[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]

[Ambassadors] 2009-03-29 FAMSCO Meeting Summary

Hello and welcome to this eighth FAMSCO weekly meeting summary.

The latest meeting was hold on March 19th 2009 on #fedora-ambassadors

Francesco Fugolini
Max Spevack
Joerg Simon
David Nalley
Susmit Shannigrahi

Regreted attendees:
Rodrigo Padula

Meeting agenda :
1. Open Issues
2. Tasks review
3. Budget
4. t.b.d.

1. Open Issues
Francesco started by thanking Max for his summary on FAmSCo discussion
about the cleaning of the ambassador's unused accounts and mentoring.
Max stated that now FAmSCo should start making decisions and
implementing policies right after the feedback period on the list.
David then stated that some of the decisions are easy to vote on, like
the inactive/active decision. Others would requiere a bit of work
before being submitted to discussion. Franceso, David and Max then
stated that a line should be drawn under the current process and have
the new process started. JohnRose (inode0) intervened and expressed his
worriness about being allowed to give feedbacks, as he seems that
FAmSCo is rushing towards quick vote on these issues. He was happy to
learn that a couple of week will be left before FAmSCo take a formal

Joerg insisted then to talk about the filter he suggested, i.e. 
"has to be a Contributor to another Sub-Project inside Fedora where a
sponsor is needed" or, "is recommended by a Contributor to another
Sub-Project inside Fedora who will take mentorship for that person" or,
"has contributed to Fedora on a event before" or, "has to provide
measureable, visible contributions before!" or, "has to spend money or
whatever (if a company want to be Ambassador without doing work)".

Francesco admitted that these points are good as basis, whereas Max
expressed some little reserved on some. Francesco then recentered the
discussion on what FAmSCo has to achieve in the next few weeks: take a
decision after the comments are done on the proposal Joerg made. Joerg
then asked if the "purging inactive Accounts" topic can be decided
today and Max wondered if any feedbacks from Infrasdtructure were
needed. To what David made it clear that Infrastructure guys have not
yet decided anything but are thinking about stripping people of all
groups if they have been inactive for a certain length of time. To
which Max answered that we should wait for the Infratructure guys to be
ready on this topic and apply a global FAS account cleaning as they
wish, and wait for Ambassadors accounts to be cleaned at the same time.
However, according to David, the Infrastructure guys encouraged to have
our own Ambassador accounts cleaning, as they don't know at all when
they will be able to handle this issue. Then FAmSCO decided he could
handle its own account cleaning.

