstra wrote: > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Board/Meetings/2009-04-29 > > == Roll Call == > > * Board Members: Paul Frields, Dimitris Glezos, Bill Nottingham, Spot > Callaway, Matt Domsch, Seth Vidal, Jesse Keating, Chris Tyler, Christopher > Aillon > * Regrets: Harald Hoyer > * Secretary: John Poelstra > > ... snip ... > > == What is Fedora? == > * previously: > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Board/Meetings/2009-04-22#What_is_Fedora.3F > * Paul: > # Have we finished discussing this topic? > # What is the board's role: arbitrate problems or lead with new initiatives? As someone who has been trying to understand the role of the board for a while I'm going to stop being so hard on myself for failing now. Was that a rhetorical question? If the board really does not know the role of the board I think it is a good time to take a deep breath. > Discussion occurred; proposals and decisions have been tabled to the next > meeting. > > ''' BRAINSTORMING FOLLOWS -- THIS DOES NOT REPRESENT OFFICIAL BOARD POLICY > OR DECISION ''' > > * Paul > ** Is the board OK with the current process we are on surrounding defining > Fedora and its goals and purposes? ((have we answered this question?)) As a community member I would ask if the community is OK with the current process you are on surrounding defining Fedora and its goals and purposes? Are you just trying to capture the essence of what Fedora actually is in the new mission statement and related documents? In that case it would seem the community has already defined what Fedora is. Or do you feel you can define it to be what you want it to be irrespective of what it actually is today? > ** Suggests that board next move forward with a prioritized list of goals > for Fedora. To do that we need a foundation for what Fedora is about > ** How do we decide what is most important to Fedora? ((have we answered > this question?)) I don't think you get to decide this?! I suppose you can say X is most important but if X isn't most important to the Fedora community it isn't going to mean anything to say that it is. > ** Could this affect release processes and policies and what drives them? > ** How does the board help guide and lead the project? > * Matt: board should be more than judges, we should lead new initiatives As a community grows the role of a governance body like the board's changes over time or it becomes a hindrance rather than a help to the community. When the project was new, lots needed to be done to get some coherent structure in the community, not to mention getting the community built to start with. Things settle for a while, the community forms into some more or less stable shape. This shape isn't ideal and to resolve structural problems the board sees opportunities to lead new initiatives to reorganize things into a more coherent community structure. Things again settle into a new more or less stable shape. Not seeing the sorts of opportunities for leadership that existed in the earlier periods the board begins wondering what its purpose is. This might just be a good thing indicating that the project is well structured and moving in a positive direction. Sometimes it is best to just let the horse run. Other times the horse needs encouragement and guidance. The great jockeys are the ones that know when to sit back and enjoy the ride. I don't presume to know if this is one of those times, but wouldn't rule it out. > ... snip ... John From poelstra at redhat.com Sat May 16 14:34:54 2009 From: poelstra at redhat.com (John Poelstra) Date: Sat, 16 May 2009 07:34:54 -0700 Subject: Proposal for ML conduct In-Reply-To: References: <20090514184625.GL3514@localhost.localdomain> <1242332968.6282.85.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20090514204909.GW3514@localhost.localdomain> <4A0D9DD6.6090004@gmail.com> Message-ID: <4A0ECF0E.5040405@redhat.com> Seth Vidal said the following on 05/15/2009 09:56 AM Pacific Time: > > > On Fri, 15 May 2009, Lyos Gemini Norezel wrote: > >> >> The consequence of this 'gift', is a severe aversion to words and >> phrases meant to "beat around the bush", ie., hint at >> the proper word, wherein such words might be offensive. >> (Another consequence of such a gift, is an aversion to the 'willfully >> ignorant'... ie., those who can learn but refuse >> to. I find this group offensive regardless of their intelligence/lack >> thereof) >> >> Hence, when talking to the average 'Joe Idiot', cursing is not only >> commonplace, but demanded for quick and effective >> communication. >> >> I will not censor myself/limit my ability to communicate to suit the >> P.C. pussies. >> Those who take offence to this can kiss my ass. >> >> I do not bow to oppression or censorship. >> >> I am a free man today, I will remain free at all costs. > > okay. you can be free. But you have to understand that if you're abusive > or aggressive on fedora mailing lists then your posts will be moderated. > And there have been cases when members of leadership bodies (FESCo and or the Board) have met this criteria. Is it fair to assume that this proposal is to sanction everyone equally regardless of position? John From stickster at gmail.com Sat May 16 14:42:16 2009 From: stickster at gmail.com (Paul Frields) Date: Sat, 16 May 2009 10:42:16 -0400 Subject: Proposal for ML conduct In-Reply-To: <4A0ECF0E.5040405@redhat.com> References: <20090514184625.GL3514@localhost.localdomain> <1242332968.6282.85.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20090514204909.GW3514@localhost.localdomain> <4A0D9DD6.6090004@gmail.com> <4A0ECF0E.5040405@redhat.com> Message-ID: On Sat, May 16, 2009 at 10:34 AM, John Poelstra wrote: > Seth Vidal said the following on 05/15/2009 09:56 AM Pacific Time: >> >> >> On Fri, 15 May 2009, Lyos Gemini Norezel wrote: >> >>> >>> The consequence of this 'gift', is a severe aversion to words and phrases >>> meant to "beat around the bush", ie., hint at >>> the proper word, wherein such words might be offensive. >>> (Another consequence of such a gift, is an aversion to the 'willfully >>> ignorant'... ie., those who can learn but refuse >>> to. I find this group offensive regardless of their intelligence/lack >>> thereof) >>> >>> Hence, when talking to the average 'Joe Idiot', cursing is not only >>> commonplace, but demanded for quick and effective >>> communication. >>> >>> I will not censor myself/limit my ability to communicate to suit the P.C. >>> pussies. >>> Those who take offence to this can kiss my ass. >>> >>> I do not bow to oppression or censorship. >>> >>> I am a free man today, I will remain free at all costs. >> >> okay. you can be free. But you have to understand that if you're abusive >> or aggressive on fedora mailing lists then your posts will be moderated. >> > > And there have been cases when members of leadership bodies (FESCo and or > the Board) have met this criteria. Is it fair to assume that this proposal > is to sanction everyone equally regardless of position? Every single person on the Board should be leading by example, period. Paul From jonstanley at gmail.com Sat May 16 14:41:45 2009 From: jonstanley at gmail.com (Jon Stanley) Date: Sat, 16 May 2009 10:41:45 -0400 Subject: Proposal for ML conduct In-Reply-To: <4A0ECF0E.5040405@redhat.com> References: <20090514184625.GL3514@localhost.localdomain> <1242332968.6282.85.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20090514204909.GW3514@localhost.localdomain> <4A0D9DD6.6090004@gmail.com> <4A0ECF0E.5040405@redhat.com> Message-ID: On Sat, May 16, 2009 at 10:34 AM, John Poelstra wrote: > Is it fair to assume that this proposal is to sanction everyone equally > regardless of position? Absolutely, I see no reason to treat anyone differently because they hold some position - be that @redhat.com, Board, FESCo, FAMsCO, whatever. From stickster at gmail.com Sat May 16 14:45:04 2009 From: stickster at gmail.com (Paul Frields) Date: Sat, 16 May 2009 10:45:04 -0400 Subject: Proposal for ML conduct In-Reply-To: References: <20090514184625.GL3514@localhost.localdomain> <1242332968.6282.85.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20090514204909.GW3514@localhost.localdomain> <4A0D9DD6.6090004@gmail.com> <4A0ECF0E.5040405@redhat.com> Message-ID: On Sat, May 16, 2009 at 10:42 AM, Paul Frields wrote: > On Sat, May 16, 2009 at 10:34 AM, John Poelstra wrote: >> Seth Vidal said the following on 05/15/2009 09:56 AM Pacific Time: >>> >>> >>> On Fri, 15 May 2009, Lyos Gemini Norezel wrote: >>> >>>> >>>> The consequence of this 'gift', is a severe aversion to words and phrases >>>> meant to "beat around the bush", ie., hint at >>>> the proper word, wherein such words might be offensive. >>>> (Another consequence of such a gift, is an aversion to the 'willfully >>>> ignorant'... ie., those who can learn but refuse >>>> to. I find this group offensive regardless of their intelligence/lack >>>> thereof) >>>> >>>> Hence, when talking to the average 'Joe Idiot', cursing is not only >>>> commonplace, but demanded for quick and effective >>>> communication. >>>> >>>> I will not censor myself/limit my ability to communicate to suit the P.C. >>>> pussies. >>>> Those who take offence to this can kiss my ass. >>>> >>>> I do not bow to oppression or censorship. >>>> >>>> I am a free man today, I will remain free at all costs. >>> >>> okay. you can be free. But you have to understand that if you're abusive >>> or aggressive on fedora mailing lists then your posts will be moderated. >>> >> >> And there have been cases when members of leadership bodies (FESCo and or >> the Board) have met this criteria. Is it fair to assume that this proposal >> is to sanction everyone equally regardless of position? > > Every single person on the Board should be leading by example, period. Sorry to reply to myself -- I guess I didn't really answer the question. You are correct, Board members are not somehow exempted, with the caveat that sometimes you have to be less than excellent to an abusive person, solely by non-combatively sanctioning them, in order to provide a more excellent environment for everyone else. Paul From jonstanley at gmail.com Sat May 16 14:45:35 2009 From: jonstanley at gmail.com (Jon Stanley) Date: Sat, 16 May 2009 10:45:35 -0400 Subject: Proposal for ML conduct In-Reply-To: References: <20090514184625.GL3514@localhost.localdomain> <1242332968.6282.85.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20090514204909.GW3514@localhost.localdomain> <4A0D9DD6.6090004@gmail.com> <4A0ECF0E.5040405@redhat.com> Message-ID: On Sat, May 16, 2009 at 10:42 AM, Paul Frields wrote: > Every single person on the Board should be leading by example, period. No doubt. I think that the same is true for ANY leadership body within Fedora. However, we're all human, and can make mistakes or send an emotionally charged email from time to time. I don't see any reason to hold members of the Board or any other body to a higher "standard of implementation" for this policy. If you'd moderate Joe Blow for some infringement, moderate me for the same infringement. From jkeating at redhat.com Sat May 16 15:46:09 2009 From: jkeating at redhat.com (Jesse Keating) Date: Sat, 16 May 2009 08:46:09 -0700 Subject: Proposal for ML conduct In-Reply-To: <4A0ECF0E.5040405@redhat.com> References: <20090514184625.GL3514@localhost.localdomain> <1242332968.6282.85.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20090514204909.GW3514@localhost.localdomain> <4A0D9DD6.6090004@gmail.com> <4A0ECF0E.5040405@redhat.com> Message-ID: <1242488769.3024.86.camel@localhost.localdomain> On Sat, 2009-05-16 at 07:34 -0700, John Poelstra wrote: > > And there have been cases when members of leadership bodies (FESCo and > or the Board) have met this criteria. Is it fair to assume that this > proposal is to sanction everyone equally regardless of position? That is correct. Absolutely nobody is exempt from this policy. Even the monitors must be polite when enacting a moderation. -- 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 tcallawa at redhat.com Sat May 16 15:49:29 2009 From: tcallawa at redhat.com (Tom "spot" Callaway) Date: Sat, 16 May 2009 11:49:29 -0400 Subject: Proposal for ML conduct In-Reply-To: <4A0ECF0E.5040405@redhat.com> References: <20090514184625.GL3514@localhost.localdomain> <1242332968.6282.85.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20090514204909.GW3514@localhost.localdomain> <4A0D9DD6.6090004@gmail.com> <4A0ECF0E.5040405@redhat.com> Message-ID: <4A0EE089.7030608@redhat.com> On 05/16/2009 10:34 AM, John Poelstra wrote: > And there have been cases when members of leadership bodies (FESCo and > or the Board) have met this criteria. Is it fair to assume that this > proposal is to sanction everyone equally regardless of position? Speaking as someone who has arguably failed to meet this criteria once or twice, I would say yes. If anything members of leadership bodies should be held to a higher standard. ~spot From skvidal at fedoraproject.org Sat May 16 23:38:25 2009 From: skvidal at fedoraproject.org (Seth Vidal) Date: Sat, 16 May 2009 19:38:25 -0400 (EDT) Subject: Proposal for ML conduct In-Reply-To: <4A0ECF0E.5040405@redhat.com> References: <20090514184625.GL3514@localhost.localdomain> <1242332968.6282.85.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20090514204909.GW3514@localhost.localdomain> <4A0D9DD6.6090004@gmail.com> <4A0ECF0E.5040405@redhat.com> Message-ID: On Sat, 16 May 2009, John Poelstra wrote: >> >> okay. you can be free. But you have to understand that if you're abusive or >> aggressive on fedora mailing lists then your posts will be moderated. >> > > And there have been cases when members of leadership bodies (FESCo and or the > Board) have met this criteria. Is it fair to assume that this proposal is to > sanction everyone equally regardless of position? In my opinion, of course. -sv From francesco at ephisia.org Sun May 17 09:27:00 2009 From: francesco at ephisia.org (Francesco Ugolini) Date: Sun, 17 May 2009 11:27:00 +0200 Subject: Proposal for ML conduct In-Reply-To: <20090514184625.GL3514@localhost.localdomain> References: <20090514184625.GL3514@localhost.localdomain> Message-ID: On Thu, May 14, 2009 at 8:46 PM, Paul W. Frields wrote: > The proposal: > > To resolve this, the Board appoints one or more Board members or other > Board-approved volunteers to monitor Fedora Project mailing lists. > The Board will warn violators of our "Be excellent to each other" > policy in the form of a one-day list moderation (with notice to the > poster). ?Messages not allowed through will be returned to the poster > with explanation as to why they were not allowed. ?If after one day of > moderation, the violation continues, the case will be brought to the > Board for further action, which could include permanent moderation, > complete removal from the project, or other remedies. > > ?Being excellent to each other == No personal attacks, profanity > ?directed at people or groups, serious threats of violence, or other > ?things seen by the monitor as to be purposefully disrespectful. > I like the idea, and I think it can be considered a good starting point to solve this big (at least from my POV) problem. Maybe instead of Board members (that, like someone suggested could take their time), it could be useful let Board nominating someone else, out the board, to do this. Meanwhile I think this isn't censorship: one of the best tools we have to communicate are out M-Ls, and the only way to keep them working is to control way: at the end people will be free to talk about fedora and everything connected. Regards Francesco Ugolini From frankly3d at gmail.com Sun May 17 09:35:13 2009 From: frankly3d at gmail.com (Frank Murphy) Date: Sun, 17 May 2009 10:35:13 +0100 Subject: Proposal for ML conduct In-Reply-To: References: <20090514184625.GL3514@localhost.localdomain> Message-ID: <4A0FDA51.7090200@gmail.com> Francesco Ugolini wrote: > On Thu, May 14, 2009 at 8:46 PM, Paul W. Frields wrote: > > Meanwhile I think this isn't censorship: one of the best tools we have > to communicate are out M-Ls, and the only way to keep them working is > to control way: For the Mailing Lists in General. If possible: A. Could replies to "Digest" be auto deleted, and reason sent to sender. http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicate/MailingListGuidelines B: Likewise html Because both of above mean, some of the best people to answer User Q's, don't see them, they just delete them. Frank From rjones at redhat.com Sun May 17 09:42:51 2009 From: rjones at redhat.com (Richard W.M. Jones) Date: Sun, 17 May 2009 10:42:51 +0100 Subject: Proposal for ML conduct In-Reply-To: References: <20090514184625.GL3514@localhost.localdomain> Message-ID: <20090517094251.GA14474@amd.home.annexia.org> On Sun, May 17, 2009 at 11:27:00AM +0200, Francesco Ugolini wrote: > Meanwhile I think this isn't censorship: one of the best tools we have > to communicate are out M-Ls, and the only way to keep them working is > to control way: at the end people will be free to talk about fedora > and everything connected. Exactly. Don't worry about 'censorship'. It's only censorship if the government can take away your liberty for saying it. If someone wants to say something about Fedora they can write it on their own blog or web page. Comparing this to censorship denigrates people around the world suffering because of real censorship. Rich. -- Richard Jones, Emerging Technologies, Red Hat http://et.redhat.com/~rjones virt-top is 'top' for virtual machines. Tiny program with many powerful monitoring features, net stats, disk stats, logging, etc. http://et.redhat.com/~rjones/virt-top From jkeating at redhat.com Sun May 17 15:17:24 2009 From: jkeating at redhat.com (Jesse Keating) Date: Sun, 17 May 2009 08:17:24 -0700 Subject: Proposal for ML conduct In-Reply-To: References: <20090514184625.GL3514@localhost.localdomain> Message-ID: <1242573444.3223.22.camel@localhost.localdomain> On Sun, 2009-05-17 at 11:27 +0200, Francesco Ugolini wrote: > > Maybe instead of Board members (that, like someone suggested could > take their time), it could be useful let Board nominating someone > else, out the board, to do this. > We started with a board member mostly because nearly all the board members are also subscribers to the fedora-devel-list in question, and many others, making it easy to casually monitor the list as a party of the daily reading anyway. We did however leave room for other non-board volunteers. -- 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 stickster at gmail.com Sun May 17 23:12:35 2009 From: stickster at gmail.com (Paul W. Frields) Date: Sun, 17 May 2009 19:12:35 -0400 Subject: Proposal for ML conduct In-Reply-To: <1242573444.3223.22.camel@localhost.localdomain> References: <20090514184625.GL3514@localhost.localdomain> <1242573444.3223.22.camel@localhost.localdomain> Message-ID: <20090517231235.GG3521@localhost.localdomain> On Sun, May 17, 2009 at 08:17:24AM -0700, Jesse Keating wrote: > On Sun, 2009-05-17 at 11:27 +0200, Francesco Ugolini wrote: > > > > Maybe instead of Board members (that, like someone suggested could > > take their time), it could be useful let Board nominating someone > > else, out the board, to do this. > > > > We started with a board member mostly because nearly all the board > members are also subscribers to the fedora-devel-list in question, and > many others, making it easy to casually monitor the list as a party of > the daily reading anyway. > > We did however leave room for other non-board volunteers. Also -- and I think this may have been pointed out before -- fedora-devel-list is not the only list where we'd like to encourage more civil or even positive interactions. Our proposal wasn't so specific that a reasonable individual would think other lists are meant to be a free-for-all, but just for the sake of posterity I wanted to point it out. -- Paul W. Frields http://paul.frields.org/ gpg fingerprint: 3DA6 A0AC 6D58 FEC4 0233 5906 ACDB C937 BD11 3717 http://redhat.com/ - - - - http://pfrields.fedorapeople.org/ irc.freenode.net: stickster @ #fedora-docs, #fedora-devel, #fredlug From stickster at gmail.com Sun May 17 23:14:43 2009 From: stickster at gmail.com (Paul W. Frields) Date: Sun, 17 May 2009 19:14:43 -0400 Subject: Fedora Board Recap 2009-04-29 In-Reply-To: References: <49F8EE3B.1040209@redhat.com> Message-ID: <20090517231443.GH3521@localhost.localdomain> On Fri, May 15, 2009 at 11:37:21PM -0500, inode0 wrote: > On Wed, Apr 29, 2009 at 7:18 PM, John Poelstra wrote: > > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Board/Meetings/2009-04-29 > ... snip ... > > > > == What is Fedora? == > > * previously: > > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Board/Meetings/2009-04-22#What_is_Fedora.3F > > * Paul: > > # Have we finished discussing this topic? > > # What is the board's role: arbitrate problems or lead with new initiatives? > > As someone who has been trying to understand the role of the board for > a while I'm going to stop being so hard on myself for failing now. Was > that a rhetorical question? If the board really does not know the role > of the board I think it is a good time to take a deep breath. This was a rhetorical question, posed because the Board's purpose is to advise pieces of the Project. At times we do that in a reactive manner, and at times a more proactive