spevackshall we get started here?10:00
* jds2001 here10:01
jwbspevack, are you going to try and avoid duplicate questions then?10:01
mdomschthere are 4 of the 7 candidates present10:01
spevackjwb: 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
jwbspevack, ok10:01
mdomschwhich due to the early hour to the west, may be all we get10:01
spevackwell, let me start fishing for questions in the other room, and we'll give folks a few more minutes10:02
jwbmdomsch, do you know what time it is where Dimitri is?10:02
jwbhe was the only candidate missing last night10:02
jds2001hes' in greece, UTC+210:02
jwbany idea if he's planning on joining?10:02
mdomschjwb, he indicated that this time was good for him10:03
jwbhope so10:03
spevackCan we get a quick roll call of who is here?10:04
* jwb is10:04
* notting is10:04
*** jreznik has joined #fedora-townhall10:04
* jds2001 10:04
* mdomsch 10:05
spevackAlright, a brief introduction, and then we'll start with the questions.10:05
spevackWelcome 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
spevackWe'll be taking questions from the #fedora-townhall-public room and feeding them into this room for the candidates to answer.10:06
spevackThe moderator reserves the right to ask any interesting follow up questions that occur to him.10:06
spevackAnd with that, I shall paste the first question10:06
spevackfrom inode010:06
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 iss10:06
spevackdid that paste in its entirety?10:07
jwbfinish please10:07
jwbno, "...for this not to be an is"10:07
spevackwhere did it cut off?10:07
spevackThis 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
jds2001I 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
nottingi would say the appointed seats aren't for that, as in many cases we have appointed 'new' people.10:08
jwbFESCo has the same concept, so i'll relate from there.  retaining 1/3 is an 'it depends'10:08
nottinginstitutional memory definitely useful for legal and similar issues.10:09
nottingalso, verbs good in speech. oof.10:09
mdomschinstitutional memory plays several roles - legal history (and our handling of issues), political/legal/technical issues (inclusion of firmware)10:09
jwbi think the key is to keep enough people that have a longer history in the Board/committee10:09
jwbbecause if you turn over 2/3 each time, then you could be left with 1/3 that has only been there for as single term10:10
mdomschcan 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
jwbi do think institutional memory has a place, but i also think that memory can be documented and can be recalled from 'emeritus' members when needed10:10
mdomschso every 6 months it's up to the electorate to decide if the people serving can fulfill that need10:11
* jds2001 just used institutional memory from FESCo yesterday, from when I wasn't on FESCo, for example.10:11
spevackinode0 notes that he wasn't suggesting that larger turnover would be desireable.10:12
mdomschjwb, agreed, which the board does.  also it regularly invites subject matter experts to meetings to discuss particular areas where that extra insight would be valuable10:12
spevackany other comments from the candidates on this topic?10:13
jwbspevack, did we answer the question sufficiently?  i was just using numbers as examples10:13
mdomschwe've also been fortunate that our FPLs have been involved in Fedora for so long and held positions of leadership in several areas10:13
spevackjwb: i think we're about ready to move on.10:13
*** jeff_hann has joined #fedora-townhall10:13
spevackok, moving on...10:13
spevackthe 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
jwbfor the board, or for Fedora as a project?10:14
jwbi guess that could be the same thing :)10:14
jds2001We went through some of this last night, I10:14
spevackjwb: i would say either.10:14
jds2001I'm happy to go through it again :)10:14
spevackjds2001: 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
jds2001ok :)10:15
jwbmostly we talked about eliminating hurdles and doing more advocacy10:15
spevackor "Fedora only has ONE PROBLEM"  :)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
jwbgrowth of contributor base is a good issue, yeah10:15
nottinglast 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, anywhere10:16
jwba user base can only be sustained by a healthy active contributor base10:16
jds2001and it is the board's responsibility to ensure that there as few barriers in the way of that as possible,10:16
