Meeting:Board meeting 2009-07-16

From FedoraProject

Revision as of 01:16, 17 July 2009 by Pfrields (Talk | contribs)

(diff) ← Older revision | Latest revision (diff) | Newer revision → (diff)
Jump to: navigation, search

Contents

Roll Call

  • Attendees: John Poelstra, Josh Boyer, Mike McGrath, Bill Nottingham, Matt Domsch, Paul Frields, Dennis Gilmore, Dimitris Glezos, Chris Aillon
  • Regrets: Tom Callaway

Last Meeting

Fedora Spin Prioritization

  • Tabled for this meeting because proposal is not ready
  • caillon plans to have it by next Monday for review!

Russian Fedora

Use of fedoraproject.org email Addresses

  • (mdomsch) Trademark policy seems to cover this for the most part
    • No association with illegal activity, or association with advertised services
    • Board responsible for trademark matters
  • John asks how using fedoraproject.org email is any different from other mail services like gmail
    • mdomsch answers: gmail and the like have terms of service which prohibit illegal activity using a gmail address (as way of comparison)
    • dgilmore: fp.o is seen as a private community; whereas gmail is seen as a public service, so activities by its members don't reflect on the private community as much.
  • caillon: Negative image created by use of the address is not good for Fedora, malicious association

CSI - Security Policy

Published: http://infrastructure.fedoraproject.org/csi/security-policy/en-US/html-single/

  • RESOLUTION: Issue is closed.

Extended Life Cycle

  • https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Features/Extended_Life_Cycle
  • FESCo requests that Board discuss this topic because they do not believe it is a "feature" of Fedora 12
  • FESCo wants to know if the Board supports the concept of an Extended Life Cycle?
  • John: what new issues are being raised in the new proposal that differ from the Board's previous discussion?
  • Does the Board believe a longer lifecycle is aligned with our objectives?
    • In the sense of stretching resources too far, "no"
    • Several board members do not think that Fedora has the resources to maintain more releases in parallel (result of extending support lifecycle)
  • Dimitris: We should make sure that new ideas and improvements to what Fedora is doing are indeed tried.
    • Is the cost for Fedora itself high enough to disallow the mounting of the effort under the 'Fedora' umbrella?
    • Let's ask exactly what resources the team will need from Fedora itself.
  • John asks if someone on the Board who is interested in is this issue can work outside of the board meeting to get a clearer list of what ELC wants from Fedora and what exactly they are requesting
    • John is concerned about spending multiple meetings on this topic without being clear on what we are discussing or deciding
  • UNANSWERED QUESTIONS:
    • What is the Board saying "yes" to?
    • Trademark usage?
    • Fedora infrastructure?
    • What is the board responsible for deciding?
    • What is FESCo responsible for deciding?
    • Would ELC's request go against or detract from meeting Fedora's objectives?
      • Most Board members believed the answer to this was "yes," but were willing to entertain the idea to avoid calcification and stay open-minded
  • SHORT SUMMARY: Initially the board saw no reason to consider this topic beyond the previous discussion (https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Meeting:Board_meeting_2008-11-11), however after discussing at length (1 hour), at Dimitris' urging, the Board also wanted to remain open minded to new things that strectch our current perspective and might actually benefit Fedora
  • NEXT ACTIONS: Dennis will engage with the Extended Life Cycle (ELC) group by sending an email to f-a-b to obtain more information about their plans and requests from Fedora itself.

Next Meeting Time

  • 2009-07-23 @ 16:00 UTC (12 PM EDT)