role is called for. It's always a good thing for the Board to look at where it's been and where it's going. That's the reason why this discussion started. > > Discussion occurred; proposals and decisions have been tabled to the next > > meeting. > > > > ''' BRAINSTORMING FOLLOWS -- THIS DOES NOT REPRESENT OFFICIAL BOARD POLICY > > OR DECISION ''' > > > > * Paul > > ** Is the board OK with the current process we are on surrounding defining > > Fedora and its goals and purposes? ((have we answered this question?)) > > As a community member I would ask if the community is OK with the > current process you are on surrounding defining Fedora and its goals > and purposes? > > Are you just trying to capture the essence of what Fedora actually is > in the new mission statement and related documents? In that case it > would seem the community has already defined what Fedora is. Or do you > feel you can define it to be what you want it to be irrespective of > what it actually is today? The first, definitely! It is impossible and downright silly to simply impose priorities on a community of contributors. Instead, we are trying to judge, based on what engages the community, and what the community does effectively, to help make a better statement of priorities. That way, when new members of the community join, they have a better idea how we are positioned in the panoply of free software projects. As an Ambassador, I'm sure you have seen that new members of the Project are sometimes not aware of our goals and priorities, and we're trying to improve that situation. We can be very flexible as a community in terms of trying new things, but there is also a need to capture institutional knowledge in a way that helps new contributors. We've had not one but numerous instances of other groups asking the Board to clarify this. It's clear they are looking to the Board for leadership, and again, we're trying to provide it. That requires discussion and thought, and you see that reflected in the notes I hope. > > ** Suggests that board next move forward with a prioritized list of goals > > for Fedora. To do that we need a foundation for what Fedora is about > > ** How do we decide what is most important to Fedora? ((have we answered > > this question?)) > > I don't think you get to decide this?! I suppose you can say X is most > important but if X isn't most important to the Fedora community it > isn't going to mean anything to say that it is. No one's deciding about direction for the purpose of foisting it on the community, but I admit that statement in the minutes is a pretty loose translation of what we actually talked about. We've been trying to transcribe more carefully but when conversation gets very involved it can be hard to capture all the nuances. A better way of stating it would be that we talked about the need to pursue ways of moving Fedora forward. And to do that, we can't just go in a million directions and hope one ends up working. Even a community as large and thriving as Fedora doesn't have unlimited people and time. > > ** Could this affect release processes and policies and what drives them? > > ** How does the board help guide and lead the project? > > * Matt: board should be more than judges, we should lead new initiatives > > As a community grows the role of a governance body like the board's > changes over time or it becomes a hindrance rather than a help to the > community. > > When the project was new, lots needed to be done to get some coherent > structure in the community, not to mention getting the community built > to start with. Things settle for a while, the community forms into > some more or less stable shape. This shape isn't ideal and to resolve > structural problems the board sees opportunities to lead new > initiatives to reorganize things into a more coherent community > structure. Things again settle into a new more or less stable shape. > Not seeing the sorts of opportunities for leadership that existed in > the earlier periods the board begins wondering what its purpose is. > This might just be a good thing indicating that the project is well > structured and moving in a positive direction. I don't think this is a case where the Board is doubting whether it has a purpose, it's one of deciding how to spend our time and agenda. > Sometimes it is best to just let the horse run. Other times the horse > needs encouragement and guidance. The great jockeys are the ones that > know when to sit back and enjoy the ride. > > I don't presume to know if this is one of those times, but wouldn't > rule it out. We'll try not to do that either, thanks for taking the time to write this. -- Paul W. Frields http://paul.frields.org/ gpg fingerprint: 3DA6 A0AC 6D58 FEC4 0233 5906 ACDB C937 BD11 3717 http://redhat.com/ - - - - http://pfrields.fedorapeople.org/ irc.freenode.net: stickster @ #fedora-docs, #fedora-devel, #fredlug From kevin at tummy.com Mon May 18 03:33:44 2009 From: kevin at tummy.com (Kevin Fenzi) Date: Sun, 17 May 2009 21:33:44 -0600 Subject: Proposal for ML conduct In-Reply-To: <4A0FDA51.7090200@gmail.com> References: <20090514184625.GL3514@localhost.localdomain> <4A0FDA51.7090200@gmail.com> Message-ID: <20090517213344.52ec8d50@ohm.scrye.com> On Sun, 17 May 2009 10:35:13 +0100 Frank Murphy wrote: > Francesco Ugolini wrote: > > On Thu, May 14, 2009 at 8:46 PM, Paul W. Frields > > wrote: > > Meanwhile I think this isn't censorship: one of the best tools we > > have to communicate are out M-Ls, and the only way to keep them > > working is to control way: > > For the Mailing Lists in General. > If possible: > A. Could replies to "Digest" be auto deleted, and reason sent to > sender. > http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Communicate/MailingListGuidelines This could be possible done via the mailman Spam filter rules. At least for posts that don't change the subject, ie: Re: Digest, Vol* > B: Likewise html This could be done via mailman's content filtering settings. > Because both of above mean, some of the best people to answer User > Q's, don't see them, they just delete them. On fedora-list for example, yeah. fedora-devel doesn't seem to have nearly as much of this... > > Frank > kevin -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: signature.asc Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 198 bytes Desc: not available URL: From markmc at redhat.com Mon May 18 08:24:09 2009 From: markmc at redhat.com (Mark McLoughlin) Date: Mon, 18 May 2009 09:24:09 +0100 Subject: Proposal for ML conduct In-Reply-To: References: <20090514184625.GL3514@localhost.localdomain> <1242332968.6282.85.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20090514204909.GW3514@localhost.localdomain> <1242389292.25932.16.camel@blaa> Message-ID: <1242635049.9081.53.camel@blaa> On Fri, 2009-05-15 at 09:10 -0400, Seth Vidal wrote: > > How can we allow the poster to defend themselves publicly? > > They have no right to a public defense - this isn't a court of law, we are > not a gov't. There are no rights here. I never said anything about rights. I'm suggesting openness for pragmatic reasons. Suppose Irritable Ivan is complaining about the shade of blue used in the F11 desktop background and (jokingly, he thinks) suggests the artist in question takes a colour-blindness test. A moderator, Dutiful Don, privately emails Irritable Ivan and politely explains that Ivan is out of line and has been placed on moderation for 24 hours. Ivan, now verging on a apoplexy, replies to Don that the comment was merely a joke and that Don should get a life. An exchange of email ensues ending with Ivan accusing Don of having borne a grudge against him since he rejected one of Don's patches three years ago. Dutiful Don realises things are getting out of hand and stops the exchange. Still raging, Irritable Ivan posts to planet.fedoraproject.org how he has had enough of Dutiful Don, how Fedora is ruined by cliquey cabals and how it's all a conspiracy against members of his religion. Don quickly consults with other moderators and removes Ivan from planet.fedoraproject.org. Sympathetic Sarah sees how the post has been removed and emails fedora-devel-list about how Ivan has been treated unfairly. The whole thing escalates and escalates. ... My suggestion is that if Don's email to Ivan cc-ed a public list, then Ivan would at least feel he has an opportunity to reply and gain support from others. If Ivan was truly out of line, other moderators can back Don up. If Don got it wrong, the whole thing can be defused quickly. Also, since it's all public and archived, accusations of conspiracy wouldn't hold much weight. Cc-ing fedora-devel-list would be a complete nightmare, so perhaps fedora-moderators does make some sense. Cheers, Mark. From frankly3d at gmail.com Mon May 18 08:49:45 2009 From: frankly3d at gmail.com (Frank Murphy (Frankly3d)) Date: Mon, 18 May 2009 09:49:45 +0100 Subject: Proposal for ML conduct In-Reply-To: <1242635049.9081.53.camel@blaa> References: <20090514184625.GL3514@localhost.localdomain> <1242332968.6282.85.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20090514204909.GW3514@localhost.localdomain> <1242389292.25932.16.camel@blaa> <1242635049.9081.53.camel@blaa> Message-ID: <4A112129.8090603@gmail.com> Mark McLoughlin wrote: > On Fri, 2009-05-15 at 09:10 -0400, Seth Vidal wrote: > > > > My suggestion is that if Don's email to Ivan cc-ed a public list, then > Ivan would at least feel he has an opportunity to reply and gain support > from others. If Ivan was truly out of line, other moderators can back > Don up. If Don got it wrong, the whole thing can be defused quickly. > > Also, since it's all public and archived, accusations of conspiracy > wouldn't hold much weight. That makes sence, keeping it public. > > Cc-ing fedora-devel-list would be a complete nightmare, so perhaps > fedora-moderators does make some sense. > But, how many would sign up to fedora-moderators. There is still a lot of mumbling (over time) about missed Announcements. Despite a list for it. Frank -- msn: frankly3d skype: frankly3d Mailing-List Reply to: Mailing-List Still Learning, Unicode where possible From lyos.gemininorezel at gmail.com Mon May 18 13:23:23 2009 From: lyos.gemininorezel at gmail.com (Lyos Gemini Norezel) Date: Mon, 18 May 2009 09:23:23 -0400 Subject: Proposal for ML conduct In-Reply-To: <4A0DC216.9070601@redhat.com> References: <20090514184625.GL3514@localhost.localdomain> <1242332968.6282.85.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20090514204909.GW3514@localhost.localdomain> <4A0D9DD6.6090004@gmail.com> <4A0DC216.9070601@redhat.com> Message-ID: <4A11614B.4080601@gmail.com> Christopher Aillon wrote: > On 05/15/2009 09:52 AM, Lyos Gemini Norezel wrote: > > If the free speech pie is made with good ingredients, everyone will > want it. If the free speech pie is made with rusty nails, cyanide, > motor oil and battery acid, I'm sure as hell not going to eat it. > So all you want is the good and not the bad? *"They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety." - Benjamin Franklin* If you would give up your free speech pie, because of vitriol and offensive people, then you do not deserve free speech. > > There are people who feel violated to the very core of their being > which seriously hurts their feelings. Several people have taken great > offense recently at ML discussions when they have been personally > attacked. A friend was looking for information on Fedora for some > reason, google pointed her to a thread, and she now has a sour > impression of Fedora based solely on the ML being so vile. It's one > thing to say what you want, it's another thing to intentionally hurt > others and even more so to intentionally hurt people while the whole > world watches. Here in the US, at least, you do not have a right /*not to be offended*/. If you cannot (or your friend cannot) handle this... then perhaps you (or your friend) do not deserve free speech. Lyos Gemini Norezel -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: Lyos_GeminiNorezel.vcf Type: text/x-vcard Size: 428 bytes Desc: not available URL: From stickster at gmail.com Mon May 18 13:42:18 2009 From: stickster at gmail.com (Paul W. Frields) Date: Mon, 18 May 2009 09:42:18 -0400 Subject: Proposal for ML conduct In-Reply-To: <4A11614B.4080601@gmail.com> References: <20090514184625.GL3514@localhost.localdomain> <1242332968.6282.85.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20090514204909.GW3514@localhost.localdomain> <4A0D9DD6.6090004@gmail.com> <4A0DC216.9070601@redhat.com> <4A11614B.4080601@gmail.com> Message-ID: <20090518134218.GE3634@localhost.localdomain> On Mon, May 18, 2009 at 09:23:23AM -0400, Lyos Gemini Norezel wrote: > Christopher Aillon wrote: > > On 05/15/2009 09:52 AM, Lyos Gemini Norezel wrote: > > If the free speech pie is made with good ingredients, everyone will want > it. If the free speech pie is made with rusty nails, cyanide, motor oil > and battery acid, I'm sure as hell not going to eat it. > > > > So all you want is the good and not the bad? > > "They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, > deserve neither liberty nor safety." - Benjamin Franklin > > If you would give up your free speech pie, because of vitriol and offensive > people, then you do not deserve free speech. > > > There are people who feel violated to the very core of their being which > seriously hurts their feelings. Several people have taken great offense > recently at ML discussions when they have been personally attacked. A > friend was looking for information on Fedora for some reason, google > pointed her to a thread, and she now has a sour impression of Fedora based > solely on the ML being so vile. It's one thing to say what you want, it's > another thing to intentionally hurt others and even more so to > intentionally hurt people while the whole world watches. > > > Here in the US, at least, you do not have a right not to be offended. If you > cannot (or your friend cannot) handle this... then perhaps you (or your friend) > do not deserve free speech. Let me see if I can clarify a bit here. Your rights in the USA are meant to be guarantees against the *government* stopping you from speaking. Not private entities. Imagine the Fedora Project as more like a bar. Sometimes conversation at the bar does get a little boisterous. But if a patron really gets obnoxious, the bar may ask her to cool it, and if she doesn't, throw her out. Neither of those remedies is encroaching on the patron's rights. The bar is not abridging the patron's right to free speech by refusing to allow her to exercise it on their premises. The same situation goes for 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 From lyos.gemininorezel at gmail.com Mon May 18 13:55:11 2009 From: lyos.gemininorezel at gmail.com (Lyos Gemini Norezel) Date: Mon, 18 May 2009 09:55:11 -0400 Subject: Proposal for ML conduct In-Reply-To: <2cb10c440905151443s10fa60ebyae847a036690ddca@mail.gmail.com> References: <20090514184625.GL3514@localhost.localdomain> <2cb10c440905151443s10fa60ebyae847a036690ddca@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <4A1168BF.7070809@gmail.com> Luis Villa wrote: > If you can't tell the difference between being a free man and being an > asshole, a community may not be the right place for you. Or at least, > it probably shouldn't be. > Ah... you have the right to call me an asshole, just as I have the right to call you a fool, and neither of us has the right to not be offended. As Ben Franklin said: "*They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety." * If you would be so foolish as to wish the removal of vitriol and "offensive" language... then you _/*do not deserve*/_ to live in a country that has free speech. > Or to put it another way: The Fedora community exists to work together > towards some common goals. Sometimes, in the name of reaching those > goals, you have to be polite and adult towards others so that you can > work efficiently and constructively with those other people even when > you disagree with them, and work with them in the future after you > have stopped disagreeing. This use of words like 'freedom' and > 'oppression' suggests to me that some people think their highest > reason for being here is about them. It's not about you, it's about > working together to build something bigger and better than you. And if > you can't play nicely with others in the name of those bigger and > better things, or don't understand why sometimes you have to play nice > in order to get to those bigger and better things, then maybe this > isn't the right place for you. > Let me put this in a way you might understand... You called me an asshole earlier... and I defended your right to do so. Yet, if you were to have your way with the ML Conduct rules, you would have been moderated on this list. Sometimes the best and most effective means of communication *IS* "offensive language". Both "playing nice" and vitriol have their place in such communities. > I'd note that while Seth's point about you not having any 'rights' to > be 'free' on fedora's infrastructure is technically correct, I think > it's beside the point. If you feel that those 'rights' are really > important to you, then whether or not you technically have those > rights is less important than the fact that you may not understand the > entire point of coming together as a community to create and build > software. It's like the right to set someone's house on fire- whether > or not you have the legal right to set the house on fire, the fact > that you're even talking about it suggests that you're missing the > point. > > Luis For a community to remain open and free, regardless of intention or reason for the group to exist, free speech _/*must*/_ reign supreme. Without it, ideas may never come to light, people may be removed, and the entire project would collapse. Even vitriol can be constructive at times. Lyos Gemini Norezel -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: Lyos_GeminiNorezel.vcf Type: text/x-vcard Size: 428 bytes Desc: not available URL: From frankly3d at gmail.com Mon May 18 14:02:59 2009 From: frankly3d at gmail.com (Frank Murphy (Frankly3d)) Date: Mon, 18 May 2009 15:02:59 +0100 Subject: Proposal for ML conduct In-Reply-To: <4A1168BF.7070809@gmail.com> References: <20090514184625.GL3514@localhost.localdomain> <2cb10c440905151443s10fa60ebyae847a036690ddca@mail.gmail.com> <4A1168BF.7070809@gmail.com> Message-ID: <4A116A93.10000@gmail.com> You actually dont't have the right to call each other names. You have the right to free speech, but not to attack a person figurativly\literally. I'm on is another public list, where someone was sued for calling someone else a fool. Treat free speech as a privilege, if that is done, then truly it is a right. If not then it is an abuse. Frank -- msn: frankly3d skype: frankly3d Mailing-List Reply to: Mailing-List Still Learning, Unicode where possible From lyos.gemininorezel at gmail.com Mon May 18 14:17:17 2009 From: lyos.gemininorezel at gmail.com (Lyos Gemini Norezel) Date: Mon, 18 May 2009 10:17:17 -0400 Subject: Proposal for ML conduct In-Reply-To: <20090518134218.GE3634@localhost.localdomain> References: <20090514184625.GL3514@localhost.localdomain> <1242332968.6282.85.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20090514204909.GW3514@localhost.localdomain> <4A0D9DD6.6090004@gmail.com> <4A0DC216.9070601@redhat.com> <4A11614B.4080601@gmail.com> <20090518134218.GE3634@localhost.localdomain> Message-ID: <4A116DED.1030909@gmail.com> Paul W. Frields wrote: > On Mon, May 18, 2009 at 09:23:23AM -0400, Lyos Gemini Norezel wrote: > > > Let me see if I can clarify a bit here. Your rights in the USA are > meant to be guarantees against the *government* stopping you from > speaking. Not private entities. > True. > Imagine the Fedora Project as more like a bar. Sometimes conversation > at the bar does get a little boisterous. But if a patron really gets > obnoxious, the bar may ask her to cool it, and if she doesn't, throw > her out. Neither of those remedies is encroaching on the patron's > rights. The bar is not abridging the patron's right to free speech by > refusing to allow her to exercise it on their premises. The same > situation goes for Fedora. > Ah... but there is a major difference between a bar and a community of people that's meant to be _/*"Free and Open"*/_. Without vitriol and obnoxious people, some of the best ideas would be lost forever. How many times has the obnoxious person pointed out "Hey asshole... use Google!"? Without such vitriol... many lists would be drowning under the flood of people asking the same damn questions over and over. How many ideas would be lost in said flood? You see utopia... I see a troll-filled hell, without the obnoxious making short work of said hell. Lyos Gemini Norezel -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: Lyos_GeminiNorezel.vcf Type: text/x-vcard Size: 428 bytes Desc: not available URL: From inode0 at gmail.com Mon May 18 14:35:45 2009 From: inode0 at gmail.com (inode0) Date: Mon, 18 May 2009 09:35:45 -0500 Subject: Proposal for ML conduct In-Reply-To: <4A116DED.1030909@gmail.com> References: <20090514184625.GL3514@localhost.localdomain> <1242332968.6282.85.