spevacknotting: are you referring to some of the long threads on -devel-list and the "controversial" f10 proposed changes, like Xorg's tty?10:17
mdomschmentorships / sponsorships have been the working model so far, and it works, but can be labor-intensive10:17
jds2001and a lot of great work has been doen in this area.10:17
mdomschI'm excited by the "Fedora Classroom" series as a way to educate at a higher ratio10:17
nottingspevack: mainly the fact that *any* change seems to generate these threads. whether it be xorg, art, servers, CVS for packages, etc.10:17
spevacklatching 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
jds2001i 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 too10:19
jds2001actually i shouldn't say anger.10:19
jwbspevack, i think it's a by-product of Fedora being on the leading edge of upstream for the most part10:19
jwbwe hit big changes first most of the time10:19
jds2001in terms of the software changes yet.10:20
jds2001but the question is more general.10:20
mdomschand 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
jwbsome are changable, like the X tty thing.  some really aren't, like python versions10:20
*** jeff_hann has left #fedora-townhall10:20
jwbspevack, honestly i think that is a better question for FESCo10:21
mdomschI 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
jwbif the Board has to worry about whether X is on tty1 or tty7, then FESCo has failed10:21
jwbplus... what mdomsch just said10:21
nottingjwb: yeah, i'm more worried about the climate than any particular decision10:22
jwbnotting, true.  but changing that climate is hard given that it's human nature to reject change :)10:22
mdomsche.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
jds2001and 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
nottinghow 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
jwbthere was an example of Codeina10:23
jwbi'll just say that i think the Board and Fedora as a community learned from Codeina10:23
jwbso hopefully we won't repeat some of the same mistakes going forward10:23
spevackjwb: given that, let me paste another question in10:24
spevackand then we'll continue the conversation10:24
spevackb/c bpepple asked a question that mentioned codeina10:24
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
spevackcarry on...10:24
jwbi think MinGW is a slightly off example.  that was mostly Jef trying to be proactive to my understanding10:24
jwbbut anyway, that wasn't the question10:25
jwbthe public IRC meetings are good.  the meeting minutes could be a bit more verbose at times10:25
spevackI'll add a followup for people to take if they like.  "How successful do you think the monthly IRC meetings have been?"10:25
spevackjwb: you read my mind10:25
jds2001and proactive is good.  But the Board involving themselves to that technical level is FESCo's domain.10:25
jwbi think some of the perceived lack of communication comes from the fact that the Board does discuss things that cannot be public10:26
jwbfor legal, or whatever, reasons10:26
*** ctyler has quit IRC10:26
mdomschjds2001, 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
nottingthe 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 initiative10:27
*** ctyler has joined #fedora-townhall10:27
*** ChanServ sets mode: +o ctyler10:27
mdomschcodeina was handled poorly; hopefully that's behind us10:28
mdomschwe've been inviting subject matter experts to the meetings when there's a specific topic to discuss10:28
nottingbiggest issue is probably publicizing the minutes a little better, and poking people directly who are affected10:29
nottingadd a little push to the normal pull10:29
mdomschboth to educate the board, and to help the board realize when it really shouldn't be involved in deciding something10:29
spevackAny other comments, or next question?10:29
mdomschI've been disappointed with the IRC meetings myself10:30
mdomschI know it's the only "mass audience" method we have at the moment10:30
jwbmight look at doing some fedora talk stuff in the future?10:30
* jwb wonders if that would melt the internet10:30
jds2001yeah, there are a few challenges there.10:30
mdomschjwb, it's been on the wishlist since fedora talk was first created, but hasn't materialized10:30
jds2001i talked with paul about it awhile back.....10:30
jwbmdomsch, as a non-Board member, i do find the IRC meetings useful10:31
*** ctyler has quit IRC10:31
jds20011) Hard of hearing folks, 2) recording support, 3) something else I forget :)10:31
