Meeting:Board meeting 2009-07-09

Roll Call

Board Members: Dimitris Glezos, Paul Frields, John Poelstra, Mike McGrath, Josh Boyer, Matt Domsch, Bill Nottingham, Tom Callaway, Christopher Aillon
Regrets: Dennis Gilmore

Provide guidance as to what people can or cannot get sponsorship for
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Meeting:Board_meeting_2009-06-11#Status_of_sponsorship_work
Discuss Paul's draft and bannering proposal
- http://pfrields.fedorapeople.org/temp/rh-bannering
- https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Pfrields/Sponsorship
We do have links back to mirrors' organization from the mirror page (built into MirrorManager)
Singular web apps or sites providing banner ads for hosting providers of those particular sites
Dollar values removed from sponsorship levels because dollar values do not always map well to realized value
Need a catch-all for extraordinary services that we want to reward where it may not fit well with existing levels as described
- "Board may reward those services as they see fit"
John asks, "What does the 'substantial input into the performance management process' mean?"
- Paul explains over the course of 7 minutes
- Spot suggests this be elided for now
- too much language-lawyering
- Entire coverage of personnel is probably unnecessary, at least right now
- "If you're interested in delivering man-hours, contact the Board"
ACTION: Paul to revise and resubmit, should be able to close on mailing list

https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Meeting:Board_meeting_2009-06-11#Security_notification_plan_2
http://pfrields.fedorapeople.org/documents/csi-securitypolicy/
Excellent job Mike!
- Suggestion to include wording about partner notification
- would like to see individual names/emails removed from policy, replaced by roles (FPL, Legal). See 3.3.1.
  - Mike indicated this was done with XML entities and can be changed easily
ACTIONS:
- Paul will present to Red Hat as 1-2 day advance notice, as would be appropriate for any primary sponsor
- Announce on fedora-advisory-board list

https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=503013
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/private/fedora-board-list/2009-May/msg00120.html
Summary:
- No strong objections to it remaining in distro, but it would be inappropriate for the default spin
- only registered material objection is the "Teens" category, which advertises itself as something problematic, regardless of what's actually there
- not our responsibility to police content behind the app, anymore than for other downloading apps (firefox, et al.)
- Does not include content of a pornographic or offensive nature, thus, no reason to exclude it (c.f. http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Packaging/Guidelines#Code_Vs_Content)
- spot: Board reserves the right to restrict which packages are included on the official spins
  - In this case, we are leveraging that right and require that gnaughty not be on official spins
  - paul: Board is responsible for enforcing trademark policies, and we do not feel that it is necessarily proper to associate this with the Fedora trademarks ((add to policy as it pertains to this issue?))
policy could be something as generic as "packages which may be morally objectionable by a majority of our target audience may not be included on a spin which bears the Fedora logo. The Board is the arbiter of packages in this case".

I think it's important to not leave this completely open that the Board may randomly dictate package lists (caillon)

RESOLUTION: Spot will lift the FE-Legal hold
ACTION: Paul to make sure Board wiki page includes this responsibility and any others that have been enumerated to date

Spot proposal
- https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Meeting:Board_meeting_2009-06-11#What_is_Fedora
- https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/TomCallaway/SpinPriorities
- Spot is trying to call out "Who is Fedora's target audience?" versus "What is Fedora?"
- Target audience on a per-spin level
- That being said, there's still a default spin, and a default target audience
  - Lots of discussion ensues
  - A counter proposal of positioning Fedora as 'distro-next'; where upstream would go to integrate their new code
Board discussed proposal at great length
- ramifications of defining target audience on a per-spin basis
- where do we get future contributor pipeline for, if we restrict audience?
- Usability is one factor, target audience is another
- Can we focus our discussions into specific questions?
Board agrees we need a single default spin
spot's proposal generally agreeable, caillon to bring his at next meeting
After both proposals are reviewed, focus on list of questions we *can* and *should* answer, acknowledging that "What is Fedora?" is overly broad and misleading.
ACTION: Chris to bring proposal to next meeting

Pending requests
- Dennis Gilmore: fedoramirror.net and fedorapeople.org
  - Mike has already talked to Dennis
- Andy York: fedorageeks.com
  - Paul has talked with Andy
  - Board to deal with this on ML
ACTION: Mike to work on transferring Dennis's names to Fedora Infrastructure
ACTION: Paul to get Board consensus on Andy's domain and move forward from there

https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Meeting:Board_meeting_2009-07-02
Josh proposal: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Jwboyer/HallMonitors
- Acknowledgement to be done on list
Draft revisions to be circulated to list, approval via the mailing list