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20090514204909.GW3514@localhost.localdomain> <4A0D9DD6.6090004@gmail.com> <4A0DC216.9070601@redhat.com> <4A11614B.4080601@gmail.com> <20090518134218.GE3634@localhost.localdomain> <4A116DED.1030909@gmail.com> Message-ID: On Mon, May 18, 2009 at 9:17 AM, Lyos Gemini Norezel wrote: > Paul W. Frields wrote: > > Let me see if I can clarify a bit here. Your rights in the USA are > meant to be guarantees against the *government* stopping you from > speaking. Not private entities. > > True. Only to a point. Your natural rights, which are inalienable and universal, including liberty are not conferred on you by any government. The Fedora Project can quash your speech if it so chooses without violating your legal rights in the USA, but one can still argue with some merit that it violates your natural rights. Regardless, I think we should let this effort run its course for a while and see how it works out. There is no certainty anyone is going to be prevented from making any point they desire to make, they might be asked to make their points in a more civil and respectful way. There is certainly some cost to going down this road, but there is some cost in not doing anything as well. We have a board to try to negotiate these sorts of murky waters on our behalf, and I'm sure if it doesn't work out well appropriate remedial action will be taken. John From jonrob at fedoraproject.org Mon May 18 14:40:28 2009 From: jonrob at fedoraproject.org (Jonathan Roberts) Date: Mon, 18 May 2009 15:40:28 +0100 Subject: Proposal for ML conduct In-Reply-To: <4A116DED.1030909@gmail.com> References: <20090514184625.GL3514@localhost.localdomain> <1242332968.6282.85.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20090514204909.GW3514@localhost.localdomain> <4A0D9DD6.6090004@gmail.com> <4A0DC216.9070601@redhat.com> <4A11614B.4080601@gmail.com> <20090518134218.GE3634@localhost.localdomain> <4A116DED.1030909@gmail.com> Message-ID: <507738ef0905180740h584ee805jb8d0508ff06ff279@mail.gmail.com> 2009/5/18 Lyos Gemini Norezel : > Paul W. Frields wrote: > > On Mon, May 18, 2009 at 09:23:23AM -0400, Lyos Gemini Norezel wrote: > > > Let me see if I can clarify a bit here. Your rights in the USA are > meant to be guarantees against the *government* stopping you from > speaking. Not private entities. > > > True. > > Imagine the Fedora Project as more like a bar. Sometimes conversation > at the bar does get a little boisterous. But if a patron really gets > obnoxious, the bar may ask her to cool it, and if she doesn't, throw > her out. Neither of those remedies is encroaching on the patron's > rights. The bar is not abridging the patron's right to free speech by > refusing to allow her to exercise it on their premises. The same > situation goes for Fedora. > > > Ah... but there is a major difference between a bar and a community of > people that's meant to be > "Free and Open". > > Without vitriol and obnoxious people, some of the best ideas would be lost > forever. Right, but there are a million and one different ways to say something to someone. You can say "Hey *******, I think you're a ******* ******, and you're ideas are complete *********" and the chances are that person is not going to be very responsive to whatever change you're proposing. Or you can say, "Hey, I really like the basic idea of what you're working on, but think it would be better if we took it in this direction instead, because a) .... b) ...." and then chances are that person would be far more responsive, engage in real, constructive dialogue, and something might actually be achieved. The first of these two is not constructive, and actively prevents others from joining in and progressing the project. In anyway, I'm going to go back to lurking for another month or so until the summer arrives... Kind regards to all, Jon From stickster at gmail.com Mon May 18 14:43:10 2009 From: stickster at gmail.com (Paul W. Frields) Date: Mon, 18 May 2009 10:43:10 -0400 Subject: Proposal for ML conduct In-Reply-To: <4A116DED.1030909@gmail.com> References: <20090514184625.GL3514@localhost.localdomain> <1242332968.6282.85.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20090514204909.GW3514@localhost.localdomain> <4A0D9DD6.6090004@gmail.com> <4A0DC216.9070601@redhat.com> <4A11614B.4080601@gmail.com> <20090518134218.GE3634@localhost.localdomain> <4A116DED.1030909@gmail.com> Message-ID: <20090518144310.GH3634@localhost.localdomain> On Mon, May 18, 2009 at 10:17:17AM -0400, Lyos Gemini Norezel wrote: > Paul W. Frields wrote: > > On Mon, May 18, 2009 at 09:23:23AM -0400, Lyos Gemini Norezel wrote: > > Let me see if I can clarify a bit here. Your rights in the USA are > meant to be guarantees against the *government* stopping you from > speaking. Not private entities. > > True. > > Imagine the Fedora Project as more like a bar. Sometimes conversation > at the bar does get a little boisterous. But if a patron really gets > obnoxious, the bar may ask her to cool it, and if she doesn't, throw > her out. Neither of those remedies is encroaching on the patron's > rights. The bar is not abridging the patron's right to free speech by > refusing to allow her to exercise it on their premises. The same > situation goes for Fedora. > > Ah... but there is a major difference between a bar and a community > of people that's meant to be "Free and Open". I don't think membership in a free and open project has to require a license to be rude. We as a community don't allow everything to be in our free and open project. For example, we don't allow bits in that don't meet our licensing requirements. One could think of that as requiring code that behaves excellently to its recipients, I suppose. > Without vitriol and obnoxious people, some of the best ideas would > be lost forever. I suppose there is some marginal loss we might suffer as a result of requiring people to be excellent to each other. I suppose we're also missing out on some arguably good applications (for some value of "good") by requiring that everything we carry in Fedora meet our licensing requirements. Speaking only for myself, I think the loss is acceptable, and judging by the reaction thus far, my suspicion is the majority of our contributor community does too. > How many times has the obnoxious person pointed out "Hey > asshole... use Google! "? Without such vitriol... many lists would > be drowning under the flood of people asking the same damn questions > over and over. There is nothing in the situation you describe that requires that level of useless vitriol. Rewrite the same advice in a helpful and friendly way, and it achieves the same effect without lowering the tone of the 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 From luis.villa at gmail.com Mon May 18 14:45:16 2009 From: luis.villa at gmail.com (Luis Villa) Date: Mon, 18 May 2009 10:45:16 -0400 Subject: Proposal for ML conduct In-Reply-To: <507738ef0905180740h584ee805jb8d0508ff06ff279@mail.gmail.com> References: <20090514184625.GL3514@localhost.localdomain> <1242332968.6282.85.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20090514204909.GW3514@localhost.localdomain> <4A0D9DD6.6090004@gmail.com> <4A0DC216.9070601@redhat.com> <4A11614B.4080601@gmail.com> <20090518134218.GE3634@localhost.localdomain> <4A116DED.1030909@gmail.com> <507738ef0905180740h584ee805jb8d0508ff06ff279@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <2cb10c440905180745m28cb8c8fs89b30c0755c1fad9@mail.gmail.com> On Mon, May 18, 2009 at 10:40 AM, Jonathan Roberts wrote: > 2009/5/18 Lyos Gemini Norezel : >> Without vitriol and obnoxious people, some of the best ideas would be lost >> forever. And with vitriol and obnoxious people, some of the best people (and their ideas) are lost forever as well. This is a no-win situation, but thousands of years of social experience suggest to us that on balance you lose more by tolerating vitriol than by not tolerating it. > Right, but there are a million and one different ways to say something > to someone. > > You can say "Hey *******, I think you're a ******* ******, and you're > ideas are complete *********" and the chances are that person is not > going to be very responsive to whatever change you're proposing. > > Or you can say, "Hey, I really like the basic idea of what you're > working on, but think it would be better if we took it in this > direction instead, because a) .... b) ...." and then chances are that > person would be far more responsive, engage in real, constructive > dialogue, and something might actually be achieved. > > The first of these two is not constructive, and actively prevents > others from joining in and progressing the project. Exactly. Luis From luis.villa at gmail.com Mon May 18 14:46:59 2009 From: luis.villa at gmail.com (Luis Villa) Date: Mon, 18 May 2009 10:46:59 -0400 Subject: Proposal for ML conduct In-Reply-To: References: <20090514184625.GL3514@localhost.localdomain> <1242332968.6282.85.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20090514204909.GW3514@localhost.localdomain> <4A0D9DD6.6090004@gmail.com> <4A0DC216.9070601@redhat.com> <4A11614B.4080601@gmail.com> <20090518134218.GE3634@localhost.localdomain> <4A116DED.1030909@gmail.com> Message-ID: <2cb10c440905180746r25e21cebj5a4dbeb54a42af66@mail.gmail.com> On Mon, May 18, 2009 at 10:35 AM, inode0 wrote: > On Mon, May 18, 2009 at 9:17 AM, Lyos Gemini Norezel > wrote: >> Paul W. Frields wrote: >> >> Let me see if I can clarify a bit here. ?Your rights in the USA are >> meant to be guarantees against the *government* stopping you from >> speaking. ?Not private entities. >> >> True. > > Only to a point. Your natural rights, which are inalienable and > universal, including liberty are not conferred on you by any > government. The Fedora Project can quash your speech if it so chooses > without violating your legal rights in the USA, but one can still > argue with some merit that it violates your natural rights. You have no natural rights to enter someone else's creative community and speak as you please, any more than you have natural rights to enter someone's home and speak as you please. (Really, don't get me started on this topic; I've got a degree in political philosophy and am not afraid to use it ;) We have built/are building this community in order to get things done; no one has any 'right' on any level to disrupt that, and we should be very skeptical of anyone who thinks they do. Luis From skvidal at fedoraproject.org Mon May 18 14:46:47 2009 From: skvidal at fedoraproject.org (Seth Vidal) Date: Mon, 18 May 2009 10:46:47 -0400 (EDT) Subject: Proposal for ML conduct In-Reply-To: <20090518144310.GH3634@localhost.localdomain> References: <20090514184625.GL3514@localhost.localdomain> <1242332968.6282.85.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20090514204909.GW3514@localhost.localdomain> <4A0D9DD6.6090004@gmail.com> <4A0DC216.9070601@redhat.com> <4A11614B.4080601@gmail.com> <20090518134218.GE3634@localhost.localdomain> <4A116DED.1030909@gmail.com> <20090518144310.GH3634@localhost.localdomain> Message-ID: On Mon, 18 May 2009, Paul W. Frields wrote: >> How many times has the obnoxious person pointed out "Hey >> asshole... use Google! "? Without such vitriol... many lists would >> be drowning under the flood of people asking the same damn questions >> over and over. > > There is nothing in the situation you describe that requires that > level of useless vitriol. Rewrite the same advice in a helpful and > friendly way, and it achieves the same effect without lowering the > tone of the discussion. > And just to clear something up. I answer the same question over and over again, often. I do not think a moderator will be alarmed if, in response to the same question over and over, a form-response is pasted in and/or a single link is left as an answer to the question. It's a far cry from being rude and abusive to someone to simply answering the question quickly and dispassionately. There are times when someone misinterprets efficiency/expediency as rudeness but I don't think that's what we're talking about for moderation at all. -sv From jwboyer at gmail.com Mon May 18 14:52:14 2009 From: jwboyer at gmail.com (Josh Boyer) Date: Mon, 18 May 2009 10:52:14 -0400 Subject: F12 Naming: Cambridge -> Leonidas -> ? Message-ID: <20090518145214.GA2964@yoda.jdub.homelinux.org> Hi All, It's that time of year again. Time to start the naming process for the next Fedora release. To recap on the rules: 1) must have some link to Leonidas More specifically, the link should be Leonidas is a and is a Where is the same for both 2) The link between and Leonidas cannot be the same as between Cambridge and Leonidas. That link was "was a ship in the Union navy". We're repeating the collection process we used for Fedora 11 this time. Contributors wishing to make a suggestion are asked to go to the F11 naming wiki page, and add an entry to the suggestion table found there: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Name_suggestions_for_Fedora_12 The naming submissions are open starting now until May 23. The rest of the schedule is outlined on the wiki page. So, put on your thinking caps and come up with some really good suggestions! Happy naming. josh From kwade at redhat.com Mon May 18 14:59:18 2009 From: kwade at redhat.com (Karsten Wade) Date: Mon, 18 May 2009 07:59:18 -0700 Subject: Proposal for ML conduct In-Reply-To: <604aa7910905150355i68aacde7u25fd63ecbd79c76a@mail.gmail.com> References: <20090514184625.GL3514@localhost.localdomain> <1242332968.6282.85.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20090514204909.GW3514@localhost.localdomain> <1242338505.3024.3.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20090515000612.GA18678@hansolo.jdub.homelinux.org> <604aa7910905150355i68aacde7u25fd63ecbd79c76a@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <20090518145918.GA26966@calliope.phig.org> On Fri, May 15, 2009 at 02:55:04AM -0800, Jeff Spaleta wrote: > On Thu, May 14, 2009 at 4:06 PM, Josh Boyer wrote: > > Do you have examples of what the Board considers unacceptable? ?You don't need > > to highlight specific people, but I'm curious what has caused people to ask > > the Board to step in. > > > If there is a need to point to specific behaviour without wanted to > call individuals out, I'm more than happy to assume the role of "bad > actor" in a staged, scripted interaction so that people can point to > me specifically as an example of wrong action. Shut up, you suck! That is the worst idea this list has *ever* seen. Grow up! Get a life! Puhleez ... - Karsten (How was that?) -- Karsten 'quaid' Wade, Community Gardener http://quaid.fedorapeople.org AD0E0C41 -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: not available URL: From stickster at gmail.com Mon May 18 15:11:40 2009 From: stickster at gmail.com (Paul W. Frields) Date: Mon, 18 May 2009 11:11:40 -0400 Subject: Proposal for ML conduct In-Reply-To: References: <1242332968.6282.85.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20090514204909.GW3514@localhost.localdomain> <4A0D9DD6.6090004@gmail.com> <4A0DC216.9070601@redhat.com> <4A11614B.4080601@gmail.com> <20090518134218.GE3634@localhost.localdomain> <4A116DED.1030909@gmail.com> <20090518144310.GH3634@localhost.localdomain> Message-ID: <20090518151140.GK3634@localhost.localdomain> On Mon, May 18, 2009 at 10:46:47AM -0400, Seth Vidal wrote: > On Mon, 18 May 2009, Paul W. Frields wrote: > >>> How many times has the obnoxious person pointed out "Hey >>> asshole... use Google! "? Without such vitriol... many lists would >>> be drowning under the flood of people asking the same damn questions >>> over and over. >> >> There is nothing in the situation you describe that requires that >> level of useless vitriol. Rewrite the same advice in a helpful and >> friendly way, and it achieves the same effect without lowering the >> tone of the discussion. >> > > And just to clear something up. > > I answer the same question over and over again, often. > > I do not think a moderator will be alarmed if, in response to the same > question over and over, a form-response is pasted in and/or a single link > is left as an answer to the question. > > It's a far cry from being rude and abusive to someone to simply answering > the question quickly and dispassionately. > > There are times when someone misinterprets efficiency/expediency as > rudeness but I don't think that's what we're talking about for moderation > at all. Terse is not the same as rude, I agree, and we're not trying to moderate terseness. However, if you're going to be copy/pasting an answer like that, why not just make the form-response slightly less terse to keep it more friendly? (Or save it for the link's landing page.) Unless the "form-response" you're referring to is manually typing the same thing out of personal habit, in which case I'd say it's not very efficient. -- Paul W. Frields http://paul.frields.org/ gpg fingerprint: 3DA6 A0AC 6D58 FEC4 0233 5906 ACDB C937 BD11 3717 http://redhat.com/ - - - - http://pfrields.fedorapeople.org/ irc.freenode.net: stickster @ #fedora-docs, #fedora-devel, #fredlug From skvidal at fedoraproject.org Mon May 18 15:17:17 2009 From: skvidal at fedoraproject.org (Seth Vidal) Date: Mon, 18 May 2009 11:17:17 -0400 (EDT) Subject: Proposal for ML conduct In-Reply-To: <20090518151140.GK3634@localhost.localdomain> References: <1242332968.6282.85.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20090514204909.GW3514@localhost.localdomain> <4A0D9DD6.6090004@gmail.com> <4A0DC216.9070601@redhat.com> <4A11614B.4080601@gmail.com> <20090518134218.GE3634@localhost.localdomain> <4A116DED.1030909@gmail.com> <20090518144310.GH3634@localhost.localdomain> <20090518151140.GK3634@localhost.localdomain> Message-ID: On Mon, 18 May 2009, Paul W. Frields wrote: > Terse is not the same as rude, I agree, and we're not trying to > moderate terseness. However, if you're going to be copy/pasting an > answer like that, why not just make the form-response slightly less > terse to keep it more friendly? (Or save it for the link's landing > page.) Unless the "form-response" you're referring to is manually > typing the same thing out of personal habit, in which case I'd say > it's not very efficient. For example. An email I've sent often contains entirely the below: """ examples here: http://yum.baseurl.org/wiki/YumCodeSnippets -sv """ I don't think the above is rude, at all, it is often in response to an extremely vague/general question about programming with the yum python modules. I think the moderation should not try to judge "friendliness" but only to determine if the message is hostile and abusive. If only b/c of how many non-native english speakers we have who, I've found, sometime do not understand the tone certain word choices connote. -sv From stickster at gmail.com Mon May 18 15:23:01 2009 From: stickster at gmail.com (Paul W. Frields) Date: Mon, 18 May 2009 11:23:01 -0400 Subject: Proposal for ML conduct In-Reply-To: References: <4A0D9DD6.6090004@gmail.com> <4A0DC216.9070601@redhat.com> <4A11614B.4080601@gmail.com> <20090518134218.GE3634@localhost.localdomain> <4A116DED.1030909@gmail.com> <20090518144310.GH3634@localhost.localdomain> <20090518151140.GK3634@localhost.localdomain> Message-ID: <20090518152301.GN3634@localhost.localdomain> On Mon, May 18, 2009 at 11:17:17AM -0400, Seth Vidal wrote: > > > On Mon, 18 May 2009, Paul W. Frields wrote: > >> Terse is not the same as rude, I agree, and we're not trying to >> moderate terseness. However, if you're going to be copy/pasting an >> answer like that, why not just make the form-response slightly less >> terse to keep it more friendly? (Or save it for the link's landing >> page.) Unless the "form-response" you're referring to is manually >> typing the same thing out of personal habit, in which case I'd say >> it's not very efficient. > > For example. An email I've sent often contains entirely the below: > > """ > examples here: http://yum.baseurl.org/wiki/YumCodeSnippets > -sv > """ > > I don't think the above is rude, at all, it is often in response to an > extremely vague/general question about programming with the yum python > modules. > > I think the moderation should not try to judge "friendliness" but only to > determine if the message is hostile and abusive. > > If only b/c of how many non-native english speakers we have who, I've > found, sometime do not understand the tone certain word choices connote. True, wordiness is also not always more friendly. Your example above is a good example, in my opinion. -- Paul W. Frields http://paul.frields.org/ gpg fingerprint: 3DA6 A0AC 6D58 FEC4 0233 5906 ACDB C937 BD11 3717 http://redhat.com/ - - - - http://pfrields.fedorapeople.org/ irc.freenode.net: stickster @ #fedora-docs, #fedora-devel, #fredlug From inode0 at gmail.com Mon May 18 15:47:07 2009 From: inode0 at gmail.com (inode0) Date: Mon, 18 May 2009 10:47:07 -0500 Subject: Proposal for ML conduct In-Reply-To: <2cb10c440905180746r25e21cebj5a4dbeb54a42af66@mail.gmail.com> References: <20090514184625.GL3514@localhost.localdomain> <20090514204909.GW3514@localhost.localdomain> <4A0D9DD6.6090004@gmail.com> <4A0DC216.9070601@redhat.com> <4A11614B.4080601@gmail.com> <20090518134218.GE3634@localhost.localdomain> <4A116DED.1030909@gmail.com> <2cb10c440905180746r25e21cebj5a4dbeb54a42af66@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: On Mon, May 18, 2009 at 9:46 AM, Luis Villa wrote: > On Mon, May 18, 