jds2001but all seemed valid.10:31
jwbthe public at least gets to see 'discussion' happen and gets a feel for how the individual Board members think10:31
jwbso, it's certainly better than not having them10:32
nottingone thing i mentioned last night was we should probably rotate the time of the IRC meetings10:32
jds2001much 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
mdomschjwb, agreed, but it can be very slow...  maybe that's just due to the number of people in the discussion.10:32
*** mits has left #fedora-townhall10:33
jds2001compared to a phone call, no doubt.10:33
*** glezos has joined #fedora-townhall10:33
*** ChanServ sets mode: +v glezos10:33
jwbthe Board is spoiled.  FESCo has to do everything on IRC and email ;)10:33
spevackok, I'm going to post the next question at :3510:33
jwbhi glezos10:33
mdomschglezos, welcome10:33
glezoshi guys, terribly sorry I was late10:33
* glezos got stuck in a phone meeting10:34
* glezos reads through the log10:34
*** ctyler has joined #fedora-townhall10:34
*** ChanServ sets mode: +o ctyler10:34
spevacknext question is from inode010:34
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
jwbI 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
jwbthe challenge is taking our user base, and turning them into contributors10:35
jwbin one fashion or another10:35
jds2001without user, what contributors do is meaningless.10:35
*** spevack sets mode: +v mpdehaan10:35
mpdehaanalso FudCON is also 99% developers10:35
jds2001However, 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
mpdehaanlosing the "U"10:35
nottingand without pulling new contributors from the users, we'll stagnate and die.10:35
mpdehaanabsolutely.  I've created some projects to do that at least in the sysadmin space, which has been underutilized10:36
mpdehaanwe need to find ways to do that in other areas as well10:36
mpdehaanCobbler and Func have largely been successful and getting lots more folks involved in Fedora, but that's only in enterprisey usage10:36
glezosTraditionally 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
mpdehaanhow do we do the same in desktop land or in terms of other apps and docs?10:36
mpdehaanI'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
glezosBesides -- 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
jwbi said relationship, not problem :)10:37
jwbas in 'you can't have one without the other'10:38
nottingyes, 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
mpdehaanit's about building architectures of collaboration10:38
mdomschMirrorManager has also done a good job of turning users into contributors - we've added ~30-40 new public mirrors in the last 6 months10:38
mpdehaanthere have to be places built for people to be able to get in easily and contribute and see those rewards10:38
jwbyeah, it's important to keep in my that contributions come in all kinds of forms10:38
mpdehaancomplicated processes can get in the way, so we need to minimize those were we can to lower those barriers to entry10:38
mpdehaanand allow those people to feel like they are a part of Fedora10:38
mpdehaanit's that feeling of being a part of things and making a difference that makes folks want to contribute10:39
mpdehaanwe have to ensure folks feel welcome and know how to do that10:39
glezosmdomsch, 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
mpdehaaneven if it's largely just a documentation and presentation thing at first, and examining all the entry points into Fedora more closely10:39
mdomschglezos, +110:39
glezosmpdehaan, do you have any specific actions in mind on how to get better documentation with our current resources?10:40
mpdehaanMirror Manager is great, but I'm not sure it's how we get folks to contribute to the distro10:40
mpdehaanit's how we get someone to be a very nice mirror definitely10:40
* jds2001 is a big fan of metrics to show new contributors that they're having an impact.10:40
mpdehaanthat was re: glezos, not mdomsch10:40
mpdehaanfedorahosted.org/ekg was written for that purpose10:40
jwbmpdehaan, you don't think mirroring Fedora is contributing to the distro?10:40
mdomschmpdehaan, I think being a mirror is a huge contribution10:40
mpdehaanat least in terms of making sure we know where the active/vibrant areas of the communities are10:40
jwbcontributions != development10:40
mpdehaanmdomsch: it's huge in terms of resources, but we need to do a lot more10:41