Francesco adjourned the meeting.
Title: 2009-03-26-famsco.log


fugoliniOk, just to start, roll call:19:04
fugoliniFrancesco Ugolini19:04
... join!#fedora-meeting -> asgeirf_(n=asgeirf 203-217-44-219 dyn iinet net au)19:04
ke4qqqDavid Nalley19:04
spevackMax Spevack19:04
... signoff!#fedora-meeting -> G(Remote closed the connection)19:05
fugoliniSo, here is it the agenda. For this time I still used the same format of the past. Starting from the next one I'll work on a better done one :)19:06
fugolini1. Open issues19:06
fugolini2. Tasks review19:06
fugolini4. Budget19:06
fugolini5. t.b.d.19:06
fugolini*3 and 4 naturally19:06
fugolini1. Open issues: I know this issue is too generic. I'm talking about the David proposal19:07
fugolinifirst of all my thanks to Max for his great summary19:07
spevackWell, as everyone has seen, I wrote up the summary that I promised last week and sent it to the list19:07
fugoliniof the FAmSCo discussion.19:07
spevackfugolini: no problem19:07
... join!#fedora-meeting -> tatica_(n=tatica host-190-15-166-74 movilmax com)19:07
spevackin writing it up, i felt like it made a pretty clear case for what the decisions should be19:08
fugolinispevack: take the voice, you19:08
spevackat this point, i don't have much to add.  I guess my own views came across even though i tried to write19:08
... signoff!#fedora-meeting -> asgeirf(Read error: 145 (Connection timed out))19:08
spevacka unbiased summary19:08
... signoff!#fedora-meeting -> tatica(Nick collision from services.)19:08
... nick!tatica_ -> tatica19:08
spevackbut i think we need to more or less19:08
spevackstart making some decisions, and implementing new policies.19:08
spevackthough some time for comments on the thread19:09
spevackand feedback19:09
spevack is worthwhile19:09
spevackthat's all19:09
* fugolini thinks that we can skip this formality if someone is directly involved in the discussion. Use it for questions/clarification (?) or suggestions (!)19:09
spevackke4qqq: go for it19:09
ke4qqqI think there are some parts of this that are ready to be baked - such as the inactive/active decision - seems like an easy vote to handle19:10
ke4qqqothers such as raising the bar - sounds like we might be ready to start doing the leg work of drafting a proposal for a future meeting19:10
ke4qqqto actually vote on, though perhaps assigning those who would draft might be a discussion19:10
fugoliniFAmSCo vote naturally :) (we represent all the community)19:10
ke4qqqeof from me19:11
fugolinike4qqq: could be possible to formalize that proposal, in order to have a text to spread19:11
susmit! !19:11
fugoliniI know your email and the other ones are just clear enough, but I think we could take it as one, to help us19:12
ke4qqqfugolini: I am unclear on what you are asking - but you want me to restate here?19:12
ke4qqqfor the log?19:12
susmitwhat happens to the existing but new (say 0-6 month old) ambassadors? Do we put the into the process again?19:12
fugolinike4qqq: to make a formal voting request on FAmSCo list. Just that everyone could know perfectly what they are voting for19:13
* susmit waiting for views19:13
... join!#fedora-meeting -> fedora-angel(n=angel 116 193 168 179)19:13
fugolinisusmit: I'm sure we can use general principles, that says that new rules apply to new cases if they don't give a benefit to the previous situation19:13
fugolini*people that are just part of the project19:13
ke4qqqfugolini: I did so for the inactive issue - and it was repeated verbatim in the email that spevack sent out19:14
* ke4qqq is trying to find a link 19:14
spevackI think we need to draw a line under the current process, and once we have a new process basically just say "starting on THIS DATE, we now use THIS PROCESS"19:14
fugolinispevack: that's what I mean19:15
fugolinike4qqq: are you talking about the official proposal?19:15
... join!#fedora-meeting -> G(n=njones fedora/G)19:15
susmitspevack, exactly what I was trying to say, we had many ambassadors from India in last six months :)19:15
fugolinike4qqq: ?19:16
fugoliniok, inode019:16
kitalwhat do we need to have a quorum?19:16
fugolinikital: I think we can use 50% +1 of FAmSCo members (so 4 people)19:16
ke4qqqfugolini: this was what I proposed on famsco19:16
ke4qqqand what max pasted back19:17
fugolinike4qqq: I see the proposal, I mean have an email with this is what I'm asking to vote (really few lines), reply with +1 or -1 and give a reason19:17
inode0I'm wondering if we (people not on FAmSCo) are being given a chance to give feedback? It seems you have already decided and are in a hurry to vote and be done with it?19:17
fugoliniinode0: we are just doing this19:17
fugoliniwe opened the discussion to ambassadors list to give a chance to give a relevant position on the discussion19:17
spevackinode0: as far as i can tell, we're just talking.  i already said that we need to give time for the thread i put on the list today to be discussed.19:18