2009 at 10:35 AM, inode0 wrote: >> On Mon, May 18, 2009 at 9:17 AM, Lyos Gemini Norezel >> wrote: >>> Paul W. Frields wrote: >>> >>> Let me see if I can clarify a bit here. ?Your rights in the USA are >>> meant to be guarantees against the *government* stopping you from >>> speaking. ?Not private entities. >>> >>> True. >> >> Only to a point. Your natural rights, which are inalienable and >> universal, including liberty are not conferred on you by any >> government. The Fedora Project can quash your speech if it so chooses >> without violating your legal rights in the USA, but one can still >> argue with some merit that it violates your natural rights. > > You have no natural rights to enter someone else's creative community > and speak as you please, any more than you have natural rights to > enter someone's home and speak as you please. (Really, don't get me > started on this topic; I've got a degree in political philosophy and > am not afraid to use it ;) We have built/are building this community > in order to get things done; no one has any 'right' on any level to > disrupt that, and we should be very skeptical of anyone who thinks > they do. First, it isn't someone else's creative community. It is *our* creative community. Second, my statement was about quashing speech and there is no requirement that the quashed speech be in any way disruptive to anything in the context of what I said above. The Fedora Project can without violating my legal rights in the USA quash *all* of my speech on Fedora mailing lists. I was making a small objection to Paul's characterization of rights in the USA by omitting the existence of natural rights. Nothing more. John From stickster at gmail.com Mon May 18 16:56:22 2009 From: stickster at gmail.com (Paul W. Frields) Date: Mon, 18 May 2009 12:56:22 -0400 Subject: F12 Naming: Cambridge -> Leonidas -> ? In-Reply-To: <20090518145214.GA2964@yoda.jdub.homelinux.org> References: <20090518145214.GA2964@yoda.jdub.homelinux.org> Message-ID: <20090518165622.GQ3634@localhost.localdomain> On Mon, May 18, 2009 at 10:52:14AM -0400, Josh Boyer wrote: > Hi All, > > It's that time of year again. Time to start the naming process > for the next Fedora release. > > To recap on the rules: > > 1) must have some link to Leonidas > > More specifically, the link should be > Leonidas is a and > is a > Where is the same for both > > 2) The link between and Leonidas cannot be the same as > between Cambridge and Leonidas. That link was "was a ship in the Union navy". > > We're repeating the collection process we used for Fedora 11 this > time. Contributors wishing to make a suggestion are asked to go to > the F11 naming wiki page, and add an entry to the suggestion table > found there: > > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Name_suggestions_for_Fedora_12 > > The naming submissions are open starting now until May 23. The > rest of the schedule is outlined on the wiki page. > > So, put on your thinking caps and come up with some really good > suggestions! > > Happy naming. Please remember as you add names to make sure there are at least a few ways to link *out* of the name. If you find an F12 name that has something in common with F11, but no other significance, it probably won't make a good name. For instance, I see a great name, "Hippocoon," on the list already, which has no other significance I can find beyond its connection with F11 (also a Spartan king). That means we can't easily link *from* Hippocoon to something else for F13, and this name will likely be cut from the list. The Board and I are going to have to go through these names manually, so we do ask that you give us a hand in advance by thinking through *each* of your name suggestions carefully, according to all the guidelines on the wiki page. Thanks very much for your help! -- Paul W. Frields http://paul.frields.org/ gpg fingerprint: 3DA6 A0AC 6D58 FEC4 0233 5906 ACDB C937 BD11 3717 http://redhat.com/ - - - - http://pfrields.fedorapeople.org/ irc.freenode.net: stickster @ #fedora-docs, #fedora-devel, #fredlug From larry.cafiero at gmail.com Mon May 18 17:04:47 2009 From: larry.cafiero at gmail.com (Larry Cafiero) Date: Mon, 18 May 2009 10:04:47 -0700 Subject: F12 Naming: Cambridge -> Leonidas -> ? In-Reply-To: <20090518145214.GA2964@yoda.jdub.homelinux.org> References: <20090518145214.GA2964@yoda.jdub.homelinux.org> Message-ID: <7a0d56080905181004k552876e7v41942d984fd356eb@mail.gmail.com> On Mon, May 18, 2009 at 7:52 AM, Josh Boyer wrote: > > The naming submissions are open starting now until May 23. The > rest of the schedule is outlined on the wiki page. So we only have six days (counting today) to come up with a name? I thought last time the window was larger. Larry Cafiero -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From tcallawa at redhat.com Mon May 18 17:05:06 2009 From: tcallawa at redhat.com (Tom "spot" Callaway) Date: Mon, 18 May 2009 13:05:06 -0400 Subject: F12 Naming: Cambridge -> Leonidas -> ? In-Reply-To: <20090518165622.GQ3634@localhost.localdomain> References: <20090518145214.GA2964@yoda.jdub.homelinux.org> <20090518165622.GQ3634@localhost.localdomain> Message-ID: <4A119542.8010002@redhat.com> On 05/18/2009 12:56 PM, Paul W. Frields wrote: > For instance, I see a great name, "Hippocoon," on the list already, > which has no other significance I can find beyond its connection with > F11 (also a Spartan king). Aww, come on. Hippocoon is a combination of two animals, a Hippopotamus and a Raccoon. (I would hate to have been there for that courtship.) We can go from there to the: Liger (or Tigon): Lion/Tiger Zorse (or Zony or Zonkey): Zebra/Horse/Pony/Donkey (they're called Zebroids) Cama: Camel/Llama Grolar (or Pizzly): Grizzly Bear/Polar Bear Leopon: Leopard/Lion Wolphin: Bottlenose Dolphin/False Killer Whale ~spot From bkearney at redhat.com Mon May 18 17:10:51 2009 From: bkearney at redhat.com (Bryan Kearney) Date: Mon, 18 May 2009 13:10:51 -0400 Subject: F12 Naming: Cambridge -> Leonidas -> ? In-Reply-To: <4A119542.8010002@redhat.com> References: <20090518145214.GA2964@yoda.jdub.homelinux.org> <20090518165622.GQ3634@localhost.localdomain> <4A119542.8010002@redhat.com> Message-ID: <4A11969B.8040203@redhat.com> Tom "spot" Callaway wrote: > On 05/18/2009 12:56 PM, Paul W. Frields wrote: >> For instance, I see a great name, "Hippocoon," on the list already, >> which has no other significance I can find beyond its connection with >> F11 (also a Spartan king). > > Aww, come on. Hippocoon is a combination of two animals, a Hippopotamus > and a Raccoon. (I would hate to have been there for that courtship.) We > can go from there to the: > Actually... My uncle Ernie shot a Hippocoon back in the day. He has it mounted right near his Jack-a-lope. I think I have a picture at home some place. -- bk From jamatos at fc.up.pt Mon May 18 17:17:06 2009 From: jamatos at fc.up.pt (=?iso-8859-1?q?Jos=E9_Matos?=) Date: Mon, 18 May 2009 18:17:06 +0100 Subject: F12 Naming: Cambridge -> Leonidas -> ? In-Reply-To: <20090518165622.GQ3634@localhost.localdomain> References: <20090518145214.GA2964@yoda.jdub.homelinux.org> <20090518165622.GQ3634@localhost.localdomain> Message-ID: <200905181817.06223.jamatos@fc.up.pt> On Monday 18 May 2009 17:56:22 Paul W. Frields wrote: > For instance, I see a great name, "Hippocoon," on the list already, > which has no other significance I can find beyond its connection with > F11 (also a Spartan king). That means we can't easily link from > Hippocoon to something else for F13, and this name will likely be cut > from the list. Oh, you mean like a genus from the insect family? The only reference I can find on wikipedia is this page: http://species.wikimedia.org/wiki/Stigmaphronidae http://animaldiversity.ummz.umich.edu/site/accounts/classification/Stigmaphronidae.html#Stigmaphronidae -- Jos? Ab?lio From jwboyer at gmail.com Mon May 18 17:23:03 2009 From: jwboyer at gmail.com (Josh Boyer) Date: Mon, 18 May 2009 13:23:03 -0400 Subject: F12 Naming: Cambridge -> Leonidas -> ? In-Reply-To: <7a0d56080905181004k552876e7v41942d984fd356eb@mail.gmail.com> References: <20090518145214.GA2964@yoda.jdub.homelinux.org> <7a0d56080905181004k552876e7v41942d984fd356eb@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <20090518172303.GA6706@yoda.jdub.homelinux.org> On Mon, May 18, 2009 at 10:04:47AM -0700, Larry Cafiero wrote: >On Mon, May 18, 2009 at 7:52 AM, Josh Boyer wrote: > >> >> The naming submissions are open starting now until May 23. The >> rest of the schedule is outlined on the wiki page. > > > So we only have six days (counting today) to come up with >a name? I thought last time the window was larger. You have 6 days, yes. The window for F11 was Dec 2 - Dec 8. Also 6 days. josh From notting at redhat.com Mon May 18 17:38:23 2009 From: notting at redhat.com (Bill Nottingham) Date: Mon, 18 May 2009 13:38:23 -0400 Subject: F12 Naming: Cambridge -> Leonidas -> ? In-Reply-To: <20090518172303.GA6706@yoda.jdub.homelinux.org> References: <20090518145214.GA2964@yoda.jdub.homelinux.org> <7a0d56080905181004k552876e7v41942d984fd356eb@mail.gmail.com> <20090518172303.GA6706@yoda.jdub.homelinux.org> Message-ID: <20090518173823.GB6318@nostromo.devel.redhat.com> Josh Boyer (jwboyer at gmail.com) said: > >> The naming submissions are open starting now until May 23. The > >> rest of the schedule is outlined on the wiki page. > > > > So we only have six days (counting today) to come up with > >a name? I thought last time the window was larger. > > You have 6 days, yes. The window for F11 was Dec 2 - Dec 8. Also 6 days. Because on the seventh day, Josh rests. Bill From jkeating at redhat.com Mon May 18 17:38:09 2009 From: jkeating at redhat.com (Jesse Keating) Date: Mon, 18 May 2009 10:38:09 -0700 Subject: F12 Naming: Cambridge -> Leonidas -> ? In-Reply-To: <20090518165622.GQ3634@localhost.localdomain> References: <20090518145214.GA2964@yoda.jdub.homelinux.org> <20090518165622.GQ3634@localhost.localdomain> Message-ID: <1242668289.3223.45.camel@localhost.localdomain> On Mon, 2009-05-18 at 12:56 -0400, Paul W. Frields wrote: > For instance, I see a great name, "Hippocoon," on the list already, > which has no other significance I can find beyond its connection with > F11 (also a Spartan king). That means we can't easily link *from* > Hippocoon to something else for F13, and this name will likely be cut > from the list. Actually, that has traditionally been one of the fun parts, picking a name that makes it nearly impossible to pick the next name, which brings more creativity to the next release process. -- 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 mspevack at redhat.com Mon May 18 17:57:38 2009 From: mspevack at redhat.com (Max Spevack) Date: Mon, 18 May 2009 19:57:38 +0200 (CEST) Subject: F12 Naming: Cambridge -> Leonidas -> ? In-Reply-To: <1242668289.3223.45.camel@localhost.localdomain> References: <20090518145214.GA2964@yoda.jdub.homelinux.org> <20090518165622.GQ3634@localhost.localdomain> <1242668289.3223.45.camel@localhost.localdomain> Message-ID: On Mon, 18 May 2009, Jesse Keating wrote: > Actually, that has traditionally been one of the fun parts, picking a > name that makes it nearly impossible to pick the next name, which > brings more creativity to the next release process. To whomever rejected "Chuck Norris" because "is a bad-ass" is a "tenuous" link, I urge you to reconsider. Paul, do the right thing here. Be tough-minded. --Max From skvidal at fedoraproject.org Mon May 18 17:57:37 2009 From: skvidal at fedoraproject.org (Seth Vidal) Date: Mon, 18 May 2009 13:57:37 -0400 (EDT) Subject: F12 Naming: Cambridge -> Leonidas -> ? In-Reply-To: References: <20090518145214.GA2964@yoda.jdub.homelinux.org> <20090518165622.GQ3634@localhost.localdomain> <1242668289.3223.45.camel@localhost.localdomain> Message-ID: On Mon, 18 May 2009, Max Spevack wrote: > On Mon, 18 May 2009, Jesse Keating wrote: > >> Actually, that has traditionally been one of the fun parts, picking a name >> that makes it nearly impossible to pick the next name, which brings more >> creativity to the next release process. > > To whomever rejected "Chuck Norris" because "is a bad-ass" is a "tenuous" > link, I urge you to reconsider. > > Paul, do the right thing here. Be tough-minded. > I'm inclined to agree. X is a badass Y is a badass seems to meet our requirements. -sv From notting at redhat.com Mon May 18 18:02:26 2009 From: notting at redhat.com (Bill Nottingham) Date: Mon, 18 May 2009 14:02:26 -0400 Subject: F12 Naming: Cambridge -> Leonidas -> ? In-Reply-To: References: <20090518145214.GA2964@yoda.jdub.homelinux.org> <20090518165622.GQ3634@localhost.localdomain> <1242668289.3223.45.camel@localhost.localdomain> Message-ID: <20090518180226.GA6821@nostromo.devel.redhat.com> Max Spevack (mspevack at redhat.com) said: >> Actually, that has traditionally been one of the fun parts, picking a >> name that makes it nearly impossible to pick the next name, which >> brings more creativity to the next release process. > > To whomever rejected "Chuck Norris" because "is a bad-ass" is a > "tenuous" link, I urge you to reconsider. It's tenuous because unlike most all other links, it's a matter of opinion. Bill From bkearney at redhat.com Mon May 18 18:00:18 2009 From: bkearney at redhat.com (Bryan Kearney) Date: Mon, 18 May 2009 14:00:18 -0400 Subject: F12 Naming: Cambridge -> Leonidas -> ? In-Reply-To: <20090518180226.GA6821@nostromo.devel.redhat.com> References: <20090518145214.GA2964@yoda.jdub.homelinux.org> <20090518165622.GQ3634@localhost.localdomain> <1242668289.3223.45.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20090518180226.GA6821@nostromo.devel.redhat.com> Message-ID: <4A11A232.6030107@redhat.com> Bill Nottingham wrote: > Max Spevack (mspevack at redhat.com) said: >>> Actually, that has traditionally been one of the fun parts, picking a >>> name that makes it nearly impossible to pick the next name, which >>> brings more creativity to the next release process. >> To whomever rejected "Chuck Norris" because "is a bad-ass" is a >> "tenuous" link, I urge you to reconsider. > > It's tenuous because unlike most all other links, it's a matter > of opinion. > > Bill > I believe Bill just called out Chuck Norris. /me shudders at the pain -- bk From notting at redhat.com Mon May 18 18:05:18 2009 From: notting at redhat.com (Bill Nottingham) Date: Mon, 18 May 2009 14:05:18 -0400 Subject: F12 Naming: Cambridge -> Leonidas -> ? In-Reply-To: <4A11A232.6030107@redhat.com> References: <20090518145214.GA2964@yoda.jdub.homelinux.org> <20090518165622.GQ3634@localhost.localdomain> <1242668289.3223.45.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20090518180226.GA6821@nostromo.devel.redhat.com> <4A11A232.6030107@redhat.com> Message-ID: <20090518180517.GB6821@nostromo.devel.redhat.com> Bryan Kearney (bkearney at redhat.com) said: >> It's tenuous because unlike most all other links, it's a matter >> of opinion. > > I believe Bill just called out Chuck Norris. Nah, I called out Leonidas. And well, he's dead. Bill From bkearney at redhat.com Mon May 18 18:07:28 2009 From: bkearney at redhat.com (Bryan Kearney) Date: Mon, 18 May 2009 14:07:28 -0400 Subject: F12 Naming: Cambridge -> Leonidas -> ? In-Reply-To: <20090518180517.GB6821@nostromo.devel.redhat.com> References: <20090518145214.GA2964@yoda.jdub.homelinux.org> <20090518165622.GQ3634@localhost.localdomain> <1242668289.3223.45.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20090518180226.GA6821@nostromo.devel.redhat.com> <4A11A232.6030107@redhat.com> <20090518180517.GB6821@nostromo.devel.redhat.com> Message-ID: <4A11A3E0.7030800@redhat.com> Bill Nottingham wrote: > Bryan Kearney (bkearney at redhat.com) said: >>> It's tenuous because unlike most all other links, it's a matter >>> of opinion. >> I believe Bill just called out Chuck Norris. > > Nah, I called out Leonidas. And well, he's dead. > > Bill > Just you wait until you cross the River Styx... he will be waiting for you. Hope you have an extra coin or two to pay the ferryman. -- bk From jwboyer at gmail.com Mon May 18 14:52:14 2009 From: jwboyer at gmail.com (Josh Boyer) Date: Mon, 18 May 2009 10:52:14 -0400 Subject: F12 Naming: Cambridge -> Leonidas -> ? Message-ID: <20090518145214.GA2964@yoda.jdub.homelinux.org> Hi All, It's that time of year again. Time to start the naming process for the next Fedora release. To recap on the rules: 1) must have some link to Leonidas More specifically, the link should be Leonidas is a and is a Where is the same for both 2) The link between and Leonidas cannot be the same as between Cambridge and Leonidas. That link was "was a ship in the Union navy". We're repeating the collection process we used for Fedora 11 this time. Contributors wishing to make a suggestion are asked to go to the F11 naming wiki page, and add an entry to the suggestion table found there: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Name_suggestions_for_Fedora_12 The naming submissions are open starting now until May 23. The rest of the schedule is outlined on the wiki page. So, put on your thinking caps and come up with some really good suggestions! Happy naming. josh -- fedora-announce-list mailing list fedora-announce-list at redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-announce-list From stickster at gmail.com Mon May 18 19:36:20 2009 From: stickster at gmail.com (Paul W. Frields) Date: Mon, 18 May 2009 15:36:20 -0400 Subject: F12 Naming: Cambridge -> Leonidas -> ? In-Reply-To: <200905181817.06223.jamatos@fc.up.pt> References: <20090518145214.GA2964@yoda.jdub.homelinux.org> <20090518165622.GQ3634@localhost.localdomain> <200905181817.06223.jamatos@fc.up.pt> Message-ID: <20090518193620.GT3634@localhost.localdomain> On Mon, May 18, 2009 at 06:17:06PM +0100, Jos? Matos wrote: > On Monday 18 May 2009 17:56:22 Paul W. Frields wrote: > > For instance, I see a great name, "Hippocoon," on the list already, > > which has no other significance I can find beyond its connection with > > F11 (also a Spartan king). That means we can't easily link from > > Hippocoon to something else for F13, and this name will likely be cut > > from the list. > > Oh, you mean like a genus from the insect family? > > The only reference I can find on wikipedia is this page: > http://species.wikimedia.org/wiki/Stigmaphronidae > http://animaldiversity.ummz.umich.edu/site/accounts/classification/Stigmaphronidae.html#Stigmaphronidae Excellent! Thanks for that link. This might prove that an extra field is needed for showing possible links out. It definitely proves that two sets of eyeballs are better than one. :-) -- Paul W. Frields http://paul.frields.org/ gpg fingerprint: 3DA6 A0AC 6D58 FEC4 0233 5906 ACDB C937 BD11 3717 http://redhat.com/ - - - - http://pfrields.fedorapeople.org/ irc.freenode.net: stickster @ #fedora-docs, #fedora-devel, #fredlug From aoliva at redhat.com Mon May 18 20:05:04 2009 From: aoliva at redhat.com (Alexandre Oliva) Date: Mon, 18 May 2009 17:05:04 -0300 Subject: Proposal for ML conduct In-Reply-To: <4A11614B.4080601@gmail.com> (Lyos Gemini Norezel's message of "Mon\, 18 May 2009 09\:23\:23 -0400") References: <20090514184625.GL3514@localhost.localdomain> <1242332968.6282.85.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20090514204909.GW3514@localhost.localdomain> <4A0D9DD6.6090004@gmail.com> <4A0DC216.9070601@redhat.com> <4A11614B.4080601@gmail.com> Message-ID: On May 18, 2009, Lyos Gemini Norezel wrote: > "They who can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary safety, > deserve neither liberty nor safety." - Benjamin Franklin > If you would give up your free speech pie, because of vitriol and offensive > people, then you do not deserve free speech. Free speech, like every other freedom, isn't unlimited. One's freedom extends up to where neighbors' freedoms begin. If speech does not respect neighbors, it conflicts with their freedoms, i.e., it goes beyond one's own right to free speech. It's sad that at times people (myself included) may have to be warned at times when we've trespassed the limits of our own freedoms, but respecting our neighbors is hardly an unacceptable sacrifice for the sake of living in community. Ideally, the respect should be voluntary, but unfortunately it isn't always that easy. -- Alexandre Oliva, freedom fighter http://FSFLA.org/~lxoliva/ You must be the change you wish to see in the world. -- Gandhi Be Free! -- http://FSFLA.org/ FSF Latin America board member Free Software Evangelist Red Hat Brazil Compiler Engineer From poelstra at redhat.com Mon May 18 22:46:52 2009 From: poelstra at redhat.com (John Poelstra) Date: Mon, 18 May 2009 18:46:52 -0400 (EDT) Subject: Fedora 11 GA Readiness Meeting :: Date = TBD @ 17:00 UTC (13:00 EDT) In-Reply-To: <501507894.1248071242686800705.JavaMail.root@zmail01.collab.