| spevack | shall we get started here? | 10:00 |
|---|---|---|
| * jds2001 here | 10:01 | |
| jwb | spevack, are you going to try and avoid duplicate questions then? | 10:01 |
| mdomsch | there are 4 of the 7 candidates present | 10:01 |
| spevack | jwb: I'll try, but I just started reading the log :) If a dupe comes through, the candidates should say so, and we'll move on. | 10:01 |
| jwb | spevack, ok | 10:01 |
| mdomsch | which due to the early hour to the west, may be all we get | 10:01 |
| spevack | well, let me start fishing for questions in the other room, and we'll give folks a few more minutes | 10:02 |
| jwb | mdomsch, do you know what time it is where Dimitri is? | 10:02 |
| jwb | he was the only candidate missing last night | 10:02 |
| jds2001 | hes' in greece, UTC+2 | 10:02 |
| notting | 5PM | 10:02 |
| jwb | any idea if he's planning on joining? | 10:02 |
| mdomsch | jwb, he indicated that this time was good for him | 10:03 |
| jwb | hope so | 10:03 |
| spevack | Can we get a quick roll call of who is here? | 10:04 |
| * jwb is | 10:04 | |
| * notting is | 10:04 | |
| *** jreznik has joined #fedora-townhall | 10:04 | |
| * jds2001 | 10:04 | |
| * mdomsch | 10:05 | |
| spevack | Alright, a brief introduction, and then we'll start with the questions. | 10:05 |
| spevack | Welcome to the second of the Fedora Board town hall meetings, sponsored by the Commission on Fedora Board Debates. If a speaker talks for too long, a red light will beep and their microphone will be cut off. | 10:05 |
| spevack | We'll be taking questions from the #fedora-townhall-public room and feeding them into this room for the candidates to answer. | 10:06 |
| spevack | The moderator reserves the right to ask any interesting follow up questions that occur to him. | 10:06 |
| spevack | And with that, I shall paste the first question | 10:06 |
| spevack | from inode0 | 10:06 |
| spevack | "I understand that the board as a collective body benefits from institutional memory. The board can also benefit from fresh brain cells. Can you help me understand the role of institutional memory in the board's decision process and at what point the board would be hindered in its work by a lack of institutional memory? This is sheer guesswork but would 1/3 of the board possessing vast institutional memory be sufficient for this not to be an iss | 10:06 |
| spevack | did that paste in its entirety? | 10:07 |
| jwb | finish please | 10:07 |
| jwb | no, "...for this not to be an is" | 10:07 |
| spevack | where did it cut off? | 10:07 |
| spevack | This is sheer guesswork but would 1/3 of the board possessing vast institutional memory be sufficient for this not to be an issue with the composition of a new board?" | 10:07 |
| spevack | sorry | 10:07 |
| spevack | EOF | 10:07 |
| jds2001 | I personally think that the appointed seats are there precisely to ensure that institutional memory is preserved. But to answer the question directly, as a non-member, I don't know. | 10:08 |
| notting | i would say the appointed seats aren't for that, as in many cases we have appointed 'new' people. | 10:08 |
| jwb | FESCo has the same concept, so i'll relate from there. retaining 1/3 is an 'it depends' | 10:08 |
| notting | institutional memory definitely useful for legal and similar issues. | 10:09 |
| notting | also, verbs good in speech. oof. | 10:09 |
| mdomsch | institutional memory plays several roles - legal history (and our handling of issues), political/legal/technical issues (inclusion of firmware) | 10:09 |
| jwb | i think the key is to keep enough people that have a longer history in the Board/committee | 10:09 |
| jds2001 | +1 | 10:10 |
| jwb | because if you turn over 2/3 each time, then you could be left with 1/3 that has only been there for as single term | 10:10 |
| mdomsch | can the same be accomplished with fewer "tenured" members? yes. But we also have no way to ensure tenure. Just as we don't have term limits, we don't have >1 yr seats either. | 10:10 |
| jwb | i do think institutional memory has a place, but i also think that memory can be documented and can be recalled from 'emeritus' members when needed | 10:10 |
| mdomsch | so every 6 months it's up to the electorate to decide if the people serving can fulfill that need | 10:11 |