spevackinode0: do you have any feedback for us?19:18
inode0yes, and I gave quite a bit in another channel today - to respond by mail will take longer19:19
susmitI think we need to put up a date for voting...after a couple of week?19:19
spevackinode0: was it in #fedora-ambassadors?  /me will make a point of going back and reading the channel logs19:19
spevackinode0: ok19:19
inode0thanks, if we have a couple of weeks to discuss, then you take some time to consider the input, I'm happy19:20
* kital thinks it is time to do it now19:20
ke4qqqmy concern is analysis paralysis - we've been discussing for weeks19:20
* inode0 thinks he is getting that feeling it is decided already again19:21
kital+1 ke4qqq19:21
inode0that is all I wanted to say now19:21
... join!#fedora-meeting -> CheekyBoinc(n=CheekyBo port-92-196-94-178 dynamic qsc de)19:21
spevackinode0: seriously, after all the time i took to bring that conversation out to ambassadors-list, you're not willing to give any benefit of the doubt?19:21
spevackinode0: no one is rushing towards anything19:21
kitalinode0 if i understand your position right - than we have to decide personally that someone is ready to be a Ambassador - right?19:22
inode0I can't explain it in 5 minutes in a meeting, I'm sorry.19:22
kitalok there are two topics on this19:23
ke4qqqat least two if not three19:23
kitalAccounts which remained inactive for a period of greater than 30 days after a password reset has to be purged!19:23
fugolinididn't we discussed about 3 months?19:24
spevackinode0: i wrote that summary email particularly with you in mind, trying to make it clear who was advocating for what, and with different rationales19:24
kitalthis was my first suggestion 3 months after reset19:24
kital30 days was the other suggestion by david19:25
... join!#fedora-meeting -> tkjacobsen_(n=tkjacobs pppoe2-ves broadcom dk)19:25
kitalso it is 6 month + 30days19:25
inode0spevack: and I intended to thank you for sharing more details about internal FAmSCo business with us. Whatever I said here I were not the result of anything you have done.19:25
fugolinikital: what about the second topic?19:26
kitalthe other task is - how we can have more quality - now we could share our daily expiriences with new Ambassadors - we know the situation so we can skip this19:26
kitali have made proposals set a tightened filter19:27
fugolinisure we read, and, after seeing the situation, I agree with the points moved :)19:28
spevackI feel like we need to give people time to read the thread from today and respond.19:28
spevackand that famsco needs to make some decisions next week19:28
ke4qqqon both issues?19:28
* spevack isn't sure19:28
* kital is not happy19:29
fugoliniat lead the first one19:29
spevacki just don't want to spend the next 30 mins re-writing stuff that I wrote this morning :)19:29
* spevack sits back for a while and just listens19:29
kitalcan we at least talk about if the filters i have suggested make sense19:29
fugolinisure, we can19:29
kitalshould i paste them here again?19:30
* spevack worries whenever someone like kital says he is not happy. let's let kital talk :)19:30
ke4qqqbefore we get started - do we not have a motion on the table?19:30
fugoliniI personally agreed, like clint suggested in his mail, we should bring some filters as principle19:30
fugolinikital:  sure19:30
... signoff!#fedora-meeting -> wwoods(Read error: 110 (Connection timed out))19:31
kital- has to be a Contributor to another Sub-Project inside Fedora where a sponsor19:31
kitalis needed19:31
kital- is recommended by a Contributor to another Sub-Project inside Fedora who19:31
kitalwill take mentorship for that person19:31
... signoff!#fedora-meeting -> nphilipp("Leaving")19:31
kital- has contributed to Fedora on a event before19:31
kital- has to provide measureable, visible contributions before! (this can be done19:31
kitalas soon as CLA is subscribed!)19:31
kital- has to spend money or whatever (if a company want to be Ambassador without19:31
kitaldoing work)19:31
fugolinike4qqq: I think the 2 points moved by kital could be considered the motion: they are clear and simple redirect to topic discussed in the list19:31
kitalrecommended by a Contributor to another Sub-Project inside Fedora who will take mentorship for that person and has to provide measureable, visible contributions before!19:31
kitalwould be a good combination19:32
fugolinikital:  I think those critieria are enought maybe we should bring them as parameters, giving a spectrum of choice to people19:32
... signoff!#fedora-meeting -> tkjacobsen_(Remote closed the connection)19:32
... join!#fedora-meeting -> tkjacobsen_(n=tkjacobs pppoe2-ves broadcom dk)19:32
... join!#fedora-meeting -> abadger1999(n=abadger1 12 185 22 226)19:32
... join!#fedora-meeting -> mharris(n=mharris fedora/mharris)19:33