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com> Message-ID: <1251355160.1248091242686812388.JavaMail.root@zmail01.collab.prod.int.phx2.redhat.com> We are waiting for a final go/no-go decision on the Fedora 11 release which will be made tomorrow. Based on the results of that decision we will either meet as originally planned this coming Wednesday (2009-05-20) or one week from this Wednesday. We are having this meeting to make sure everything is ready to go for a successful final release. Please let your teams know about this meeting and coordinate within your team if you would like to send a different representative. Please let me know ASAP if there are any substitutions. I will send another reminder including the conference call in information to all the team representatives. I am inviting the following people based on the designated representatives from the Fedora 11 Preview meeting: Ambassadors -- David Nalley 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 -- James Laska Release Engineering -- Jesse Keating Translation -- Diego B?rigo Zacar?o Websites -- Ricky Zhou Facilitator -- John Poelstra Thank you, John From caillon at redhat.com Mon May 18 23:01:50 2009 From: caillon at redhat.com (Christopher Aillon) Date: Mon, 18 May 2009 16:01:50 -0700 Subject: Proposal for ML conduct In-Reply-To: <4A11614B.4080601@gmail.com> References: <20090514184625.GL3514@localhost.localdomain> <1242332968.6282.85.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20090514204909.GW3514@localhost.localdomain> <4A0D9DD6.6090004@gmail.com> <4A0DC216.9070601@redhat.com> <4A11614B.4080601@gmail.com> Message-ID: <4A11E8DE.7020000@redhat.com> On 05/18/2009 06:23 AM, Lyos Gemini Norezel wrote: > Christopher Aillon wrote: >> On 05/15/2009 09:52 AM, Lyos Gemini Norezel wrote: >> >> If the free speech pie is made with good ingredients, everyone will >> want it. If the free speech pie is made with rusty nails, cyanide, >> motor oil and battery acid, I'm sure as hell not going to eat it. >> > > So all you want is the good and not the bad? For the Fedora community? I absolutely want what's good for the Fedora community, not what's bad for the Fedora community. However, because something is not considered good for a person or group, it does not prevent you the freedom of enjoying it on your own time. I dislike asparagus and will always refuse to eat it. But you are free to eat asparagus if you like. Don't forget that this is a community, not your personal space. Common courtesy and sense should be displayed when dealing with others, else you will be asked to leave. For example: * Don't bring a keg of beer to a wine tasting. * Don't bring veal to a PETA event. * Don't bring filet mignon to a vegetarian event. * Don't bring ham to a bar mitzvah. * Don't protest by blocking traffic in front of city hall during rush hour. * Don't bring vitriolic comments to the Fedora community. From christoph.wickert at googlemail.com Tue May 19 09:08:00 2009 From: christoph.wickert at googlemail.com (Christoph Wickert) Date: Tue, 19 May 2009 11:08:00 +0200 Subject: Be excellent - answer questions Message-ID: <1242724080.2919.24.camel@localhost.localdomain> I think an important part of being excellent is to reply to questions, so I'd like to re-send my questions about fedoracommunity.org. I already sent them 10 days ago, but so far nobody has replied. I'd like to know more about the idea behind and the history of fedoracommunity.org. Who's idea was this? When was it discussed in public? If it was not discussed, was it at least announced? I just searched 65.000 Fedora related mails and could not find anything related (except this discussion of course). Is getting a *.fedoracomminity.org subdomain limited to the group of Fedora contributors or FAS account holders? How about content control? In the previous discussions about community websites (on fedora-ambassadors-list back in January) the question emerged if we were allowed to link to rpmfusion or even livna. Can someone publish a "How to watch copy-protected DVDs with Fedora" article or similar on fedoracommunity.org or any other community website? Are we allowed to speak freely on these sites? According to the trademark guidelines Red Hat gives licenses "solely in connection with the promotion of the Fedora Project." When someone criticizes a decision or recent development in Fedora, this surely is not promotion any longer. Can Red Hat revoke the license because of that? Kind regards, Christoph From matt at domsch.com Tue May 19 12:42:10 2009 From: matt at domsch.com (Matt Domsch) Date: Tue, 19 May 2009 07:42:10 -0500 Subject: Be excellent - answer questions In-Reply-To: <1242724080.2919.24.camel@localhost.localdomain> References: <1242724080.2919.24.camel@localhost.localdomain> Message-ID: <20090519124209.GA546@domsch.com> On Tue, May 19, 2009 at 11:08:00AM +0200, Christoph Wickert wrote: > I think an important part of being excellent is to reply to questions, > so I'd like to re-send my questions about fedoracommunity.org. I already > sent them 10 days ago, but so far nobody has replied. Well, some of the answers came as part of the "yet another website" thread. > I'd like to know more about the idea behind and the history of > fedoracommunity.org. Who's idea was this? When was it discussed in > public? If it was not discussed, was it at least announced? I just > searched 65.000 Fedora related mails and could not find anything > related (except this discussion of course). As I understand it, this was the brainchild of Paul, Mike McGrath, and Red Hat's Legal dept. as a way to address the growing numbers of domain names being purchased that have 'fedora' in their names. Per the trademark guidelines, each of those domains must agree to the 'use in a domain name trademark license'. Instead, individuals wishing to run their own web site with 'Fedora' in the domain name could instead request a subdomain of fedoracommunity.org, which does not require signing that license. The trademark guidelines still apply of course. Individuals wouldn't be _required_ to get a subdomain in *.fc.org, they can still purchase domains with 'fedora' in their names, but then would need to sign the trademark license. *.fc.org was seen as a way to lower that burden. The first public disclosure of the purchase of fedoracommunity.org was within days of its purchase. I see it was registered on 2 Feb, the Infrastructure team was made aware of it on 4 Feb: https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-infrastructure-list/2009-February/msg00053.html and it was noted in a message to f-a-b on 8 Feb in regards to the "EOL Security" domain request. https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-advisory-board/2009-February/msg00039.html I don't think it was _announced on a mailing list_ per say, but was included in the "Local community domains" wiki page (which the Board was working to revise to add flexibility) at that time. https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Local_community_domains > Is getting a *.fedoracommunity.org subdomain limited to the group of > Fedora contributors or FAS account holders? As the Board approves each request, I don't see the Board approving such for non-Fedora contributors or people not FAS account holders. That seems like quite a low bar. > How about content control? In the previous discussions about community > websites (on fedora-ambassadors-list back in January) the question > emerged if we were allowed to link to rpmfusion or even livna. Can > someone publish a "How to watch copy-protected DVDs with Fedora" article > or similar on fedoracommunity.org or any other community website? I'm going to defer to the legal folks here. > Are we allowed to speak freely on these sites? According to the > trademark guidelines Red Hat gives licenses "solely in connection with > the promotion of the Fedora Project." When someone criticizes a decision > or recent development in Fedora, this surely is not promotion any > longer. Can Red Hat revoke the license because of that? If the site's only purpose is to criticize (as opposed to engage in reasonable discussion), then I doubt that would be in the Project's best interest to let such be set up on *.fedoracommunity.org. But if people engage in healthy (and polite) debate about aspects of the Project as part of wider discussions, I consider that to be a good thing. Thanks, Matt From stickster at gmail.com Tue May 19 13:04:55 2009 From: stickster at gmail.com (Paul W. Frields) Date: Tue, 19 May 2009 09:04:55 -0400 Subject: Be excellent - answer questions In-Reply-To: <20090519124209.GA546@domsch.com> References: <1242724080.2919.24.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20090519124209.GA546@domsch.com> Message-ID: <20090519130455.GI5760@localhost.localdomain> On Tue, May 19, 2009 at 07:42:10AM -0500, Matt Domsch wrote: > On Tue, May 19, 2009 at 11:08:00AM +0200, Christoph Wickert wrote: > > I think an important part of being excellent is to reply to questions, > > so I'd like to re-send my questions about fedoracommunity.org. I already > > sent them 10 days ago, but so far nobody has replied. > > Well, some of the answers came as part of the "yet another website" > thread. Correct, according to the list I answered back on May 10. > > I'd like to know more about the idea behind and the history of > > fedoracommunity.org. Who's idea was this? When was it discussed in > > public? If it was not discussed, was it at least announced? I just > > searched 65.000 Fedora related mails and could not find anything > > related (except this discussion of course). > > As I understand it, this was the brainchild of Paul, Mike McGrath, and > Red Hat's Legal dept. as a way to address the growing numbers of > domain names being purchased that have 'fedora' in their names. Per > the trademark guidelines, each of those domains must agree to the > 'use in a domain name trademark license'. Instead, individuals > wishing to run their own web site with 'Fedora' in the domain name > could instead request a subdomain of fedoracommunity.org, which does > not require signing that license. The trademark guidelines still > apply of course. Individuals wouldn't be _required_ to get a > subdomain in *.fc.org, they can still purchase domains with 'fedora' in > their names, but then would need to sign the trademark license. > *.fc.org was seen as a way to lower that burden. This is all correct. Our legal counsel felt the particular domain name "fedoracommunity" was sufficiently clear that the sites are owned and run by someone other than the Fedora Project. In other words, local communities are free to include content as they like, subject only to the guidelines for use of the Fedora trademarks on the site (which are minimal, such as not being disparaging to the Fedora Project). > The first public disclosure of the purchase of fedoracommunity.org was > within days of its purchase. I see it was registered on 2 Feb, the > Infrastructure team was made aware of it on 4 Feb: > https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-infrastructure-list/2009-February/msg00053.html > and it was noted in a message to f-a-b on 8 Feb in regards to the "EOL > Security" domain request. > https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-advisory-board/2009-February/msg00039.html > > I don't think it was _announced on a mailing list_ per say, but was > included in the "Local community domains" wiki page (which the Board > was working to revise to add flexibility) at that time. > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Local_community_domains Correct. We are offering yet another option to local communities, not making requirements on them. No one is forced to use a fedoracommunity.org domain, it's simply an option for community members who want to set up sites without what they perceive as the hassle of a license agreement. I believe the agreement isn't much of a hassle, but nevertheless, I wanted to make more options available. > > Is getting a *.fedoracommunity.org subdomain limited to the group of > > Fedora contributors or FAS account holders? > > As the Board approves each request, I don't see the Board approving > such for non-Fedora contributors or people not FAS account holders. > That seems like quite a low bar. Agreed. > > How about content control? In the previous discussions about community > > websites (on fedora-ambassadors-list back in January) the question > > emerged if we were allowed to link to rpmfusion or even livna. Can > > someone publish a "How to watch copy-protected DVDs with Fedora" article > > or similar on fedoracommunity.org or any other community website? > > I'm going to defer to the legal folks here. See above. The content on the fedoracommunity.org sites is controlled by the communities themselves. The Fedora Project and Red Hat are not going to police them, but we do require that people observe the trademark guidelines. The guidelines make no distinctions about this kind of content, only about very simple and well-understood principles like not substantially altering the Fedora logo or being disparaging toward the Project or the community. > > Are we allowed to speak freely on these sites? According to the > > trademark guidelines Red Hat gives licenses "solely in connection with > > the promotion of the Fedora Project." When someone criticizes a decision > > or recent development in Fedora, this surely is not promotion any > > longer. Can Red Hat revoke the license because of that? > > If the site's only purpose is to criticize (as opposed to engage in > reasonable discussion), then I doubt that would be in the Project's > best interest to let such be set up on *.fedoracommunity.org. But if > people engage in healthy (and polite) debate about aspects of the > Project as part of wider discussions, I consider that to be a good > thing. Correct, see above again. -- Paul W. Frields http://paul.frields.org/ gpg fingerprint: 3DA6 A0AC 6D58 FEC4 0233 5906 ACDB C937 BD11 3717 http://redhat.com/ - - - - http://pfrields.fedorapeople.org/ irc.freenode.net: stickster @ #fedora-docs, #fedora-devel, #fredlug From christoph.wickert at googlemail.com Tue May 19 14:08:18 2009 From: christoph.wickert at googlemail.com (Christoph Wickert) Date: Tue, 19 May 2009 16:08:18 +0200 Subject: Be excellent - answer questions In-Reply-To: <20090519130455.GI5760@localhost.localdomain> References: <1242724080.2919.24.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20090519124209.GA546@domsch.com> <20090519130455.GI5760@localhost.localdomain> Message-ID: <1242742098.2848.55.camel@localhost.localdomain> Am Dienstag, den 19.05.2009, 09:04 -0400 schrieb Paul W. Frields: > On Tue, May 19, 2009 at 07:42:10AM -0500, Matt Domsch wrote: > > On Tue, May 19, 2009 at 11:08:00AM +0200, Christoph Wickert wrote: > > > I think an important part of being excellent is to reply to questions, > > > so I'd like to re-send my questions about fedoracommunity.org. I already > > > sent them 10 days ago, but so far nobody has replied. > > > > Well, some of the answers came as part of the "yet another website" > > thread. > > Correct, according to the list I answered back on May 10. Both you and Matt replied to my mail, that's correct and I appreciate it. But none of you answered to my questions, instead Matt trimmed them in his reply and you replied to Matt afterward. > > > I'd like to know more about the idea behind and the history of > > > fedoracommunity.org. Who's idea was this? When was it discussed in > > > public? If it was not discussed, was it at least announced? I just > > > searched 65.000 Fedora related mails and could not find anything > > > related (except this discussion of course). > > > > As I understand it, this was the brainchild of Paul, Mike McGrath, and > > Red Hat's Legal dept. as a way to address the growing numbers of > > domain names being purchased that have 'fedora' in their names. Per > > the trademark guidelines, each of those domains must agree to the > > 'use in a domain name trademark license'. Instead, individuals > > wishing to run their own web site with 'Fedora' in the domain name > > could instead request a subdomain of fedoracommunity.org, which does > > not require signing that license. The trademark guidelines still > > apply of course. Individuals wouldn't be _required_ to get a > > subdomain in *.fc.org, they can still purchase domains with 'fedora' in > > their names, but then would need to sign the trademark license. > > *.fc.org was seen as a way to lower that burden. > > This is all correct. Our legal counsel felt the particular domain > name "fedoracommunity" was sufficiently clear that the sites are owned > and run by someone other than the Fedora Project. In other words, > local communities are free to include content as they like, subject > only to the guidelines for use of the Fedora trademarks on the site > (which are minimal, such as not being disparaging to the Fedora > Project). > > > The first public disclosure of the purchase of fedoracommunity.org was > > within days of its purchase. I see it was registered on 2 Feb, the > > Infrastructure team was made aware of it on 4 Feb: > > https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-infrastructure-list/2009-February/msg00053.html > > and it was noted in a message to f-a-b on 8 Feb in regards to the "EOL > > Security" domain request. > > https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-advisory-board/2009-February/msg00039.html So basically one can say: It was not discussed in public but a fait accompli has been created. It's not the question if fc.org is good or bad, but I feel like this kind of decision making has become more frequent. > > I don't think it was _announced on a mailing list_ per say, but was > > included in the "Local community domains" wiki page (which the Board > > was working to revise to add flexibility) at that time. > > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Local_community_domains Well, how would one realize there is a new wiki page? Just take the "Flags Policy" page as an example: Nobody realized it was there for months. > Correct. We are offering yet another option to local communities, not > making requirements on them. No one is forced to use a > fedoracommunity.org domain, it's simply an option for community > members who want to set up sites without what they perceive as the > hassle of a license agreement. I believe the agreement isn't much of > a hassle, but nevertheless, I wanted to make more options available. > > > > Is getting a *.fedoracommunity.org subdomain limited to the group of > > > Fedora contributors or FAS account holders? > > > > As the Board approves each request, I don't see the Board approving > > such for non-Fedora contributors or people not FAS account holders. > > That seems like quite a low bar. > > Agreed. Sorry, but I disagree. Remember, we already had ambassadors leaving the project after the CLA changed. I don't share their concerns (otherwise I had to resign, too), but I do see there are people not willing to sign the current CLA which means they cannot get a FAS account. > > > How about content control? In the previous discussions about community > > > websites (on fedora-ambassadors-list back in January) the question > > > emerged if we were allowed to link to rpmfusion or even livna. Can > > > someone publish a "How to watch copy-protected DVDs with Fedora" article > > > or similar on fedoracommunity.org or any other community website? > > > > I'm going to defer to the legal folks here. > > See above. The content on the fedoracommunity.org sites is controlled > by the communities themselves. The Fedora Project and Red Hat are not > going to police them, but we do require that people observe the > trademark guidelines. The guidelines make no distinctions about this > kind of content, only about very simple and well-understood principles > like not substantially altering the Fedora logo or being disparaging > toward the Project or the community. Thanks for the clarification. So basically this means that fc.org websites have far more freedom than any website containing "fedora" in it's domain name, because fc.org only needs to follow the trademark and logo guidelines whereas owners of other websites also need to sign the Trademark license agreement. > > > Are we allowed to speak freely on these sites? According to the > > > trademark guidelines Red Hat gives licenses "solely in connection with > > > the promotion of the Fedora Project." When someone criticizes a decision > > > or recent development in Fedora, this surely is not promotion any > > > longer. Can Red Hat revoke the license because of that? > > > > If the site's only purpose is to criticize (as opposed to engage in > > reasonable discussion), then I doubt that would be in the Project's > > best interest to let such be set up on *.fedoracommunity.org. But if > > people engage in healthy (and polite) debate about aspects of the > > Project as part of wider discussions, I consider that to be a good > > thing. Who draws the line between "only criticize" and a "healthy debate"? > Correct, see above again. Ok, again thanks for clarification. But my question was if not someone *will* revoke the permission to use fc.org but if they *can*, from a very theoretical point of view I have to admit. I have to correct my previous statement here because I quoted the trademark license agreement, not the trademark guidelines. As you both said it does not apply to fc.org. So basically one could say that people are free to do whatever they want on fc.org after the board approved their request - as long as they honor the logo guidelines. I doubt that it will that way in reality. Does the board have the option to withdraw permission? If so, under which circumstances? If not, how to prevent someone from spreading FUD via fc.org? To me this looks as if it has not really been thought out. Regards, Christoph From tcallawa at redhat.com Tue May 19 14:23:20 2009 From: tcallawa at redhat.com (Tom "spot" Callaway) Date: Tue, 19 May 2009 10:23:20 -0400 Subject: Be excellent - answer questions In-Reply-To: <1242742098.2848.55.camel@localhost.localdomain> References: <1242724080.2919.24.