Meeting:Board meeting 2012-02-01

= Fedora Board Meeting 2012-02-01 =


 * Meeting secretary: Jaroslav Reznik

Present
Jared Smith Jaroslav Reznik Toshio Kuratomi Rudi Landmann Rex Dieter Christoph Wickert Jon Stanley Peter Robinson Guillermo Gómez

Regards
David Nalley

Agenda
Updates Board business

Updates

 * Fedora 17 schedule update
 * Feature submission deadline last week (2012-01-24)
 * Feature Freeze in one week (2012-02-07)

Board Business

 * Championing projects
 * Due today!
 * FAB mailing list/blog about...
 * Toshio: Work on the Feature Process
 * Peter Robinson: ARM as a Primary Arch
 * Jon Stanley: QA how-to-debug and how-to-test pages
 * Rudi: Streamline docs publication process

Voting: toshio +1 pbrobinson +1 rdieter +1 jreznik: +1 cwickert: +1 jsmith: +1 jstanley: +1 rudi +1 gomix: +1
 * Ticket 131: retire torrent seed?
 * https://fedorahosted.org/board/ticket/131
 * a lot of technical solutions (up to infra team?)
 * Near future, Board would like to continue supporting torrents
 * Proposal -- We want torrents to be available but we don't care if that's done via our own infrastructure or on a different service that we point to from our website.
 * Torrents provided: For F17 should cover all the things that are currently provided by torrent
 * For future Fedora releases, Infra may reduce to what's on get.fp.o

=> agreed (9 votes +1)

cwickert: +1 rdieter: +1 jsmith: +1 jstanley -1 pbrobinson 0 toshio: 0 rudi +1 jreznik: +1 gomix: 0
 * Possible Addition: recommend that any third party used is using an open source torrent solution.

=> agreed (5 votes +1, 3 votes 0, 1 votes -1)

cwickert: +1 jsmith: +1 jstanley +1 toshio: 0 rdieter: 0 pbrobinson +1 rudi +1 gomix: +1 jreznik: +1
 * Possible Addition: still build the .torrent files, even if no longer seeding the downloads

=> agreed (7 votes +1, 2 votes 0, 0 votes -1)

jsmith to update ticket and communicate it to the infrastructure team

Proposals from last meeting (IRC):
 * Proposal 1 was: The Board is comfortable with letting the Infra team make the call
 * Proposal 2 was: The Board asks the Infra team to try to use the current solution for F17 release (even if it's IPv4 only, etc.), and get feedback after release
 * Proposal 3 was: Table a decision pending further discussion on the mailing list
 * Proposal 4 was: ask infra to make sure they have a wide audience, and discuss this broadly before making their decision.

cwickert: the decision should not be up to the infrastructure team peter: there are limited people resource (=>security implications etc.) Lack of people joining team?

How to join infrastructure team: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Infrastructure/GettingStarted


 * Ticket 132: Endorsement of https://github.com/fedoraproject
 * https://fedorahosted.org/board/ticket/132
 * Spot says they would need a trademark license agreement to use the Fedora trademark
 * jsmith is uncomfortable granting a blanket trademark license -- would like to see the limit to the scope
 * cwickert: What would it be used for? What makes it different from all the other upstream projects we are working with?
 * toshio: Would like the limitation to be more about "just getting JBoss into Fedora" as opposed to what they posted to the advisory-board list
 * toshio: The patch vs git pull request starts to border on rel-eng/infra issues (expanded trees on pkgs.fp.o, etc)
 * toshio: doesn't answer the question "Why can't an individual contributor do this on their own -- why do they need a Fedora github account"
 * pbrobinson/cwickert: Will the github account be a dumping ground in limbo between upstream and downstream? Is there a more specific (and valid) use case?
 * rdieter: A lot of misgivings would be allayed if the scope were limited (to JBoss as example) -- is that a short-term thing?
 * pbrobinson/cwickert: If it is limited to JBoss, are we discriminating other projects?
 * -ENEEDINFO
 * pbrobinson: fedoracommunity.o domains granted a trademark license still need a disclaimer. Wouldn't we still need one here?
 * jsmith to update ticket


 * Trademark Guidelines Draft
 * https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Pchestek/TMGuidelinesDraft
 * Board members in general agreement that it's better than the current guidelines
 * Need more time to digest the changes and read the specifics


 * Any other Board business?
 * UsrMove feature
 * General concern that coming in so late, this will cause us to slip
 * Proposal: The Board puts forward a statement of concern regarding the feature and the process
 * In trying to draft a proposal, came to the conclusion that anything we would say would be micromanaging.
 * Instead of making a Board statement, we'll reach out to individuals to share our concerns privately

Other Notes

 * Next Board meeting will be a public IRC meeting on Wednesday, February 8th at 18:30 UTC