fugolinikital: +1 for  the last one, you were, like anytime, right having people that know the project19:33
... join!#fedora-meeting -> chitlesh_(n=chitlesh 56 1-200-80 adsl-dyn isp belgacom be)19:34
fugoliniwe aren't like the beginning a small, not propely defined, project. After some years we have created a deep identity19:34
kitalto match inode0's suggestion, regional mentors or qualified Ambassadors should turned into sponsors and decide by personal assessment <- i am not sure about that19:34
... join!#fedora-meeting -> thomasj(n=thomasj e180164076 adsl alicedsl de)19:34
fugoliniI think the guidelines you pasted above could be used as a parameter to judge19:34
kitalspevack: not happy to have no decission - but i see that we have to refine this19:35
spevackkital: some of your points i agree with, and some of them i think are maybe a little bit too "harsh"19:35
kitalsure they are just a proposal19:35
spevackkital: but generally, I think that we are on the right track.19:35
fugolinikital:  I'm sorry I've not pushed for a fast decision, I preferred to wait till the situation was restored to a calm one19:35
spevackand I don't see anyone either in famsco or otherwise screaming that we're talking completely crazy.19:36
spevackam i wrong?19:36
susmitI am not sure if we can measure this by this "has contributed to Fedora on a event before"19:36
... signoff!#fedora-meeting -> mbacovsk_(Read error: 110 (Connection timed out))19:37
delhageespecially not for a new region?19:37
fugolininew region?19:37
... signoff!#fedora-meeting -> tkjacobsen(Connection timed out)19:37
* ke4qqq hasn't seen that this has been aynthing but a calm discussion19:37
fugoliniMy proposal is to keep them as parameters, that could be19:37
kitaldelhage - as soon as one has signed the CLA he can contribute to Fedora19:37
susmitI know someone who volunteers at events but turned out to be not so good an ambassador19:37
fugolinike4qqq: I'm talking about what happened in the list19:38
fugolinike4qqq: see the "Reply to this mail" thread19:38
delhageI mean ambassaors in a region where there haven't been any before19:38
fugolinidelhage: ah19:38
* fugolini thinks he is completely understandable :/19:39
ke4qqqahhh ok19:39
kitalsure - but even in a new region fedora should be presented in the right way - and i am sure as i know you - you had find a way into Ambassadors through that filter19:39
* delhage thinks he might have misunderstood19:39
fugoliniJust to repeat myself: instead of creating some strict criteria we should give some "parameters" and a range they could used, like "take part to an event --in real case--> if in XXX there wasn't event just check for the other ones19:40
fugoliniSo, just to summary what we discuss since now:19:41
fugolini1) For next week meeting, after we have read feedbacks from the list, we have to take a decision on the 2 proposals Joerg moved19:42
fugolini2) For the criteria, it seems people agreed having them. Discuss on how we should use them.19:43
fugoliniisn't right?19:43
kitalto 1) - purging inactive Accounts can be decided today?19:43
kitalfor the rest +119:44
fugolinisure we can19:44
... signoff!#fedora-meeting -> che__(Read error: 60 (Operation timed out))19:44
spevackdo we have a definitive answer from Fedora Infrastructure19:44
spevackon whether or not they are implementing a global policy to deal with inactive FAS accounts?19:44
spevackbecause if they are doing that, then their decision "outranks" ours, doesn't it?19:45
ke4qqqspevack: they have said they have no definitive plans yet, but do plan at some yet undefined point in the future to strip people of all groups if they have been inactive for a certain length of time19:45
spevackwell, ok.19:46
spevackthen... doesn't that settle it?19:46
ke4qqqmmcgrath said: If you guys want to wait on our lead, it'll probably be something closer19:46
ke4qqqto 6 months for now and we'll basically take the user out of all groups19:46
ke4qqqand change their email address to something like:19:46
spevackwe'll let the global FAS active/inactive policy apply for Ambassadors?19:46
ke4qqqWe've got plans for all of this but none of them are19:46
ke4qqqtotally set in stone yet.19:47
... signoff!#fedora-meeting -> ChitleshGoorah(Read error: 110 (Connection timed out))19:47
spevackThen I guess my question to FAMSCo would be:19:47
... signoff!#fedora-meeting -> cassmodiah(Read error: 104 (Connection reset by peer))19:47
... join!#fedora-meeting -> ldimagg__(n=ldimaggi nat/redhat/x-b1f1fb6a8e7494b7)19:47
spevackshouldn't we just allow the global policy for fedora accounts that Fedora Infrastructure is creating be the policy that we follow?19:47
spevacki don't think they'd appreciate (or want) every sub-project coming up with its own policy.  that would be broken for sure19:48
fugolini(for the reasons expressed in the list, even if the question was difference)19:48