mpdehaanmore mirrors are good, but what we also need are new ideas and people with those ideas10:41
mpdehaanto seek out new worlds and civilizations10:41
glezosExtending 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
nottingone issue is i'm not sure that this works best at the board level10:42
nottingyou get an interested person starting transifex, to pull in translators10:42
mpdehaanit's a community architecture thing in many ways10:42
jwbnotting, right.  we talked a lot about Ambassadors and translators last night10:42
mpdehaanthough we need to support that and encourage everyone to think in that vein too10:42
nottingsomeone writes a project that is useful for sysadmins, it pulls in sysadmins10:42
jwbthose groups really push this10:42
nottingthis isn't a board directed activity.10:42
nottingalthough it's a board encouraged one10:42
mpdehaannope, though we can help suggest more of it and offer guidance/experience10:42
spevacknext question.10:43
glezosnotting, I think the line between encouragement and direction is pretty fuzzy. I'd say that almost nothing is practically board-directed.10:43
spevackalso from inode010:43
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
jwbme personally, no10:44
jds2001Fedora will always be free and open source, freely redistributable, etc. No variance there.10:44
glezosFrom 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
mpdehaanvariance, 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
jds2001do I use propietary software personally? yes.  (not sure if that's part of the question or not)10:45
nottingi'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
mpdehaanMachines need firmware to work10:46
mpdehaanso do cars10:46
mpdehaanI'm not giving up my car10:46
spevacknext question "should mpdehaan sell his car and use the proceeds to set up a fedora mirror?" :)10:46
mpdehaanspevack: only if someone loans me a Tesla Roadster10:46
jwbno.  he should get a bailout and use those proceeds10:46
mdomschI'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 dogmatism10:47
mpdehaanI def need a bailout10:47
mpdehaanFedora 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
nottingmdomsch: this runs into issues with things like swfdec, for example10:47
mpdehaanFedora needs to be able to run whatever software the user wants, though it should not ship with proprietary software repos or anything silly like that10:48
glezosOne 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
jds2001glezos: everything we use in FI is 100% open source.10:48
jds2001not sure what else you mean...10:49
mdomschnotting, 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
mpdehaanIt's part of Fedora's role also to encourage folks to open up their software and show them how it can be beneficial10:49
mpdehaanand to teach folks about FOSS communities and open development10:50
mpdehaannot the board per se, but Fedora's...10:50
glezosjds2001, 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
mpdehaanand OSS in general10:50
mpdehaancan'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 basis10:50
mpdehaanglezos: I think we have been following that path.10:50
mpdehaanwe could advertise it more true10:51
nottingmdomsch: right, it's finding a point to promote something like swfdec where it doesn't alienate users10:51
* 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
mdomschIn my $DAYJOB, I've had the opportunity to "gently encourage" quite a few companies down the open source path10:51
mpdehaanI like squirrels10:52
* 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
mpdehaanMore seriously....10:52
jds2001because the wiki page just said 'ssh to log1 and cat this file'10:52
jds2001and i think it's important to be transparent about how we generate that file.10:53
nottingthese are all good candidates for the position. voters can't lose.10:53
mdomschI'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
glezosmdomsch, +110:53
mpdehaanOk, 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 an10:53
spevacknotting, mdomsch: a big +1 from me10:53
mpdehaanEveryone here is also great, so we can't really screw this election up :)10:54
mpdehaanso just vote.10:54
jds2001mdomsch: +110:54
jwbvoting is key10:54
jwbalso, if you have a question that wasn't cover please email us!10:54
spevackI wonder if we could make some "don't blame me, i voted for zod" stickers or something?10:54
jds2001or I'm on fedora talk, as well.10:54
jds2001.ext jstanley10:54
zodbotjds2001: 510278810:54