| * jds2001 just used institutional memory from FESCo yesterday, from when I wasn't on FESCo, for example. | 10:11 | |
| spevack | inode0 notes that he wasn't suggesting that larger turnover would be desireable. | 10:12 |
| mdomsch | jwb, agreed, which the board does. also it regularly invites subject matter experts to meetings to discuss particular areas where that extra insight would be valuable | 10:12 |
| jwb | yep | 10:12 |
| spevack | any other comments from the candidates on this topic? | 10:13 |
| jwb | spevack, did we answer the question sufficiently? i was just using numbers as examples | 10:13 |
| mdomsch | we've also been fortunate that our FPLs have been involved in Fedora for so long and held positions of leadership in several areas | 10:13 |
| spevack | jwb: i think we're about ready to move on. | 10:13 |
| *** jeff_hann has joined #fedora-townhall | 10:13 | |
| jwb | ok | 10:13 |
| spevack | ok, moving on... | 10:13 |
| spevack | the next question is from rdieter, and is relatively straightforward for each candidate: | 10:13 |
| spevack | "What does each candidate see as a major challenge facing the fpb this coming cycle, and what are their intentions/plans to deal with it?" | 10:13 |
| spevack | EOF | 10:14 |
| jwb | for the board, or for Fedora as a project? | 10:14 |
| jwb | i guess that could be the same thing :) | 10:14 |
| jds2001 | We went through some of this last night, I | 10:14 |
| spevack | jwb: i would say either. | 10:14 |
| jds2001 | I'm happy to go through it again :) | 10:14 |
| spevack | jds2001: well, maybe people could offer a different example from last night, or say "last night I talked about $FOO, but now let me talk about $BAR" | 10:15 |
| jds2001 | ok :) | 10:15 |
| notting | heh. | 10:15 |
| jwb | mostly we talked about eliminating hurdles and doing more advocacy | 10:15 |
| spevack | or "Fedora only has ONE PROBLEM" :) | 10:15 |
| jds2001 | lol | 10:15 |
| * mdomsch believes finding ways to get people hooked into the project (not merely signing up for a Fedora account), becoming active contributors in their own right, will be critical to sustain our growth. | 10:15 | |
| jwb | growth of contributor base is a good issue, yeah | 10:15 |
| notting | last night i mentioned growing the contributor base and getting people contributing in more areas. one other thing that would be nice is to try and cut down on the negative feedback that seems to accompany any changes, anywhere | 10:16 |
| jwb | a user base can only be sustained by a healthy active contributor base | 10:16 |
| jds2001 | and it is the board's responsibility to ensure that there as few barriers in the way of that as possible, | 10:16 |
| spevack | notting: are you referring to some of the long threads on -devel-list and the "controversial" f10 proposed changes, like Xorg's tty? | 10:17 |
| mdomsch | mentorships / sponsorships have been the working model so far, and it works, but can be labor-intensive | 10:17 |
| jds2001 | and a lot of great work has been doen in this area. | 10:17 |
| mdomsch | I'm excited by the "Fedora Classroom" series as a way to educate at a higher ratio | 10:17 |
| notting | spevack: mainly the fact that *any* change seems to generate these threads. whether it be xorg, art, servers, CVS for packages, etc. | 10:17 |
| spevack | latching on to this for a moment, what do you all think the Board can or should do about what notting describes? Is this just the way open source work is done, or is there something different going on here that the Board should try to influence? | 10:18 |
| jds2001 | i can tell you from personal experience that anyone that attempts to change *anything* in Fedora, no matter how small or large, is going to be met with a fury of anger, enough to make them walk away from it in some cases. | 10:19 |
| * spevack asks because it's something he worries about a lot too | 10:19 | |
| jds2001 | actually i shouldn't say anger. | 10:19 |
| jwb | spevack, i think it's a by-product of Fedora being on the leading edge of upstream for the most part | 10:19 |
| jwb | we hit big changes first most of the time | 10:19 |
| jds2001 | in terms of the software changes yet. | 10:20 |
| jds2001 | yes. | 10:20 |
| jds2001 | but the question is more general. | 10:20 |