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20090519124209.GA546@domsch.com> <20090519130455.GI5760@localhost.localdomain> <1242742098.2848.55.camel@localhost.localdomain> Message-ID: <4A12C0D8.2040307@redhat.com> On 05/19/2009 10:08 AM, Christoph Wickert wrote: > Sorry, but I disagree. Remember, we already had ambassadors leaving the > project after the CLA changed. I don't share their concerns (otherwise I > had to resign, too), but I do see there are people not willing to sign > the current CLA which means they cannot get a FAS account. This is a separate issue, lets not dogpile everything together unnecessarily. There are some legitimate issues with the current CLA that I am constantly working on resolving, but this is perhaps the most complicated legal matter currently on Fedora Legal's plate. Even with that, your statement that a CLA signature is required to get a FAS account is not accurate. It is necessary to sign the CLA to make a contribution to Fedora, but not simply to get a FAS account. ~spot From christoph.wickert at googlemail.com Tue May 19 14:24:51 2009 From: christoph.wickert at googlemail.com (Christoph Wickert) Date: Tue, 19 May 2009 16:24:51 +0200 Subject: Yet another website? (Re: [Ambassadors] belux ambassadors meeting log 15th April 2009) In-Reply-To: <20090510142541.GA3447@localhost.localdomain> References: <20090416174256.GA20209@hurricane.linuxnetz.de> <49E7C831.5020301@fedoraproject.org> <20090425162036.GB12588@localhost.localdomain> <1241803943.9533.16.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1241807446.9533.27.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20090508233740.GS4080@localhost.localdomain> <1241834705.9533.142.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20090509044009.GA3395@domsch.com> <20090510142541.GA3447@localhost.localdomain> Message-ID: <1242743091.2848.71.camel@localhost.localdomain> Am Sonntag, den 10.05.2009, 10:25 -0400 schrieb Paul W. Frields: > On Fri, May 08, 2009 at 11:40:09PM -0500, Matt Domsch wrote: > > On Sat, May 09, 2009 at 04:05:05AM +0200, Christoph Wickert wrote: > > > OK, let's take the question from my previous mail: Why are > > > rules for community members stricter than for Red Hat or the Fedora > > > Project? Or, to be more specific: How can community websites violate the > > > trademark agreement by only mirroring fedoraproject.org? > > > > > > According to the trademark agreement community websites must label > > > "Fedora" as trademarks, at least their first appearance on each page. > > > Also each page needs a link to the fpo start page named "Fedora > > > Project," "Official Fedora Project web site," or "Visit the official > > > Fedora Project web site. We are not doing this at fpo ether, so it's > > > impossible to mirror fpo to something outside of Fedora infrastructure. > > > > As I understand it (IANAL), The Fedora Project itself is not a > > licensee under the Fedora trademark license. That would be similar to > > saying "Coca Cola must have a license from Coca Cola to produce Coca > > Cola products". Not quite. The Coca Cola Company is both the trademark holder and the producer of Coke itself. Fedora is not the trademark owner of the Fedora trademark. If the Fedora Project is nether a licensee and nor the trademark owner, what is it? > Correct -- and in fact you see the same behavior on sites as varied as > Disney, Nike, and BMW, just to name a few. The reason for having > requirements on licensed sites is to address the possible confusion > that could arise between the official site and one set up by a > licensee. No such potential confusion exists on the official site; > cocacola.com (or coke.com?) is owned by Coca Cola. Please don't focus your view to only American websites but take a look at other countries/languages instead. Here in Germany we have "Coca Cola GmbH". Although it is a subsidiary, it must follow the trademark guidelines from the Coca Cola Company. So they had to put up this page for example: http://www.coca-cola-gmbh.de/meta/markenrechte/index.html Guess what happens when Coca Cola GmbH decides to paint the logo green in Germany... > > Instead, The Fedora Project is legally an entity of Red Hat, whom also > > owns the trademark. Red Hat, and the Project directly, does not need > > a license to use the trademark. The Project works very hard to avoid > > bringing detriment to the trademark through its actions, but is not > > bound by the trademark license. > > > > [1] does note: > > As the trademark owner, Red Hat strives to use the Fedora Trademarks > > under the same guidelines as the rest of the community. > > > > Guidelines - not license. > > This is all a correct reading. There's no intention to split hairs > here -- in Fedora we always try to obey the rules for presenting the > logo and other trademarks the same way others do. We try, but seems like we fail. If the same guidelines apply to both the project itself and the community, the project is simply violating them. Example: The guidelines (not the trademark license agreement) clearly state that "Never using the ? mark for Fedora, nor a trademark statement per the guidelines" is "unacceptable", but AFAICS we do this on most wiki pages. > > Now, I'll admit, the license clause about having specific words and > > specific links in specific places on licensee web pages could be > > annoying. There may even be room to adjust these requirements. But > > it's not more significant than "annoying". Currently it prevents people from mirroring content from fpo, which is more than just annoying. > And the guidelines remain open to discussion for such changes. In > fact, that language has already been changed at least once due to > licensee critique and input, to be less confusing and annoying. Two problems here IMO: Someone owning a "fedora" domain has to sign the agreement. He has to sign it now but not later, so for him there is no time left for further discussions. And discussions of course include communication, all affected and interested people need to be informed about changes and so on. IMHO this wasn't the case recently as this discussion shows. Kind regards, Christoph From ricky at fedoraproject.org Tue May 19 14:26:06 2009 From: ricky at fedoraproject.org (Ricky Zhou) Date: Tue, 19 May 2009 10:26:06 -0400 Subject: Be excellent - answer questions In-Reply-To: <1242742098.2848.55.camel@localhost.localdomain> References: <1242724080.2919.24.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20090519124209.GA546@domsch.com> <20090519130455.GI5760@localhost.localdomain> <1242742098.2848.55.camel@localhost.localdomain> Message-ID: <20090519142606.GB20408@alpha.rzhou.org> On 2009-05-19 04:08:18 PM, Christoph Wickert wrote: > I have to correct my previous statement here because I quoted the > trademark license agreement, not the trademark guidelines. As you both > said it does not apply to fc.org. So basically one could say that people > are free to do whatever they want on fc.org after the board approved > their request - as long as they honor the logo guidelines. I doubt that > it will that way in reality. Does the board have the option to withdraw > permission? If so, under which circumstances? If not, how to prevent > someone from spreading FUD via fc.org? To me this looks as if it has not > really been thought out. Since this is a Fedora-controlled domain, subdomains can certainly be removed if anything inappropriate is going on on them. It's probably fine to discuss these things on a case-by-case basis for now, since problems will hopefully be very rare :-) Thanks, Ricky -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 197 bytes Desc: not available URL: From tcallawa at redhat.com Tue May 19 14:24:12 2009 From: tcallawa at redhat.com (Tom "spot" Callaway) Date: Tue, 19 May 2009 10:24:12 -0400 Subject: Be excellent - answer questions In-Reply-To: <1242742098.2848.55.camel@localhost.localdomain> References: <1242724080.2919.24.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20090519124209.GA546@domsch.com> <20090519130455.GI5760@localhost.localdomain> <1242742098.2848.55.camel@localhost.localdomain> Message-ID: <4A12C10C.3010400@redhat.com> On 05/19/2009 10:08 AM, Christoph Wickert wrote: > Thanks for the clarification. So basically this means that fc.org > websites have far more freedom than any website containing "fedora" in > it's domain name, because fc.org only needs to follow the trademark and > logo guidelines whereas owners of other websites also need to sign the > Trademark license agreement. This is correct, and the core intention of creating the fc.org namespace. ~spot From christoph.wickert at googlemail.com Tue May 19 14:30:49 2009 From: christoph.wickert at googlemail.com (Christoph Wickert) Date: Tue, 19 May 2009 16:30:49 +0200 Subject: Be excellent - answer questions In-Reply-To: <4A12C0D8.2040307@redhat.com> References: <1242724080.2919.24.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20090519124209.GA546@domsch.com> <20090519130455.GI5760@localhost.localdomain> <1242742098.2848.55.camel@localhost.localdomain> <4A12C0D8.2040307@redhat.com> Message-ID: <1242743449.2848.74.camel@localhost.localdomain> Am Dienstag, den 19.05.2009, 10:23 -0400 schrieb Tom "spot" Callaway: > On 05/19/2009 10:08 AM, Christoph Wickert wrote: > > Sorry, but I disagree. Remember, we already had ambassadors leaving the > > project after the CLA changed. I don't share their concerns (otherwise I > > had to resign, too), but I do see there are people not willing to sign > > the current CLA which means they cannot get a FAS account. > > This is a separate issue, lets not dogpile everything together > unnecessarily. There are some legitimate issues with the current CLA > that I am constantly working on resolving, but this is perhaps the most > complicated legal matter currently on Fedora Legal's plate. Even with > that, your statement that a CLA signature is required to get a FAS > account is not accurate. It is necessary to sign the CLA to make a > contribution to Fedora, but not simply to get a FAS account. Thanks Spot for this correction. I signed the CLA back in the days long before FAS, so I wasn't aware of this. > ~spot Regards, Christoph From skvidal at fedoraproject.org Tue May 19 14:31:05 2009 From: skvidal at fedoraproject.org (Seth Vidal) Date: Tue, 19 May 2009 10:31:05 -0400 (EDT) Subject: Be excellent - answer questions In-Reply-To: <1242743449.2848.74.camel@localhost.localdomain> References: <1242724080.2919.24.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20090519124209.GA546@domsch.com> <20090519130455.GI5760@localhost.localdomain> <1242742098.2848.55.camel@localhost.localdomain> <4A12C0D8.2040307@redhat.com> <1242743449.2848.74.camel@localhost.localdomain> Message-ID: On Tue, 19 May 2009, Christoph Wickert wrote: > Am Dienstag, den 19.05.2009, 10:23 -0400 schrieb Tom "spot" Callaway: >> On 05/19/2009 10:08 AM, Christoph Wickert wrote: >>> Sorry, but I disagree. Remember, we already had ambassadors leaving the >>> project after the CLA changed. I don't share their concerns (otherwise I >>> had to resign, too), but I do see there are people not willing to sign >>> the current CLA which means they cannot get a FAS account. >> >> This is a separate issue, lets not dogpile everything together >> unnecessarily. There are some legitimate issues with the current CLA >> that I am constantly working on resolving, but this is perhaps the most >> complicated legal matter currently on Fedora Legal's plate. Even with >> that, your statement that a CLA signature is required to get a FAS >> account is not accurate. It is necessary to sign the CLA to make a >> contribution to Fedora, but not simply to get a FAS account. > > Thanks Spot for this correction. I signed the CLA back in the days long > before FAS, so I wasn't aware of this. > Hey, I signed the cla when we had to FAX SOMETHING IN, so don't feel bad about getting confused about when it changed. ;) -sv From tcallawa at redhat.com Tue May 19 14:31:18 2009 From: tcallawa at redhat.com (Tom "spot" Callaway) Date: Tue, 19 May 2009 10:31:18 -0400 Subject: Yet another website? (Re: [Ambassadors] belux ambassadors meeting log 15th April 2009) In-Reply-To: <1242743091.2848.71.camel@localhost.localdomain> References: <20090416174256.GA20209@hurricane.linuxnetz.de> <49E7C831.5020301@fedoraproject.org> <20090425162036.GB12588@localhost.localdomain> <1241803943.9533.16.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1241807446.9533.27.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20090508233740.GS4080@localhost.localdomain> <1241834705.9533.142.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20090509044009.GA3395@domsch.com> <20090510142541.GA3447@localhost.localdomain> <1242743091.2848.71.camel@localhost.localdomain> Message-ID: <4A12C2B6.2050309@redhat.com> On 05/19/2009 10:24 AM, Christoph Wickert wrote: > Example: The guidelines (not the trademark license agreement) clearly > state that "Never using the ? mark for Fedora, nor a trademark statement > per the guidelines" is "unacceptable", but AFAICS we do this on most > wiki pages. On this specific point it is worth pointing out that in general, only the actual holder of the trademark is permitted to use the "? mark", which is why Red Hat does it on the official Fedora websites, but others cannot do so. The very nature of trademarks is one where the holder of the trademarks has a superset of rights that they are allowed to use, but must be careful about how those rights are granted to others or they risk diluting (and possibly eventually losing) the marks. Or to be blunt, Red Hat will always have the ability to do things with the Fedora marks that others will not. In general, I feel that Red Hat does a very good job of not misusing the Fedora marks in ways that the community would not approve of, and have learned a lot from some of their earlier mistakes (Fedora Directory Server being one offhand). ~spot From christoph.wickert at googlemail.com Tue May 19 14:37:35 2009 From: christoph.wickert at googlemail.com (Christoph Wickert) Date: Tue, 19 May 2009 16:37:35 +0200 Subject: Be excellent - answer questions In-Reply-To: <20090519142606.GB20408@alpha.rzhou.org> References: <1242724080.2919.24.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20090519124209.GA546@domsch.com> <20090519130455.GI5760@localhost.localdomain> <1242742098.2848.55.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20090519142606.GB20408@alpha.rzhou.org> Message-ID: <1242743855.2848.78.camel@localhost.localdomain> Am Dienstag, den 19.05.2009, 10:26 -0400 schrieb Ricky Zhou: > On 2009-05-19 04:08:18 PM, Christoph Wickert wrote: > > I have to correct my previous statement here because I quoted the > > trademark license agreement, not the trademark guidelines. As you both > > said it does not apply to fc.org. So basically one could say that people > > are free to do whatever they want on fc.org after the board approved > > their request - as long as they honor the logo guidelines. I doubt that > > it will that way in reality. Does the board have the option to withdraw > > permission? If so, under which circumstances? If not, how to prevent > > someone from spreading FUD via fc.org? To me this looks as if it has not > > really been thought out. > Since this is a Fedora-controlled domain, subdomains can certainly be > removed if anything inappropriate is going on on them. It's probably > fine to discuss these things on a case-by-case basis for now, since > problems will hopefully be very rare :-) I hope so too, but we need to be prepared for a worst case. Of course infrastructure can remove the subdomain but there needs to be a policy for that and not only a technical solution. > Thanks, > Ricky Regards, Christoph From ricky at fedoraproject.org Tue May 19 14:38:24 2009 From: ricky at fedoraproject.org (Ricky Zhou) Date: Tue, 19 May 2009 10:38:24 -0400 Subject: Yet another website? (Re: [Ambassadors] belux ambassadors meeting log 15th April 2009) In-Reply-To: <1241834705.9533.142.camel@localhost.localdomain> References: <1239884614.3360.51.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20090416174256.GA20209@hurricane.linuxnetz.de> <49E7C831.5020301@fedoraproject.org> <20090425162036.GB12588@localhost.localdomain> <1241803943.9533.16.camel@localhost.localdomain> <1241807446.9533.27.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20090508233740.GS4080@localhost.localdomain> <1241834705.9533.142.camel@localhost.localdomain> Message-ID: <20090519143824.GC20408@alpha.rzhou.org> On 2009-05-09 04:05:05 AM, Christoph Wickert wrote: > To fix this we need to fix the trademark agreement (unlikely) or fpo > websites first (unlikely too). This is not only a technical requirement > but also a moral commitment: We cannot expect the community to follow > rules that the project does not honor itself. I'm sorry to respond to this thread so late, but I should mention that the websites team is open to patches if anybody is willing to do the work. The one place where I think it is reasonable for the website to get an exemption is the text of the link to the home page - instead of "Fedora Project," "Official Fedora Project web site", or any of the listed options, just "Home" is clearer, since it is already obviously the Fedora Project web site. I agree that changes need to be made to allow for translations of the strings in the agreement though. Thanks, Ricky -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 197 bytes Desc: not available URL: From fedora at leemhuis.info Tue May 19 15:07:02 2009 From: fedora at leemhuis.info (Thorsten Leemhuis) Date: Tue, 19 May 2009 17:07:02 +0200 Subject: What questions would you like to ask the Fedora Board or FESCo Candidates? Message-ID: <4A12CB16.4050104@leemhuis.info> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Several seats of the Fedora Board and FESCo are up for election soon(?). Right now we are in the nomination period, which will be followed by a "Candidate Questionnaire." That means we give candidates a list of questions to answer by mail before the Town Hall meetings on IRC happen. Candidates may choose to answer (or not) those questions as they see fit. Voters can use the answers to get an impression of what the candidate think or plan to do while serving for the Board or FESCo. That should help to get a interesting discussion running during the IRC Town Hall meetings. Furthermore, those people that can't or don't want to participate in the IRC meetings can use the answers to make a more informed vote. Hence we need to prepare a few good questions that we can send to the candidates once the nomination period ends. And that's where I need *your help*: If you have one or more questions you'd like to send to the candidates simply go and add them to: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Elections/Questionnaire It just takes a minute or two, so best to do it right now -- otherwise you might get distracted and forget about it. ;-) I'll take care of the remaining work to review, sort, and clean up the questions(?), and send them to the candidates after the nomination period ends. Hence, I need them by around the 27th of May. I'll later collect the answers from the candidates and put them up for pubic consumption to give people enough time to read them before the town hall meetings start. So go to the wiki and add at least one hard question! The answer will help Fedora contributors to chose whom to vote for! Thanks in advance. CU knurd (?) If you haven't read about it yet see https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Elections for details. (?) If you want to get involved or review the question before I send them please drop me a line and I'll get that arranged -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux) Comment: Using GnuPG with Fedora - http://enigmail.mozdev.org/ iEYEARECAAYFAkoSyxYACgkQUjQh93TopkE14QCfd8S+T8a1k8NUy+gkBbnMOqMx nosAoKl4jgum9/8NV4MkZ6L7wBX89k6b =0Qr6 -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- From stickster at gmail.com Tue May 19 16:08:01 2009 From: stickster at gmail.com (Paul W. Frields) Date: Tue, 19 May 2009 12:08:01 -0400 Subject: Be excellent - answer questions In-Reply-To: <1242743855.2848.78.camel@localhost.localdomain> References: <1242724080.2919.24.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20090519124209.GA546@domsch.com> <20090519130455.GI5760@localhost.localdomain> <1242742098.2848.55.