nottingspevack: hey, what's the procedure if everyone votes for everyone and we have a seven-way tie?10:54
jds2001err, i thought zoddie was in here, 510278810:55
spevacknotting: then Al Franken gets the seat.10:55
mpdehaanHopefully bowling or laser-tag10:55
glezosI'd like to ask a quick Q to the other candidates10:55
jwbat FUDCon10:55
* jds2001 has a bad shoulder though :)10:55
glezosmspevack: do we have some time?10:55
spevackglezos: 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
glezosDo 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
nottingno, because the financial funding situation has not changed.10:56
jwbi don't believe so10:56
mpdehaanNo.  I'm not sure what the FF would yield.   Red Hat remains solid and Fedora is running well.10:56
jds2001I dpm't think so, financial and legal stuff overrides :)10:56
mpdehaanplus it did not last very long last time10:56
glezosnotting, the key Q I guess is whether restarting the discussion _could_ change the funding situation.10:57
jds2001I don't see any reason why it would.  We would have to get 2/3 of our funding from elsewhere.10:57
mpdehaanPlus what do you want to change?10:57
jds2001(or is it 1/3, I forget - one of those two)10:57
mpdehaanwrt the FF?10:57
nottingglezos: 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 sorce10:57
nottingand with red hat's contributions (people, bandwidth, hardware, etc.)... that math becomes really hard really fast10:58
jwbit should be noted that people can donate hardware and bandwidth already10:58
glezosWe'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
spevackhttp://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-announce-list/2006-April/msg00016.html -- for anyone who has never seen this, to give context10:58
glezosthis 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-public11:00
spevackthank you all!11:00
glezosSeeing 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
glezosmpdehaan, 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
mpdehaanglezos: but it doesn't11:02
mpdehaanRed Hat however does donate a /huge/ amount to Fedora11:02
glezosmpdehaan, of course, but it's undoubtly a sore point for a lot of folks.11:02
mpdehaanI don't believe so11:02
jds2001I 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
jwbglezos, i don't think it is11:02
jds2001I don't think so, it's not what I'm hearing at events.11:03
mpdehaanwe obviously do have a huge vested interest in Fedora's success11:03
jds2001Perhaps it's different in the US?11:03
jwbi asked that very question on f-a-b11:03
glezosthat's the image I got from Linux groups and independent folks around the world comparing our status with Debian's for example.11:03
jwbnobody even replied11:03
jwbof course, i guess that doesn't include non-Fedora users11:03
mpdehaanglezos: be careful when consulting distro fanboys, perhaps11:04
mpdehaanit apparently has not hurt Ubuntu's usage11:04
jwbmpdehaan, you don't consider yourself a distro fanboy?11:04
mpdehaaneven though their control is more total11:04
mpdehaanjwb, I don't11:04
jwbyou can be a fan and not be a zealot11:04
glezosanyway -- it's not an easy discussion, nor one with definite answers. Thanks for the answers anyway. :)11:04
mpdehaanI have to support EL 4/5 too much11:04
jds2001I xan and have recommended other distros that Fedora.11:05
mpdehaanjwb, I consider "fanboy" as "zealot"11:05
mpdehaanI like Fedora better than anything11:05
mdomschglezos, we've been trying to disabuse the notion that RH "controls" Fedora11:05
mpdehaanthough for enterprisey use, EL 4/5 would be my suggestion11:05
jds2001including EL, including Ubuntu, including lots of others.11:05
glezosmdomsch, we definitely tried..11:06
jds2001obviously I don't carry Ubuntu CD's around with me, whereas I do carry Fedora LiveCD's, but that's another point.11:06
mdomschhence the 5 elected 4 appointed board split11:06
jwbok, i have to leave.  late for another meeting11:06
jwbthanks all11:06
mdomschthanks jwb11:06
* jds2001 too11:06
glezosmdomsch, thanks for organizing the meeting11:06
mpdehaanyep, thanks11:06
glezosagain, my apologies for missing the first Qs.11:06
mdomschnp; thanks all for participating11:07
mpdehaanso important questions.  vim or emacs?11:07
mpdehaanplease nobody say eclipse11:07
mdomschTo 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
sharkczmcedit :-)11:08
mdomschfeedback to fedora-advisory-board@redhat.com (public), or to me in private11:08

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