| mdomsch | and a lot of our contributors are also upstream contributors, so they are more comfortable with "the big changes" upstreams propose, ahead of Fedora's inclusion of same. | 10:20 |
| jwb | some are changable, like the X tty thing. some really aren't, like python versions | 10:20 |
| *** jeff_hann has left #fedora-townhall | 10:20 | |
| jwb | spevack, honestly i think that is a better question for FESCo | 10:21 |
| mdomsch | I think there's room for disagreement among peers, but in the end, the people doing the work get to decide the fundamental direction. | 10:21 |
| jwb | if the Board has to worry about whether X is on tty1 or tty7, then FESCo has failed | 10:21 |
| jwb | plus... what mdomsch just said | 10:21 |
| notting | jwb: yeah, i'm more worried about the climate than any particular decision | 10:22 |
| jwb | notting, true. but changing that climate is hard given that it's human nature to reject change :) | 10:22 |
| mdomsch | e.g. the voting process. Long discussion on f-a-b, raised good questions, but when the call came to push something immature in quickly, I pushed back (for now). | 10:22 |
| jds2001 | and I certaintly am unable to change whether soemone engages in a debate or not. What I am able to influence where that debate goes, hopefully, from a flame-fest into something constructive. | 10:22 |
| notting | how to avoid every discussion turning into "i hate everything" (yes, that's an overly simple generalization) | 10:22 |
| * spevack plans to move on to the next question at :25, unless there is a lot still to say. | 10:22 | |
| jwb | there was an example of Codeina | 10:23 |
| jwb | i'll just say that i think the Board and Fedora as a community learned from Codeina | 10:23 |
| jwb | so hopefully we won't repeat some of the same mistakes going forward | 10:23 |
| spevack | jwb: given that, let me paste another question in | 10:24 |
| spevack | and then we'll continue the conversation | 10:24 |
| spevack | b/c bpepple asked a question that mentioned codeina | 10:24 |
| spevack | "One of the failings of past Boards has been poor communication. Examples being, the initial decision on [removing] Codeina being done behind closed-doors without any community input, and the MinGW process pushed forth by the board without consulting MinGW SIG. What would the candidates do to improve communication?" | 10:24 |
| spevack | carry on... | 10:24 |
| jwb | i think MinGW is a slightly off example. that was mostly Jef trying to be proactive to my understanding | 10:24 |
| jwb | but anyway, that wasn't the question | 10:25 |
| jwb | the public IRC meetings are good. the meeting minutes could be a bit more verbose at times | 10:25 |
| spevack | I'll add a followup for people to take if they like. "How successful do you think the monthly IRC meetings have been?" | 10:25 |
| spevack | jwb: you read my mind | 10:25 |
| jds2001 | and proactive is good. But the Board involving themselves to that technical level is FESCo's domain. | 10:25 |
| jwb | i think some of the perceived lack of communication comes from the fact that the Board does discuss things that cannot be public | 10:26 |
| jwb | for legal, or whatever, reasons | 10:26 |
| *** ctyler has quit IRC | 10:26 | |
| mdomsch | jds2001, that's actually something we have to actively stop ourselves in discussion - there tend to be a lot of technical people on the board, and discussions sometime rathole (like with any other group) | 10:26 |
| notting | the problem we run into is people bring things like mingw (or, crosscompilers in general) to the board, so we end up discussing them. i don't think we picked up the discussion on our own initiative | 10:27 |
| *** ctyler has joined #fedora-townhall | 10:27 | |
| *** ChanServ sets mode: +o ctyler | 10:27 | |
| mdomsch | codeina was handled poorly; hopefully that's behind us | 10:28 |
| mdomsch | we've been inviting subject matter experts to the meetings when there's a specific topic to discuss | 10:28 |
| notting | biggest issue is probably publicizing the minutes a little better, and poking people directly who are affected | 10:29 |
| notting | add a little push to the normal pull | 10:29 |
| mdomsch | both to educate the board, and to help the board realize when it really shouldn't be involved in deciding something | 10:29 |