spevacksince one account is a member of (potentially) many projects19:48
ke4qqqthey actually encouraged that19:48
spevackyeah, i'd assume so.19:48
... join!#fedora-meeting -> tkjacobsen__(n=tkjacobs pppoe2-ves broadcom dk)19:48
spevackso.... what are we arguing about? :)19:48
fugolinispevack: yeah, it couldn't be a productive way to handle things19:48
kitalwe had to pirge the "Ambassadors from ..." also19:48
ke4qqqI mean they encouraged us to do it on our own19:48
fugolinike4qqq: why?19:48
ke4qqqrather than letting them hold the hot potato19:49
ke4qqqI don't know if that's the reason19:49
ke4qqqbut mike said that he 'hate[s] makeing global changes like this'19:49
... signoff!#fedora-meeting -> thomasj_(Read error: 110 (Connection timed out))19:50
kitalwhat we want to clean up is not the Account  itself only Group membership to Ambassadors - right?19:50
ke4qqqso my concern is that I don't want to come across as shirking our responsibilibity - and dodging it because eventually someone else may handle it19:50
ke4qqqI know it's a hot potato19:50
kitalthe global clean-up that infrastructure is planning is the account - right?19:50
fugolinithe hottest one :)19:50
spevackkital: yes, of course!19:50
* spevack hits himself in the face19:51
spevackthere is a difference between the ACCOUNT and the AMBASSADORS GROUP MEMBERSHIP19:51
* spevack is an idiot19:51
* spevack removes himself from al groups :P19:51
kitalso it is not so hot :) for us19:52
... leave!#fedora-meeting -> Khaytsus()19:52
... join!#fedora-meeting -> wwoods(n=wwoods nat/redhat/x-8578a2521d6fd794)19:53
fugoliniSo, at the end, should we make the purge on our own?19:53
fugoliniMy natural answer seems to be yes19:53
* spevack wants to know what inode0 thinks is right19:54
... join!#fedora-meeting -> mcepl(n=mcepl 49-117-207-85 strcechy adsl-llu static bluetone cz)19:55
... signoff!#fedora-meeting -> fcrippa("Leaving")19:55
susmitfugolini, I think we should.19:55
fugoliniinode0: ping19:55
spevackfugolini: i believe i agree with you, though19:55
inode0sorry, I need to read a little back19:56
... signoff!#fedora-meeting -> tkjacobsen_(Connection timed out)19:56
fugolini5/7, it's passed so19:56
... join!#fedora-meeting -> MrTom(n=MrTom fedora/MrTom)19:56
... signoff!#fedora-meeting -> drago01(Remote closed the connection)19:57
fugolininothing that needs a POV but just something concrete :)19:57
MrTomhi 'im sorry i just came home :( I was busy with Solution Linux stand materials19:57
fugoliniAnything to say. I think our time is coming to an end. I'm sure those 3 points today were cleared enough19:57
spevackMrTom: that's a huge event, and very important for your time!19:58
fugoliniMrTom: don't worry19:58
MrTomI have a Fedora banner horizontal19:58
MrTomantoher one vertical19:58
fugoliniSo, is ok if we adjourn meeting to next week (NA FAmSCo Regional Meeting)19:59
spevackfugolini: i'm glad next week is NA, because I'm worried that we're 1/3 through this quarter, and we've barely spent any money yet!19:59
kitaldo we have a decission?19:59
* spevack needs herlo, inode0, and ke4qqq to start spending money :P19:59
fugolinisure they have!!!19:59
fugoliniI'll collects topic from the Ambassador List thread about it20:00
kitalpurging inactive accounts20:00
fugoliniI invite all NA Ambassadors to suggests topic to discuss. Naturally 1) Budget :)20:00
spevackfugolini: did we make a decision?20:00
fugolinikital: sure20:00
fugolini(07:56:28 PM) fugolini: 5/7, it's passed so20:00
... signoff!#fedora-meeting -> ldimaggi_(Read error: 110 (Connection timed out))20:00
susmitkital, 5/720:00
spevackso can we summarize here exactly what we decided20:01
spevackso that it is also clear what we did NOT decide20:01
spevackand to hopefully prevent confusion later20:01
spevackthough /me assumes that confusion will always exist20:01
* spevack is grupmy, apparently20:01
... signoff!#fedora-meeting -> ldimagg__("Leaving")20:02
... signoff!#fedora-meeting -> abadger1999(Remote closed the connection)20:02
fugolini1) We decided to purge inactive Accounts from Ambassadors FAS Group after20:02
ke4qqqspevack: wish for me to write that summary?20:02
spevackke4qqq: that would be wonderful20:02
fugolini+1 too20:03
fugoliniDuring the meeting we have made some summaries (I'm sorry for the language, I hope to improve soon :))20:03
fugoliniI hope they could useful.20:03
fugoliniBTW, can we adjourn the meeting?20:03
spevackfugolini: thank you for leading a difficult meeting20:04
kitalthanks fugolini20:04
susmitgood night :)20:04
fugoliniI'm sorry if the language barrier make my lead not so useful20:04
susmitor have a nice day ;)20:04
fugoliniehehe, cu too20:05

Generated by irclog2html.py 2.7 by Marius Gedminas - find it at mg.pov.lt!

Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

[Date Prev][Date Next]   [Thread Prev][Thread Next]   [Thread Index] [Date Index] [Author Index]