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20090519142606.GB20408@alpha.rzhou.org> <1242743855.2848.78.camel@localhost.localdomain> Message-ID: <20090519160801.GJ2271@localhost.localdomain> On Tue, May 19, 2009 at 04:37:35PM +0200, Christoph Wickert wrote: > Am Dienstag, den 19.05.2009, 10:26 -0400 schrieb Ricky Zhou: > > On 2009-05-19 04:08:18 PM, Christoph Wickert wrote: > > > I have to correct my previous statement here because I quoted the > > > trademark license agreement, not the trademark guidelines. As you both > > > said it does not apply to fc.org. So basically one could say that people > > > are free to do whatever they want on fc.org after the board approved > > > their request - as long as they honor the logo guidelines. I doubt that > > > it will that way in reality. Does the board have the option to withdraw > > > permission? If so, under which circumstances? If not, how to prevent > > > someone from spreading FUD via fc.org? To me this looks as if it has not > > > really been thought out. > > Since this is a Fedora-controlled domain, subdomains can certainly be > > removed if anything inappropriate is going on on them. It's probably > > fine to discuss these things on a case-by-case basis for now, since > > problems will hopefully be very rare :-) > > I hope so too, but we need to be prepared for a worst case. Of course > infrastructure can remove the subdomain but there needs to be a policy > for that and not only a technical solution. The Fedora Project Board is the natural landing place for issues concerning the trademark and logo usage guidelines, and the Board also approves uses of the fedoracommunity.org domains, which must adhere to the trademark and logo usage guidelines. Issues that arise from fedoracommunity.org sites involving those guidelines should continue to be decided by the Board. The Board should and does retain the option to withdraw permission, and perhaps the [[Local community domains]] page should be clear about that, although the trademark guidelines already are. FUD -- if it was intentional and designed to hurt the Fedora Project -- would fall under the trademark guidelines' non-disparagement clause, I believe. What other sorts of problems do you envision would arise about which we should be concerned? -- Paul W. Frields http://paul.frields.org/ gpg fingerprint: 3DA6 A0AC 6D58 FEC4 0233 5906 ACDB C937 BD11 3717 http://redhat.com/ - - - - http://pfrields.fedorapeople.org/ irc.freenode.net: stickster @ #fedora-docs, #fedora-devel, #fredlug From christoph.wickert at googlemail.com Tue May 19 20:14:30 2009 From: christoph.wickert at googlemail.com (Christoph Wickert) Date: Tue, 19 May 2009 22:14:30 +0200 Subject: Be excellent - answer questions In-Reply-To: <20090519160801.GJ2271@localhost.localdomain> References: <1242724080.2919.24.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20090519124209.GA546@domsch.com> <20090519130455.GI5760@localhost.localdomain> <1242742098.2848.55.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20090519142606.GB20408@alpha.rzhou.org> <1242743855.2848.78.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20090519160801.GJ2271@localhost.localdomain> Message-ID: <1242764070.2930.54.camel@localhost.localdomain> Am Dienstag, den 19.05.2009, 12:08 -0400 schrieb Paul W. Frields: > On Tue, May 19, 2009 at 04:37:35PM +0200, Christoph Wickert wrote: > > Am Dienstag, den 19.05.2009, 10:26 -0400 schrieb Ricky Zhou: > > > Since this is a Fedora-controlled domain, subdomains can certainly be > > > removed if anything inappropriate is going on on them. It's probably > > > fine to discuss these things on a case-by-case basis for now, since > > > problems will hopefully be very rare :-) > > > > I hope so too, but we need to be prepared for a worst case. Of course > > infrastructure can remove the subdomain but there needs to be a policy > > for that and not only a technical solution. > > The Fedora Project Board is the natural landing place for issues > concerning the trademark and logo usage guidelines, [snipped] OK, the board decides. Understood. > FUD -- if it was intentional and designed to hurt the Fedora Project > -- would fall under the trademark guidelines' non-disparagement > clause, I believe. Where is this non-disagreement clause? I can't find anything at https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Legal/TrademarkGuidelines Following this discussion I was under the impression that paragraph 5.1 "Noncommercial and community web sites" was all that a site at fc.org would have to follow. Did I oversee something? > What other sorts of problems do you envision would > arise about which we should be concerned? Substantial disagreements. What if a community and the board can't find consensus? Or using flags for example, because this topic has just been raised. Would the Taiwanese community be allowed to use their country's flag? Regards, Christoph From skvidal at fedoraproject.org Tue May 19 20:54:34 2009 From: skvidal at fedoraproject.org (Seth Vidal) Date: Tue, 19 May 2009 16:54:34 -0400 (EDT) Subject: Be excellent - answer questions In-Reply-To: <1242764070.2930.54.camel@localhost.localdomain> References: <1242724080.2919.24.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20090519124209.GA546@domsch.com> <20090519130455.GI5760@localhost.localdomain> <1242742098.2848.55.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20090519142606.GB20408@alpha.rzhou.org> <1242743855.2848.78.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20090519160801.GJ2271@localhost.localdomain> <1242764070.2930.54.camel@localhost.localdomain> Message-ID: On Tue, 19 May 2009, Christoph Wickert wrote: >> arise about which we should be concerned? > > Substantial disagreements. What if a community and the board can't find > consensus? > Or using flags for example, because this topic has just been raised. > Would the Taiwanese community be allowed to use their country's flag? > I asked this one earlier - essentially - if we're not shipping their country's flag in the distro it's not an issue. -sv From stickster at gmail.com Tue May 19 23:26:51 2009 From: stickster at gmail.com (Paul W. Frields) Date: Tue, 19 May 2009 19:26:51 -0400 Subject: Be excellent - answer questions In-Reply-To: <1242764070.2930.54.camel@localhost.localdomain> References: <1242724080.2919.24.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20090519124209.GA546@domsch.com> <20090519130455.GI5760@localhost.localdomain> <1242742098.2848.55.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20090519142606.GB20408@alpha.rzhou.org> <1242743855.2848.78.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20090519160801.GJ2271@localhost.localdomain> <1242764070.2930.54.camel@localhost.localdomain> Message-ID: <20090519232638.GH3848@localhost.localdomain> On Tue, May 19, 2009 at 10:14:30PM +0200, Christoph Wickert wrote: > Am Dienstag, den 19.05.2009, 12:08 -0400 schrieb Paul W. Frields: > > FUD -- if it was intentional and designed to hurt the Fedora Project > > -- would fall under the trademark guidelines' non-disparagement > > clause, I believe. > > Where is this non-disagreement clause? I can't find anything at > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Legal/TrademarkGuidelines > Following this discussion I was under the impression that paragraph > 5.1 "Noncommercial and community web sites" was all that a site at > fc.org would have to follow. Did I oversee something? https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Legal/TrademarkGuidelines#Usage_That_Does_Not_Require_Permission That's the set of guidelines that apply to all trademark usage that does not require prior permission, such as displaying the logo on a community site. Quoting in part: ''' In all cases, use is permitted only provided that: [...snip...] * the use is not disparaging to Red Hat, the Fedora Project or their products ''' > > What other sorts of problems do you envision would > > arise about which we should be concerned? > > Substantial disagreements. What if a community and the board can't find > consensus? Again, what kind of substantial disagreement do you imagine that wouldn't fall under the trademark guidelines? I'm sorry if I sound like I'm being difficult, I don't mean to be. Maybe my imagination is limited. > Or using flags for example, because this topic has just been raised. > Would the Taiwanese community be allowed to use their country's flag? I think the topic to which you're referring is about carrying national flags in the distribution, not as part of the content of a community controlled web site. I don't see an issue here. -- Paul W. Frields http://paul.frields.org/ gpg fingerprint: 3DA6 A0AC 6D58 FEC4 0233 5906 ACDB C937 BD11 3717 http://redhat.com/ - - - - http://pfrields.fedorapeople.org/ irc.freenode.net: stickster @ #fedora-docs, #fedora-devel, #fredlug From kanarip at kanarip.com Wed May 20 14:22:54 2009 From: kanarip at kanarip.com (Jeroen van Meeuwen) Date: Wed, 20 May 2009 16:22:54 +0200 Subject: Be excellent - answer questions In-Reply-To: <4A12C0D8.2040307@redhat.com> References: <1242724080.2919.24.camel@localhost.localdomain> <20090519124209.GA546@domsch.com> <20090519130455.GI5760@localhost.localdomain> <1242742098.2848.55.camel@localhost.localdomain> <4A12C0D8.2040307@redhat.com> Message-ID: <1cc08c5ab7ec2e8fdb1fb35422baa295@localhost> On Tue, 19 May 2009 10:23:20 -0400, "Tom \"spot\" Callaway" wrote: > On 05/19/2009 10:08 AM, Christoph Wickert wrote: >> Sorry, but I disagree. Remember, we already had ambassadors leaving the >> project after the CLA changed. I don't share their concerns (otherwise I >> had to resign, too), but I do see there are people not willing to sign >> the current CLA which means they cannot get a FAS account. > > This is a separate issue, lets not dogpile everything together > unnecessarily. There are some legitimate issues with the current CLA > that I am constantly working on resolving, but this is perhaps the most > complicated legal matter currently on Fedora Legal's plate. Even with > that, your statement that a CLA signature is required to get a FAS > account is not accurate. It is necessary to sign the CLA to make a > contribution to Fedora, but not simply to get a FAS account. > Of which a very practical example is (public) mirror admins and mirror managers of private downstream mirrors, who need a FAS account to log in and administer their mirror in MirrorManager, but do not need to sign the CLA. --Jeroen From overholt at redhat.com Thu May 21 16:53:51 2009 From: overholt at redhat.com (Andrew Overholt) Date: Thu, 21 May 2009 12:53:51 -0400 Subject: Where do I send the C/C++ guys? In-Reply-To: References: Message-ID: <1242924831.3174.12.camel@localhost.localdomain> On Mon, 2009-04-13 at 16:49 -0500, Mike McGrath wrote: > I can always put volunteers to work but I rarely have a > C/C++ task to do. I have found that our "how to get involved" pages aren't great at pointing people to upstream "to do" or similar pages. I created this page in the hopes that we can drive people who are interested in coding non-Fedora stuff to it: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/ContributingCode Andrew From sundaram at fedoraproject.org Thu May 21 19:46:50 2009 From: sundaram at fedoraproject.org (Rahul Sundaram) Date: Fri, 22 May 2009 01:16:50 +0530 Subject: FESCo election nominations now open In-Reply-To: <20090521175153.GA11344@hansolo.jdub.homelinux.org> References: <4A15602A.90100@redhat.com> <1242915966.4320.3.camel@localhost.localdomain> <4A157001.80107@fedoraproject.org> <1242919693.3029.83.camel@localhost.localdomain> <4A157592.9060704@fedoraproject.org> <20090521154403.GA10929@hansolo.jdub.homelinux.org> <20090521175153.GA11344@hansolo.jdub.homelinux.org> Message-ID: <4A15AFAA.5000303@fedoraproject.org> On 05/21/2009 11:21 PM, Josh Boyer wrote: > > Honestly, if we want to open up the candidate pool to the same thing as the > voting pool that is fine with me. If you think it's important enough, you > could certainly file a ticket with FESCo and we can discuss it. Wouldn't it be a board decision? Rahul From jonstanley at gmail.com Thu May 21 19:53:30 2009 From: jonstanley at gmail.com (Jon Stanley) Date: Thu, 21 May 2009 15:53:30 -0400 Subject: FESCo election nominations now open In-Reply-To: <4A15AFAA.5000303@fedoraproject.org> References: <4A15602A.90100@redhat.com> <1242915966.4320.3.camel@localhost.localdomain> <4A157001.80107@fedoraproject.org> <1242919693.3029.83.camel@localhost.localdomain> <4A157592.9060704@fedoraproject.org> <20090521154403.GA10929@hansolo.jdub.homelinux.org> <20090521175153.GA11344@hansolo.jdub.homelinux.org> <4A15AFAA.5000303@fedoraproject.org> Message-ID: On Thu, May 21, 2009 at 3:46 PM, Rahul Sundaram wrote: > Wouldn't it be a board decision? I don't believe so - I don't believe that the board weighed in on the Docs decision to do away with FDSco, if I'm not mistaken. Individual commitees should be free to decide their own voting policy and the qualifications of their own candidates. Of course if the board had differences with whatever we decided, they would be well within their purview to intervene. From sundaram at fedoraproject.org Thu May 21 20:07:06 2009 From: sundaram at fedoraproject.org (Rahul Sundaram) Date: Fri, 22 May 2009 01:37:06 +0530 Subject: FESCo election nominations now open In-Reply-To: References: <4A15602A.90100@redhat.com> <1242915966.4320.3.camel@localhost.localdomain> <4A157001.80107@fedoraproject.org> <1242919693.3029.83.camel@localhost.localdomain> <4A157592.9060704@fedoraproject.org> <20090521154403.GA10929@hansolo.jdub.homelinux.org> <20090521175153.GA11344@hansolo.jdub.homelinux.org> <4A15AFAA.5000303@fedoraproject.org> Message-ID: <4A15B46A.8090107@fedoraproject.org> On 05/22/2009 01:23 AM, Jon Stanley wrote: > On Thu, May 21, 2009 at 3:46 PM, Rahul Sundaram > wrote: > >> Wouldn't it be a board decision? > > I don't believe so - I don't believe that the board weighed in on the > Docs decision to do away with FDSco, if I'm not mistaken. Individual > commitees should be free to decide their own voting policy and the > qualifications of their own candidates. I don't think docs committee and FESCo is not at the same level which is why I believe others should be allowed to vote in the first place. Anyway advisory board is copied and they can be aware. I will raise it up to the board if necessary. Meanwhile filed a ticket at https://fedorahosted.org/fesco/ticket/156 Thank you for your consideration. Rahul From jonstanley at gmail.com Thu May 21 20:10:55 2009 From: jonstanley at gmail.com (Jon Stanley) Date: Thu, 21 May 2009 16:10:55 -0400 Subject: FESCo election nominations now open In-Reply-To: <4A15B46A.8090107@fedoraproject.org> References: <4A157001.80107@fedoraproject.org> <1242919693.3029.83.camel@localhost.localdomain> <4A157592.9060704@fedoraproject.org> <20090521154403.GA10929@hansolo.jdub.homelinux.org> <20090521175153.GA11344@hansolo.jdub.homelinux.org> <4A15AFAA.5000303@fedoraproject.org> <4A15B46A.8090107@fedoraproject.org> Message-ID: On Thu, May 21, 2009 at 4:07 PM, Rahul Sundaram wrote: > https://fedorahosted.org/fesco/ticket/156 > > Thank you for your consideratio No problem, caught me right as I was doing the agenda. Will be on the agenda for tomorrow, 1700UTC. From stickster at gmail.com Thu May 21 20:28:38 2009 From: stickster at gmail.com (Paul W. Frields) Date: Thu, 21 May 2009 16:28:38 -0400 Subject: Fedora Board Recap 2009-05-21 Message-ID: <20090521202838.GX6762@localhost.localdomain> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Board/Meetings/2009-05-21 == Roll Call == * Board Members: Matt Domsch, Seth Vidal, Chris Tyler, Jesse Keating, Paul Frields, Christopher Aillon, Bill Nottingham, Tom "spot" Callaway * Regrets: Harald Hoyer, Dimitris Glezos * Secretary: N/A == Export restrictions == https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Board/Meetings/2009-05-14#Export_Restrictions * Paul found some trade groups that lobby for export reform, but none that would be interested in free software projects that don't put out money * The groups of which Dell is a member are not currently investigating export restrictions == Toxicity proposal == https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Board/Meetings/2009-05-14#Toxicity * paul: Language in the proposal is intentionally not specific * spot: A code of conduct encourages people to skirt the policy with loopholes * Public notice is not going to help because it effectively additionally shames a person, who otherwise could simply come back and say "sorry, carry on" * Anyone can appeal to the board ''Unanimous approval from members in attendance.'' * Implementation details * Who to serve as moderators? ** Spot volunteers ** Seth volunteers, and notes he will be off the Board after June ** Find a volunteer to help as well * IDEAS, to be worked out by Board and Infrastructure teams ** Mailing list where subscribers/moderators are not listed? ** Dead drop for complaints, equivalent of legal at fedoraproject.org ** Moderation FAS account ** not-excellent at fedoraproject.org (send in things that are not excellent) ** Paul: the essential good in this proposal can be undone if we don't be sure to observe transparency. ACTION: Take up implementation details on FAB, following meeting minutes publication. == Sponsorship == * When we last spoke, we had asked Websites and Design team principals to design some website changes ** Better show that Red Hat sponsors a lot of what makes downloading Fedora possible (bandwidth, hardware) ** Paul sent a stopgap change to Websites that is going up immediately post-F11 * Improve Red Hat visibility on the download pages in particular. * Prominent Red Hat logo on every footer? See opensuse.org, which notes Novell at the bottom of every page, and other prominent sponsors in the right column. This isn't a requirement, but should be considered in a website redesign. * Should this be part of an overall fedoraproject.org redesign? * Concern over some pages, such as the download page being too long: ** Should be really pushing Live DVD as a one click option, and letting "choose your own adventure" be done via JS * Spot: Check in with MO to find out: ** Can we do this redesign soonest post-F11 ** Primary goal: how to send the message of Red Hat's sponsorship of Fedora to people who are downloading it ** Secondary goal: be clearer about Red Hat sponsorship throughout the site == What is Fedora? == * https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Board/Meetings/2009-03-24#What_is_Fedora * https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Board/Meetings/2009-04-29#What_is_Fedora.3F * et al., see https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Board/Meetings MORE IDEATION. This does not represent Board policy, just brainstorming for now, except where noted. * Paul has been working on mail/thoughts for multiple days now. What does the community want us to answer the most -- Who do we make Fedora for? * competing ideas ** Aunt Tilly and Uncle Jed? ** People to preview RHEL dev? ** f13: People who want rapid updates to a stable base ** People who want something like RHEL, but released more often ** ctyler: "Us", those working on the distribution, who need server/desktop ** spot: Linux enthusiast (power user) ** spot: People who LOOOVE updates. 