| spevack | Any other comments, or next question? | 10:29 |
| mdomsch | I've been disappointed with the IRC meetings myself | 10:30 |
| mdomsch | I know it's the only "mass audience" method we have at the moment | 10:30 |
| jwb | might look at doing some fedora talk stuff in the future? | 10:30 |
| * jwb wonders if that would melt the internet | 10:30 | |
| jwb | :) | 10:30 |
| jds2001 | yeah, there are a few challenges there. | 10:30 |
| mdomsch | jwb, it's been on the wishlist since fedora talk was first created, but hasn't materialized | 10:30 |
| jds2001 | i talked with paul about it awhile back..... | 10:30 |
| jwb | mdomsch, as a non-Board member, i do find the IRC meetings useful | 10:31 |
| *** ctyler has quit IRC | 10:31 | |
| jds2001 | 1) Hard of hearing folks, 2) recording support, 3) something else I forget :) | 10:31 |
| jds2001 | but all seemed valid. | 10:31 |
| jwb | the public at least gets to see 'discussion' happen and gets a feel for how the individual Board members think | 10:31 |
| jwb | so, it's certainly better than not having them | 10:32 |
| notting | one thing i mentioned last night was we should probably rotate the time of the IRC meetings | 10:32 |
| jds2001 | much like we're doing with the Classroom sessions. | 10:32 |
| * jds2001 doesn't like being up at 8:30AM tomorrow to give one, but I'll take one for the team there :) | 10:32 | |
| mdomsch | jwb, agreed, but it can be very slow... maybe that's just due to the number of people in the discussion. | 10:32 |
| jwb | yeah | 10:33 |
| *** mits has left #fedora-townhall | 10:33 | |
| jds2001 | compared to a phone call, no doubt. | 10:33 |
| *** glezos has joined #fedora-townhall | 10:33 | |
| *** ChanServ sets mode: +v glezos | 10:33 | |
| jwb | the Board is spoiled. FESCo has to do everything on IRC and email ;) | 10:33 |
| spevack | ok, I'm going to post the next question at :35 | 10:33 |
| jwb | hi glezos | 10:33 |
| mdomsch | glezos, welcome | 10:33 |
| glezos | hi guys, terribly sorry I was late | 10:33 |
| * glezos got stuck in a phone meeting | 10:34 | |
| * glezos reads through the log | 10:34 | |
| *** ctyler has joined #fedora-townhall | 10:34 | |
| *** ChanServ sets mode: +o ctyler | 10:34 | |
| spevack | next question is from inode0 | 10:34 |
| spevack | "How do [you] view Fedora users and distinct from Fedora contributors and what value/emphasis does the board place on the user community that does not intersect with the contributor community?" | 10:34 |
| spevack | s/and/as | 10:34 |
| jwb | I think users and contributors have a very chicken-egg relationship. they are very complimentary and neither really has more value than the other. | 10:34 |
| jwb | the challenge is taking our user base, and turning them into contributors | 10:35 |
| jwb | in one fashion or another | 10:35 |
| jds2001 | without user, what contributors do is meaningless. | 10:35 |
| *** spevack sets mode: +v mpdehaan | 10:35 | |
| mpdehaan | also FudCON is also 99% developers | 10:35 |
| jds2001 | However, they should be turned into some sort of contributor (even if it's just a bug report here, soem wiki cleanup there, etc) | 10:35 |
| mpdehaan | losing the "U" | 10:35 |
| notting | and without pulling new contributors from the users, we'll stagnate and die. | 10:35 |
| mpdehaan | absolutely. I've created some projects to do that at least in the sysadmin space, which has been underutilized | 10:36 |
| mpdehaan | we need to find ways to do that in other areas as well | 10:36 |
| mpdehaan | Cobbler and Func have largely been successful and getting lots more folks involved in Fedora, but that's only in enterprisey usage | 10:36 |
| glezos | Traditionally Fedora's focus is to convert users to contributors. I believe this is vitally important for the health of any growing project in the open source land. We shouldn't forget however that a large percentage of users stay somewhere in the middle, as forum lurkers etc. It's important to make sure we cover the needs of power users, as well as aunt-Ernestine ones. | 10:36 |
| mpdehaan | how do we do the same in desktop land or in terms of other apps and docs? | 10:36 |
| mpdehaan | I'm not talking about Grandma here, grandma is overused. Let's say we focus on college students who have the choice to spend time getting involved with a distro, and the tech market. | 10:37 |
| glezos | Besides -- in the end, to turn users into contributors we need users first. So I don't really agree that it's a pure chicken-and-egg problem. | 10:37 |
| jwb | i said relationship, not problem :) | 10:37 |
| jwb | as in 'you can't have one without the other' | 10:38 |
| notting | yes, most all of our contributor base was users first. of course, we're going to have users that have no desire/time to contribute, and that's ok. | 10:38 |
| mpdehaan | it's about building architectures of collaboration | 10:38 |
| mdomsch | MirrorManager has also done a good job of turning users into contributors - we've added ~30-40 new public mirrors in the last 6 months | 10:38 |
| mpdehaan | there have to be places built for people to be able to get in easily and contribute and see those rewards | 10:38 |
| jwb | yeah, it's important to keep in my that contributions come in all kinds of forms | 10:38 |
| mpdehaan | complicated processes can get in the way, so we need to minimize those were we can to lower those barriers to entry | 10:38 |
| jwb | s/my/mind | 10:38 |
| mpdehaan | and allow those people to feel like they are a part of Fedora | 10:38 |
| mpdehaan | it's that feeling of being a part of things and making a difference that makes folks want to contribute | 10:39 |
| mpdehaan | we have to ensure folks feel welcome and know how to do that | 10:39 |
| glezos | mdomsch, right. I think we should investigate more channels similar to the example of mirrormanger, which don't sound by default as means to convert more users into contributors. Artwork and Translations is another example, I think. | 10:39 |
| mpdehaan | even if it's largely just a documentation and presentation thing at first, and examining all the entry points into Fedora more closely | 10:39 |
| mdomsch | glezos, +1 | 10:39 |
| glezos | mpdehaan, do you have any specific actions in mind on how to get better documentation with our current resources? | 10:40 |
| mpdehaan | Mirror Manager is great, but I'm not sure it's how we get folks to contribute to the distro | 10:40 |
| mpdehaan | it's how we get someone to be a very nice mirror definitely | 10:40 |
| * jds2001 is a big fan of metrics to show new contributors that they're having an impact. | 10:40 | |
| mpdehaan | that was re: glezos, not mdomsch | 10:40 |
| mpdehaan | fedorahosted.org/ekg was written for that purpose | 10:40 |
| jwb | mpdehaan, you don't think mirroring Fedora is contributing to the distro? | 10:40 |
| mdomsch | mpdehaan, I think being a mirror is a huge contribution | 10:40 |
| mpdehaan | at least in terms of making sure we know where the active/vibrant areas of the communities are | 10:40 |
| jwb | contributions != development | 10:40 |
| mpdehaan | mdomsch: it's huge in terms of resources, but we need to do a lot more | 10:41 |
| mpdehaan | more mirrors are good, but what we also need are new ideas and people with those ideas | 10:41 |
| mpdehaan | to seek out new worlds and civilizations | 10:41 |
| glezos | Extending jwb's point, I'd like to also point out here a frequently overseen point: Fedora contributors include more than just Fedora Account holders. | 10:41 |
| notting | one issue is i'm not sure that this works best at the board level | 10:42 |
| notting | you get an interested person starting transifex, to pull in translators | 10:42 |
| mpdehaan | it's a community architecture thing in many ways | 10:42 |
| jwb | notting, right. we talked a lot about Ambassadors and translators last night | 10:42 |
| mpdehaan | though we need to support that and encourage everyone to think in that vein too | 10:42 |
| notting | someone writes a project that is useful for sysadmins, it pulls in sysadmins | 10:42 |
| jwb | those groups really push this | 10:42 |
| notting | this isn't a board directed activity. | 10:42 |
| notting | although it's a board encouraged one | 10:42 |
| mpdehaan | nope, though we can help suggest more of it and offer guidance/experience | 10:42 |
| jds2001 | defintely. | 10:43 |
| spevack | next question. | 10:43 |
| glezos | notting, I think the line between encouragement and direction is pretty fuzzy. I'd say that almost nothing is practically board-directed. | 10:43 |