336 final updates for F11, AND IT'S NOT RELEASED YET! (only 250 of those are mine) ** mdomsch: Spins and remixes are reaching specific target audiences. Electronics lab, education, ... Fedora's audience is the makers of these. * Paul's random crazy idea: What if we didn't produce a DVD anymore? The only thing we produced was LiveCD Desktop, and spins. ** By going to this model, you could drop a LOT of Anaconda testing. That hurts RHEL. ** Without a lot of choice, you also restrict the set of problems. ** This doesn't necessarily solve the problem of not having a target audience. ** f13: Removes the one thing that /really/ doesn't have a target audience, the DVD, which is a really mixed bag. * paul: How can we ensure, measure and improve the quality of our releases without something to target? ** f13: Blocker bugz? ** f13: Hitting release dates? ** paul: We can throw changes, but without an idea of where we're trying to get to, we're just experimenting. ** paul: As long as Red Hat is getting a RHEL out of Fedora, they'll likely be happy. Can we do better? * Lots of not particularly serious discussion of making the DVD spin 'Spin the Wheel Of Linux'. * Proposal from last time: ** spot: Suggest that GNOME Desktop spin be explicitly acknowledged as default ("first among equals") -- Changes to benefit other Spins that create a conflict should be arbitrated by FESCo, with guidance that the GNOME Desktop spin wins if all else is equal. If those changes are not amenable to the GNOME desktop SIG, then they go to FESCo for arbitration. If FESCo feels that the change is worthwhile, they should escalate to the Board for final decision. ** f13: If we just come out and say, "this view of the distribution is our best shot at an experience," we can improve this situation. ** spot: Getting bogged down in what we call our spins, particularly the "Fedora Desktop". Can we just call it GNOME spin, but tag it as our target? ** Spot motions that we start calling Fedora Desktop the Fedora GNOME Desktop spin. ** Chris thinks that if we are giving the Desktop team the nod to be the measure of what we do in Fedora, they should have the right to name their spin as they wish. ** f13, bill: Adding 'GNOME' does not add any benefit to those who don't already know that it's GNOME and what they want respective to that. ** mdomsch: what will the Desktop team object to in Spot's proposal? It seems to be a benefit to them. ** spot: the extent to which users will be confused by multiple download options is going to depend on how we design our website. ** f13: Competing interests for the "top of the page" download option. * Board members agreed we should target F12 for (yet another) redesign of the overall download experience. ** Paul: "First among equals" starts with "first." We should provide an easy way to get the "first," and for experts, a "follow me." * f13: upgrade issue on LiveCD should be solved by preupgrade. ** mdomsch: then we need some additional focus on preupgrade so it's more usable, so we can recommend that as the preferred and recommended upgrade method. Right now it's not. * paul: still need to get back to the immediate question of who we build for, and how we prioritize requirements (quality? time? other?) ** Matt is still happy with the time-based releases, feature process, and blocker bug process. It ensures we don't try to bite off "too much" (and thus never release), while keeping the quality sufficiently high, and providing people a _reason_ to upgrade. ACTION: caillon to get a proposal from the desktop team ACTION: Spot will flesh out this proposal over the next couple of weeks, immediately after F-11. == Next Meeting == * Date: 2009-05-28 * Time: 17:00 UTC -- Paul W. Frields http://paul.frields.org/ gpg fingerprint: 3DA6 A0AC 6D58 FEC4 0233 5906 ACDB C937 BD11 3717 http://redhat.com/ - - - - http://pfrields.fedorapeople.org/ irc.freenode.net: stickster @ #fedora-docs, #fedora-devel, #fredlug -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: not available URL: From stickster at gmail.com Thu May 21 20:58:52 2009 From: stickster at gmail.com (Paul W. Frields) Date: Thu, 21 May 2009 16:58:52 -0400 Subject: Where do I send the C/C++ guys? In-Reply-To: <1242924831.3174.12.camel@localhost.localdomain> References: <1242924831.3174.12.camel@localhost.localdomain> Message-ID: <20090521205852.GY6762@localhost.localdomain> On Thu, May 21, 2009 at 12:53:51PM -0400, Andrew Overholt wrote: > On Mon, 2009-04-13 at 16:49 -0500, Mike McGrath wrote: > > I can always put volunteers to work but I rarely have a > > C/C++ task to do. > > I have found that our "how to get involved" pages aren't great at > pointing people to upstream "to do" or similar pages. I created this > page in the hopes that we can drive people who are interested in coding > non-Fedora stuff to it: > > https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/ContributingCode I took the liberty of moving it to a proper name that would be searchable, and agree with the wiki czar's guidance: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Contributing_code -- Paul W. Frields http://paul.frields.org/ gpg fingerprint: 3DA6 A0AC 6D58 FEC4 0233 5906 ACDB C937 BD11 3717 http://redhat.com/ - - - - http://pfrields.fedorapeople.org/ irc.freenode.net: stickster @ #fedora-docs, #fedora-devel, #fredlug From emanuel.elias.bravo at gmail.com Fri May 22 22:20:24 2009 From: emanuel.elias.bravo at gmail.com (Emanuel Bravo) Date: Fri, 22 May 2009 19:20:24 -0300 Subject: Fedora 12 codename suggestion Message-ID: <223a1a9a0905221520o171e3d79vf834d05258e9192d@mail.gmail.com> Panthera is a genus of the family Felidae (the cats), this genus are the subfamily, the big cats (Tiger, Lion, Jaguar & Leopard) and so is a Greek name : *pan-* ("all") and *ther* ("beast") or "theras" that means ("hunter") as is Leonidas what mean "Lion's son", "Lion-like". -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From poelstra at redhat.com Wed May 27 18:19:43 2009 From: poelstra at redhat.com (John Poelstra) Date: Wed, 27 May 2009 11:19:43 -0700 Subject: Fedora 11 GA Release Readiness Meeting Recap 2009-05-27 Message-ID: <4A1D843F.8010109@redhat.com> Fedora 11 GA Release Readiness Meeting 2009-05-27 Ambassadors -- David Nalley(present) Design -- M?ir?n Duffy (present) Documentation -- Eric Christensen (present) FESCo -- Dennis Gilmore (present) Fedora Engineering Manager -- Tom "Spot" Callaway (present) Fedora Project Leader -- Paul Frields (present) Infrastructure -- Mike McGrath (present) Marketing -- Jack Aboutboul (in the house) Quality -- James Laska (present) & Adam Williamson (present) Release Engineering -- Jesse Keating (present) Translation -- Diego B?rigo Zacar?o Websites -- Ricky Zhou Facilitator -- John Poelstra (present) == Agenda == 1) Are the bits ready? Is next Tuesday a solid date? 2) Round table with all teams 3) = Overall Status = == Documentation == o Release notes are in good shape o Announcement work is in progress--will wrap up at tonight's meeting (01:00 UTC Thursday) --could use a review by marketing o Work on guides continues and should be ready soon --install guide and security security guide, user guide --publishing on docs.fedoraproject.org --How are we advertising that the guides are available? --help.fedoraproject.org has links --some personal blog posts on planet would help too --We do not have any explicit dates on the schedule for pushing the guides to docs.fedoraproject.org --best target is the night before release day or earlier is best given cvs processes that have to run --John will work with Eric on the Fedora 12 schedule o Need to have Documentation on the website stay at the final target, so that links to docs.fp.o don't need to change on release day --This is the plan in the future, release-notes were just missed through accident == Marketing == o Jack has everything done so will be ready for docs meeting tonight o Coordinating content o Release announcement needs to be translated --How should this be coordinated... by the docs team or directly with the translation team -- Jack will have the next cut at the announcement finished by ~3:30pm today, so others can check it over. Then Docs will review this evening during their meeting. --In general we do not translate... because the idiomatic first section doesn't tend to translate well. It's not forbidden by any means, just not required. --If we want to change this we should rework the Fedora 12 schedule == Ambassadors == o In good shape overall o Waiting for release announcement o DVD/media sleeve art is done and at the printers == Design Team == o Everything good to go o Banner artwork is done and coordinated with with websites team o Test is available at publictest1 == State of the Bits == o QA, Releng, FESCo o Working on a few specific bugs -- bug 502007 (kernel kms) --could impact the timeliness of the release --working on tracking down hardware --bug contains details on recreating problem, fix proposed --need extra testing, anyone with an Intel 865G needed to see if they can (1) reproduce error, and (2) resolve it using info in the bug --https://bugzilla.redhat.com/502007 -- bug 498553 (anaconda fs create error) --would probably not hold the release for o We must have a release candidate composed tonight so that people can look at tomorrow o Only 1 day available for verification of MODIFIED bugs and retesting release candidate media -- QA will continue testing after content sync's to mirrors and escalate any defects for review as needed -- Test result matrix - https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/QA:Fedora_11_RC_Install_Test_Results -- Blocker bugs (by component) - http://tinyurl.com/pqeq6n o If the release is not available to the mirrors on Thursday, then the release would have to slip --check with Jesse first thing Friday morning or last Thursday night == Infrastructure == o All good to go o Working on some performance improvements behind the scenes that have made wiki faster From ricky at fedoraproject.org Wed May 27 20:54:18 2009 From: ricky at fedoraproject.org (Ricky Zhou) Date: Wed, 27 May 2009 16:54:18 -0400 Subject: Fedora 11 GA Release Readiness Meeting Recap 2009-05-27 In-Reply-To: <4A1D843F.8010109@redhat.com> References: <4A1D843F.8010109@redhat.com> Message-ID: <20090527205418.GA27816@alpha.rzhou.org> On 2009-05-27 11:19:43 AM, John Poelstra wrote: > 3) Sorry I missed the meeting today. Just wanted to mention that everything is ready now for websites - we currently have a test site setup at http://publictest1.fedoraproject.org/fedoraproject.org/ (with all translations enabled). This is basically what the site will look like on release day, minus the languages that aren't translated enough. As usual, translators are free to keep sending translations/requests to enable languages at any point. Right before release day, I will verify all of the download/torrent links match up with what's on the mirrors, then all we need to do is change a script in Infrastructure to make it live. Thanks, Ricky -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 197 bytes Desc: not available URL: From stickster at gmail.com Thu May 28 02:09:09 2009 From: stickster at gmail.com (Paul W. Frields) Date: Wed, 27 May 2009 22:09:09 -0400 Subject: Reminder: Fedora Board IRC meeting 1800 UTC 2009-05-05 Message-ID: <20090528020909.GD3620@localhost.localdomain> ** Note the different date and time! The change was necessary to accommodate some of the Board members for this month. The Board's schedule may change after elections and appointments are complete, to make sure all members can attend as often as possible. The Board is holding its monthly public meeting on Thursday, June 4, 2009, at 1700 UTC on IRC Freenode. For this meeting, the public is invited to do the following: * Join #fedora-board-meeting to see the Board's conversation. * Join #fedora-board-questions to discuss topics and post questions. This channel is read/write for everyone. The moderator will voice people from the queue, one at a time, 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. 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 stickster at gmail.com Thu May 28 02:09:09 2009 From: stickster at gmail.com (Paul W. Frields) Date: Wed, 27 May 2009 22:09:09 -0400 Subject: Reminder: Fedora Board IRC meeting 1800 UTC 2009-05-05 Message-ID: <20090528020909.GD3620@localhost.localdomain> ** Note the different date and time! The change was necessary to accommodate some of the Board members for this month. The Board's schedule may change after elections and appointments are complete, to make sure all members can attend as often as possible. The Board is holding its monthly public meeting on Thursday, June 4, 2009, at 1700 UTC on IRC Freenode. For this meeting, the public is invited to do the following: * Join #fedora-board-meeting to see the Board's conversation. * Join #fedora-board-questions to discuss topics and post questions. This channel is read/write for everyone. The moderator will voice people from the queue, one at a time, 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. 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: -------------- next part -------------- -- fedora-announce-list mailing list fedora-announce-list at redhat.com https://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-announce-list From stickster at gmail.com Thu May 28 11:31:23 2009 From: stickster at gmail.com (Paul W. Frields) Date: Thu, 28 May 2009 07:31:23 -0400 Subject: ERRATA: IRC Board meeting ** 1700 UTC 2009-06-04 ** In-Reply-To: <20090528020909.GD3620@localhost.localdomain> References: <20090528020909.GD3620@localhost.localdomain> Message-ID: <20090528113123.GD8860@localhost.localdomain> On Wed, May 27, 2009 at 10:09:09PM -0400, Paul W. Frields wrote: > ** Note the different date and time! The change was necessary to > accommodate some of the Board members for this month. The Board's > schedule may change after elections and appointments are complete, > to make sure all members can attend as often as possible. > > The Board is holding its monthly public meeting on Thursday, June 4, > 2009, at 1700 UTC on IRC Freenode. For this meeting, the public is > invited to do the following: And I apologize for the subject error -- the correct date is listed in the message body. 2009-06-04, at UTC 1700. Paul From stickster at gmail.com Thu May 28 14:41:30 2009 From: stickster at gmail.com (Paul W. Frields) Date: Thu, 28 May 2009 10:41:30 -0400 Subject: Board meeting canceled this week Message-ID: <20090528144130.GQ8860@localhost.localdomain> The Board meeting scheduled for today has been canceled. Next Thursday at 1700 UTC we will hold a public IRC meeting. -- Paul W. Frields http://paul.frields.org/ gpg fingerprint: 3DA6 A0AC 6D58 FEC4 0233 5906 ACDB C937 BD11 3717 http://redhat.com/ - - - - http://pfrields.fedorapeople.org/ irc.freenode.net: stickster @ #fedora-docs, #fedora-devel, #fredlug -------------- next part -------------- A non-text attachment was scrubbed... Name: not available Type: application/pgp-signature Size: 189 bytes Desc: not available URL: From stickster at gmail.com Fri May 29 20:47:03 2009 From: stickster at gmail.com (Paul W. Frields) Date: Fri, 29 May 2009 16:47:03 -0400 Subject: Succession planning change proposal Message-ID: <20090529204703.GX8435@localhost.localdomain> I have two proosals to make for our succession planning documents[1]: First, I'm happy to see that we have enough nominations for the Board and FESCo elections to require ballots and voting. However, if that failed to occur in some future election cycle, we'd need to have the situation covered. The following proposal adds that coverage: ''' INSUFFICIENT NOMINATIONS: If there are fewer nominees for elected Board seats than required to fill all seats, then the FPL will appoint individuals to fill any empty seats for a full term. At the expiry of the term, the seats in question revert to elected seats. ''' Second, I think we also need to fix a couple areas in the text that refer to appointed seats as "Red Hat" seats which is a misnomer. Appointed seats are filled by the FPL, and appointees need not be Red Hat employees. I've made the changes on the wiki and marked the page {{draft}} to show its unapproved status. The Board will discuss these changes if needed, and vote on them at the next meeting (public IRC, June 4). A 2/3 majority of the Board is required to institute these changes, as reflected in the current document. === [1] http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Board/SuccessionPlanning -- Paul W. Frields http://paul.frields.org/ gpg fingerprint: 3DA6 A0AC 6D58 FEC4 0233 5906 ACDB C937 BD11 3717 http://redhat.com/ - - - - http://pfrields.fedorapeople.org/ irc.freenode.net: stickster @ #fedora-docs, #fedora-devel, #fredlug From inode0 at gmail.com Fri May 29 23:36:08 2009 From: inode0 at gmail.com (inode0) Date: Fri, 29 May 2009 18:36:08 -0500 Subject: Succession planning change proposal In-Reply-To: <20090529204703.GX8435@localhost.localdomain> References: <20090529204703.GX8435@localhost.localdomain> Message-ID: On Fri, May 29, 2009 at 3:47 PM, Paul W. Frields wrote: > I have two proosals to make for our succession planning documents[1]: I'm not sure if you are looking for public feedback but I think I've overcome my shyness now and will give you some anyway, As always, take it as the opinion of one community member who has fairly fresh eyes and who doesn't really know what he is talking about. > First, I'm happy to see that we have enough nominations for the Board and > FESCo elections to require ballots and voting. ?However, if that > failed to occur in some future election cycle, we'd need to have the > situation covered. > > The following proposal adds that coverage: > > ''' > INSUFFICIENT NOMINATIONS: ?If there are fewer nominees for elected > Board seats than required to fill all seats, then the FPL will appoint > individuals to fill any empty seats for a full term. ?At the expiry of > the term, the seats in question revert to elected seats. > ''' I don't have any problem with this simple solution. I also don't have any problem with the FESCo solution which has as its first step a one week delay to kick the community in the pants and give it a second chance to step up to its responsibility before changing gears. > Second, I think we also need to fix a couple areas in the text that > refer to appointed seats as "Red Hat" seats which is a misnomer. > Appointed seats are filled by the FPL, and appointees need not be Red > Hat employees. Are you speaking here of the APPOINTED SEATS section? I still see perhaps the old verbiage as it says "The people in these seats are appointed by Red Hat ..." Given the fact that the community freely elects Red Hat employees and that the FPL freely appoints community members who are not Red Hat employees I think it is past time to de-emphasize the distinction. In the Composition section it says "All seats are occupied by Fedora community members." This is correct and this is the language I prefer. So could we also say that in the blue box at the top of the page rather than "The Fedora Project Board is made up of a mix of Red Hat employees and Fedora community contributors?" For the same reasons you give for not liking "Red Hat seats" I object slightly to the use of "community seats" in the SCHEDULE section. In the ORDER OF OPERATIONS section it says "We hold back the final appointment so that we can look ..." which suggests it isn't the FPL making the decision since that person isn't a "we." Or reword this to make clear who this "we" refers to exactly. John From jonstanley at gmail.com Fri May 29 23:40:34 2009 From: jonstanley at gmail.com (Jon Stanley) Date: Fri, 29 May 2009 19:40:34 -0400 Subject: Succession planning change proposal In-Reply-To: <20090529204703.GX8435@localhost.localdomain> References: <20090529204703.GX8435@localhost.localdomain> Message-ID: On Fri, May 29, 2009 at 4:47 PM, Paul W. Frields wrote: > First, I'm happy to see that we have enough nominations for the Board and > FESCo elections to require ballots and voting. ?However, if that > failed to occur in some future election cycle, we'd need to have the > situation covered. FESCo already has this situation covered in our Election procedures: # A minimum number of candidates are necessary in order to hold an election. This will be the number of open seats + 25%. # If not enough candidates have signed up by the deadline, the election will be held back by one week for more candidates to appear. If there are still not enough candidates, the candidates who are present will be voted upon (or merely confirmed if there are less candidates than open seats.) # If there are not enough candidates to complete the ballot, all the contributors listed in this section will be added to the ballot. # If FESCo does not have the full number of seats filled at this point, the vacant seats will attempt to be filled by the following methods: # If there are runner-up candidates from the previous election that did not have the opportunity to be on FESCo, they will be offered a seat according to their rank in the voting. # If those candidates have been exhausted, FESCo will ask Fedora community members that they think would do a good job if they would be willing to hold the open seats. # If the open seats are still not filled, FESCo will operate with less members until the next FESCo election. From mspevack at redhat.com Sat May 30 07:55:44 2009 From: mspevack at redhat.com (Max Spevack) Date: Sat, 30 May 2009 09:55:44 +0200 (CEST) Subject: Succession planning change proposal In-Reply-To: References: <20090529204703.GX8435@localhost.localdomain> Message-ID: On Fri, 29 May 2009, inode0 wrote: > In the ORDER OF OPERATIONS section it says "We hold back the final > appointment so that we can look ..." which suggests it isn't the FPL > making the decision since that person isn't a "we." Or reword this to > make clear who this "we" refers to exactly. I wrote that text long ago, so I'll take the blame for any ambiguity. It's the FPL's call, but I probably wrote "we" to suggest that the FPL doesn't just sit in a corner staring at a wall until a name pops into his/her head, but rather thinks about what the Board is trying to and is meant to achieve, and probably talks to other Board members while trying to ensure that a good choice is made. --Max From sundaram at fedoraproject.org Sun May 31 12:24:21 2009 From: sundaram at fedoraproject.org (Rahul Sundaram) Date: Sun, 31 May 2009 17:54:21 +0530 Subject: Why not to create Fedora-us and Fedora-non-us branches? In-Reply-To: <1243772287.26053.15.camel@localhost.localdomain> References: <20090526170612.GJ9951@nostromo.devel.redhat.com> <1243358736.3144.23.camel@localhost.localdomain> <4A1C2961.70703@redhat.com> <4A2269C7.1010800@fedoraproject.org> <1243770864.26053.8.camel@localhost.localdomain> <4A227206.9010601@fedoraproject.org> <1243772287.26053.15.camel@localhost.localdomain> Message-ID: <4A2276F5.7040904@fedoraproject.org> On 05/31/2009 05:48 PM, Alexey Torkhov wrote: > On Sun, 2009-05-31 at 17:33 +0530, Rahul Sundaram wrote: >> On 05/31/2009 05:24 PM, Alexey Torkhov wrote: >>> On Sun, 2009-05-31 at 16:58 +0530, Rahul Sundaram wrote: >> >>> >>> Usage of trademark was granted to Russian Fedora by agreement between >>> Red Hat and other company that represent it here, AFAIK. >>> Max Spevack was on presentation on Russian Fedora launch. >> >> I don't see it recorded in >> >> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Trademark_licensees >> >> It doesn't fit the trademark guidelines either. While Red Hat can >> legally grant a license to anyone and doesn't have to abide by the >> guidelines, I would expect it to do so nevertheless. So why a special >> exception for "Russian Fedora"? > > I don't know the details of an agreement, ask legal team for that. I don't need to know the details of the agreement. If any such agreement exists, it should follow the trademark guidelines that Fedora set for rest of the community and not be given special exceptions. Can the Fedora Board look into this? Rahul