| spevack | also from inode0 | 10:43 |
| spevack | "Fedora has an established institutional philosophy regarding free software and as board members your decisions can affect that philosophy both in theory and in practice at the edges. I would like to ask the candidates if [any of] their personal views of free software are at variance with the current institutional philosophy?" | 10:43 |
| jwb | me personally, no | 10:44 |
| jds2001 | Fedora will always be free and open source, freely redistributable, etc. No variance there. | 10:44 |
| glezos | From my POV, Fedora has a very solid approach to this aspect. If I would like something to improve, it'd be more documentation about our approaches, like for example, a more elaborate OGG-howto. | 10:45 |
| mpdehaan | variance, no. I believe Free Software is the best and most rewarding way to develop software and Fedora is successful and a huge advocate for FOSS by remaining Free. It proves it can be done and succeeds. | 10:45 |
| jds2001 | do I use propietary software personally? yes. (not sure if that's part of the question or not) | 10:45 |
| notting | i'd agree. but then there are those who say that fedora itself is in conflict with free software with respect to firmware, etc. i don't agree with that view. | 10:45 |
| jds2001 | (mainly because I'm forced to for $DAYJOB) | 10:45 |
| mpdehaan | Machines need firmware to work | 10:46 |
| mpdehaan | so do cars | 10:46 |
| mpdehaan | I'm not giving up my car | 10:46 |
| spevack | next question "should mpdehaan sell his car and use the proceeds to set up a fedora mirror?" :) | 10:46 |
| mpdehaan | spevack: only if someone loans me a Tesla Roadster | 10:46 |
| jwb | no. he should get a bailout and use those proceeds | 10:46 |
| mdomsch | I'm a strong advocate of FLOSS, but also recognize not everything is, so the pragmatist in me says "think of users first" - don't alieniate users through dogmatism | 10:47 |
| mpdehaan | I def need a bailout | 10:47 |
| mpdehaan | Fedora does a good job of doing things to remain compatibile with external systems, Samba for instance, and we don't do anything to forbid installation of packages the user wants to install. That is important. | 10:47 |
| notting | mdomsch: this runs into issues with things like swfdec, for example | 10:47 |
| mpdehaan | Fedora needs to be able to run whatever software the user wants, though it should not ship with proprietary software repos or anything silly like that | 10:48 |
| glezos | One of the things I'd like us to really (continue) insist(ing) on is to not only ship free software, but to _use_ free software on all levels. This weighs a lot for people to turn into heavyweight contributors. | 10:48 |
| jds2001 | glezos: everything we use in FI is 100% open source. | 10:48 |
| jds2001 | not sure what else you mean... | 10:49 |
| mdomsch | notting, I have no problem with swfdec development progressing, in parallel with Adobe's proprietary efforts. Adobe can spend its money as it chooses, and has made strides. Rarely does nirvana happen all at once. | 10:49 |
| mpdehaan | It's part of Fedora's role also to encourage folks to open up their software and show them how it can be beneficial | 10:49 |
| mpdehaan | and to teach folks about FOSS communities and open development | 10:50 |
| mpdehaan | not the board per se, but Fedora's... | 10:50 |
| glezos | jds2001, documentation, translations -- they're all 100% open source, and we should continue following that path and make sure the message goes out loud and clear in interviews, etc. | 10:50 |
| mpdehaan | and OSS in general | 10:50 |
| mpdehaan | can't do that by being evil about it, but have to show them the benefits and how we do things with such great cross-organizational collaboration on a daily basis | 10:50 |
| mpdehaan | glezos: I think we have been following that path. | 10:50 |
| mpdehaan | we could advertise it more true | 10:51 |
| notting | mdomsch: right, it's finding a point to promote something like swfdec where it doesn't alienate users | 10:51 |
| * spevack notes that the hour is almost up, and would like to leave the candidates time to make any final comments they like, on any topic. | 10:51 | |
| mdomsch | In my $DAYJOB, I've had the opportunity to "gently encourage" quite a few companies down the open source path | 10:51 |
| mpdehaan | I like squirrels | 10:52 |
| * jds2001 just "open-sourced" our fedoraUsage script last night, in order to be a little more transparent on how we get our usage numbers. | 10:52 | |
| mpdehaan | More seriously.... | 10:52 |
| jds2001 | because the wiki page just said 'ssh to log1 and cat this file' | 10:52 |
| jds2001 | and i think it's important to be transparent about how we generate that file. | 10:53 |
| notting | these are all good candidates for the position. voters can't lose. | 10:53 |
| mdomsch | I'm thrilled that we have so many excellent candidates who want to volunteer their skills and time through service on the Board. This is a sign of a healthy, strong, vibrant project, which I'm pleased to be a part of. | 10:53 |
| glezos | mdomsch, +1 | 10:53 |
| mpdehaan | Ok, so I think mostly I can only speak about experience and record and love for what OSS development and Fedora means to me. In projects I've started/created, goal #1 has always been community involvement and cooperation well above the idea that it's been a project that is owned by any one project. As with the board thing, I want our focus to be about Fedora, and building that community and reaching out to new audiences an | 10:53 |
| spevack | notting, mdomsch: a big +1 from me | 10:53 |
| mpdehaan | Everyone here is also great, so we can't really screw this election up :) | 10:54 |
| mpdehaan | so just vote. | 10:54 |
| jds2001 | mdomsch: +1 | 10:54 |
| jwb | voting is key | 10:54 |
| jwb | also, if you have a question that wasn't cover please email us! | 10:54 |
| spevack | I wonder if we could make some "don't blame me, i voted for zod" stickers or something? | 10:54 |
| jds2001 | or I'm on fedora talk, as well. | 10:54 |
| jds2001 | .ext jstanley | 10:54 |
| zodbot | jds2001: 5102788 | 10:54 |
| notting | spevack: hey, what's the procedure if everyone votes for everyone and we have a seven-way tie? | 10:54 |
| jds2001 | err, i thought zoddie was in here, 5102788 | 10:55 |
| spevack | notting: then Al Franken gets the seat. | 10:55 |
| mpdehaan | Hopefully bowling or laser-tag | 10:55 |
| jwb | paintball | 10:55 |
| glezos | I'd like to ask a quick Q to the other candidates | 10:55 |
| jwb | at FUDCon | 10:55 |
| * jds2001 has a bad shoulder though :) | 10:55 | |
| glezos | mspevack: do we have some time? | 10:55 |
| spevack | glezos: sure. | 10:55 |
| * spevack notes that he has a conference call that will start at :00, so the candidates may have to "adjourn" themselves. | 10:55 | |
| glezos | Do the rest of the candidates think there are big benefits in re-starting the Fedora Foundation discussion we had much earlier on in the Fedora lifespan? If no, why and if yes, why would now be the right time? | 10:56 |
| notting | no, because the financial funding situation has not changed. | 10:56 |
| jwb | i don't believe so | 10:56 |
| mpdehaan | No. I'm not sure what the FF would yield. Red Hat remains solid and Fedora is running well. | 10:56 |
| jds2001 | I dpm't think so, financial and legal stuff overrides :) | 10:56 |
| mpdehaan | plus it did not last very long last time | 10:56 |
| glezos | notting, the key Q I guess is whether restarting the discussion _could_ change the funding situation. | 10:57 |
| jds2001 | I don't see any reason why it would. We would have to get 2/3 of our funding from elsewhere. | 10:57 |
| mpdehaan | Plus what do you want to change? | 10:57 |
| jds2001 | (or is it 1/3, I forget - one of those two) | 10:57 |
| mpdehaan | wrt the FF? | 10:57 |
| notting | glezos: the problem is that to maintain 501(3)(c) (nonprofit) status in the US, you need (as jds says) a large part of your funding/support to come from not a single sorce | 10:57 |
| notting | and with red hat's contributions (people, bandwidth, hardware, etc.)... that math becomes really hard really fast | 10:58 |
| jwb | it should be noted that people can donate hardware and bandwidth already | 10:58 |
| glezos | We've seen some good donations (investments?) lately which we didn't have in the start. Since Fedora has come a long way since the beginning, and now we've got more large entities supporting our vision (companies, enterprises, universities)... | 10:58 |
| spevack | http://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-announce-list/2006-April/msg00016.html -- for anyone who has never seen this, to give context | 10:58 |
| glezos | this is more food for thought than actual plans. I haven't really discussed it extensively lately. | 10:59 |
| * spevack notes that he must go afk. Official meeting is over, but general conversation should continue in #fedora-townhall-public | 11:00 | |
| spevack | thank you all! | 11:00 |
| glezos | Seeing a lot of smaller than Fedora projects, with a smaller contributor base and less support from big players, which DO succeed in having a nonprofit status, AND seeing the success of EMEA, one can only wonder "maybe we can talk it over again, maybe the time is more mature now". | 11:00 |
| glezos | (eof) | 11:00 |
| glezos | mpdehaan, to answer your Q, one of the things that might change is the image a lot of potential contributors have that RH "controls" Fedora. | 11:01 |
| jwb | urgh | 11:02 |
| mpdehaan | glezos: but it doesn't | 11:02 |
| mpdehaan | Red Hat however does donate a /huge/ amount to Fedora | 11:02 |
| glezos | mpdehaan, of course, but it's undoubtly a sore point for a lot of folks. | 11:02 |
| mpdehaan | I don't believe so | 11:02 |
| jds2001 | I think that EMEA likely has different laws than the US (Germany in particular, which is where I think that the EMEA NPO is for preceisely legal reasons) | 11:02 |
| jwb | glezos, i don't think it is | 11:02 |
| jds2001 | I don't think so, it's not what I'm hearing at events. | 11:03 |
| mpdehaan | we obviously do have a huge vested interest in Fedora's success | 11:03 |
| jds2001 | Perhaps it's different in the US? | 11:03 |
| jwb | i asked that very question on f-a-b | 11:03 |
| glezos | that's the image I got from Linux groups and independent folks around the world comparing our status with Debian's for example. | 11:03 |
| jwb | nobody even replied | 11:03 |
| jwb | of course, i guess that doesn't include non-Fedora users | 11:03 |
| mpdehaan | glezos: be careful when consulting distro fanboys, perhaps | 11:04 |
| mpdehaan | it apparently has not hurt Ubuntu's usage | 11:04 |
| jwb | mpdehaan, you don't consider yourself a distro fanboy? | 11:04 |
| mpdehaan | even though their control is more total | 11:04 |
| mpdehaan | jwb, I don't | 11:04 |
| jwb | bah | 11:04 |
| jwb | you can be a fan and not be a zealot | 11:04 |
| glezos | anyway -- it's not an easy discussion, nor one with definite answers. Thanks for the answers anyway. :) | 11:04 |
| mpdehaan | I have to support EL 4/5 too much | 11:04 |
| jds2001 | I xan and have recommended other distros that Fedora. | 11:05 |
| mpdehaan | jwb, I consider "fanboy" as "zealot" | 11:05 |
| mpdehaan | I like Fedora better than anything | 11:05 |
| mdomsch | glezos, we've been trying to disabuse the notion that RH "controls" Fedora | 11:05 |
| mpdehaan | though for enterprisey use, EL 4/5 would be my suggestion | 11:05 |
| jds2001 | including EL, including Ubuntu, including lots of others. | 11:05 |
| glezos | mdomsch, we definitely tried.. | 11:06 |
| jds2001 | obviously I don't carry Ubuntu CD's around with me, whereas I do carry Fedora LiveCD's, but that's another point. | 11:06 |
| mdomsch | hence the 5 elected 4 appointed board split | 11:06 |
| jwb | ok, i have to leave. late for another meeting | 11:06 |
| jwb | thanks all | 11:06 |
| mdomsch | thanks jwb | 11:06 |
| * jds2001 too | 11:06 | |
| glezos | mdomsch, thanks for organizing the meeting | 11:06 |
| mpdehaan | yep, thanks | 11:06 |
| glezos | again, my apologies for missing the first Qs. | 11:06 |
| mdomsch | np; thanks all for participating | 11:07 |
| mpdehaan | so important questions. vim or emacs? | 11:07 |
| mpdehaan | vim! | 11:07 |
| glezos | heh | 11:07 |
| mpdehaan | please nobody say eclipse | 11:07 |
| mdomsch | To everyone - I'm soliciting feedback on this Town Hall process - what worked, what didn't work - was it helpful to you in determining how you would vote? | 11:07 |
| sharkcz | mcedit :-) | 11:08 |
| mdomsch | feedback to fedora-advisory-board@redhat.com (public), or to me in private | 11:08 |
Generated by irclog2html.py 2.7 by Marius Gedminas - find it at mg.pov.lt!