From Fedora Project Wiki

Fedora Project Board Meeting :: Tuesday 2009-03-03

fedoraforever Trademark Approval

Creative Commons Repo

  • is the meeting at which this was discussed by FESCo
  • Should the board permit the Fedora name (trademark) on a potential CC-content repo.
  • Board took an incomplete vote on using the Fedora name for this initiative
  • Further discussion showed that the board is not clear what FESCo plans to do with this approval
    1. Determine exactly what FESCo is requesting and what they plan to do
    2. Discuss further at a future board meeting Trademark Approval

Questions & Answers

  • kambiz asked if the Board approves of the idea and who will decide the prefix
  • embargoed countries
  • inode0 asked for more transparency into the board decision making process
  • diauq asked if the Board considered increasing the number of public meetings, either via IRC or listen-only VoIP?
  • nirik asked if there is any news regarding The Incident from last year, or if there is any news on when there might be news.
  • jjmcd asked if there is any concern that we might have overextended ourselves with F11, in particular whether or not we have the QA and docs resources to properly test and document the vast multitude of features that are lined up for the release
  • MostafaDaneshvar asked about the Board's position is regarding embargoed nations


stickster spevack: We have a few agenda items to cover before we get to public Q & A. 11:00
spevack *nod* 11:01
stickster OK gang, the agenda is as follows: 11:01
stickster * Approval of fedoraforever.* domain for a TM license agreement 11:01
* skvidal looks at the .agenda 11:01
skvidal (hidden agenda) 11:01
stickster heh 11:01
stickster * (Creative Commons repo) 11:02
stickster * Approval of domain for Phillipines community 11:02
stickster I'd like to limit #2 on the agenda (CC repo) to 15 minute ceiling so we can keep things moving. 11:02
stickster Any '-1' on that? 11:03
* stickster lets clock tick for a few more seconds.... 11:03
stickster OK 11:03
mdomsch worksforme 11:03
h\h +1 11:03
stickster Let's start with the approval of the fedoraforever.* domain for a TM license agreement. 11:03
stickster This is the request by Scott Williams (vwbusguy) for us to approve him to receive a TM license agreement for that domain, at which he intends to build a EOL maintenance project and community. 11:04
stickster <-- start of thread. 11:05
f13 sorry I'z late. 11:05
stickster Oops 11:05
stickster f13: I'll send you a repeat agenda in PM 11:06
skvidal f13: we were deciding whether or not to keep you around 11:06
skvidal I voted against having you whacked 11:06
skvidal stickster voted in favor - he's evil like that 11:06
f13 if you whacked me, who'd break all your rawhide packages? 11:06
* spot is here 11:07
mdomsch his use of the trademark seems in keeping with the goals of Fedora, even if we have doubts whether that effort will be ultimately successful 11:07
spot sorry, i got unexpected executive time. :) 11:07
ctyler On "fedoraforever.*": Comments seem to be primarily "hasn't worked before, but blessing on you if you want to take this on". On that basis, I don't see why we shoudn't approve. 11:07
h\h I have no objections against fedoraforever the domain itsself.. though the project might not succeed 11:07
skvidal f13: I'm sure we'd find someone 11:07
* notting agrees with mdomsch/ctyler 11:07
* spot doesn't object to the trademark use 11:07
glezos I don't see a reason to reject either. 11:08
* skvidal has no problem with it 11:08
* mdomsch proposes "approval, godspeed and good luck" 11:08
caillon i just am a little concerned with image if it doesn't end up maintaining an old fedora release forever 11:08
skvidal caillon: <shrug> 11:08
caillon but... image isn't everything. 11:08
stickster It seems like an odd name, but I'm not sure we want to get in the habit of rating names...? 11:08
skvidal caillon: so we shouldn't allow tm use for things that are likely to fail? 11:08
mdomsch caillon, as if "Batman Forever" didn't actually roll credits.... 11:08
* stickster likes 11:08
f13 I think we should let it try and even fail 11:09
f13 we learn from failures. 11:09
caillon stickster, sure we do. would be rated and denied 11:09
f13 we learned a lot from fedora legacy 11:09
stickster caillon: Sorry I was imprecise. Names that are otherwise allowed. :-) 11:09
skvidal caillon: fedoraforever is not being negative to fedora 11:09
f13 unfortunately they may not have learned enough from Fedora legacy 11:09
f13 but its their perogative to try 11:09
stickster agreed. 11:09
skvidal f13: well it's been enough years, now - they forget so quickly 11:09
stickster Shall we go ahead and +/-1 ? 11:10
ctyler +1 11:10
mdomsch +1 11:10
skvidal f13: it's like wars - one generation and they forget the horrors of war 11:10
skvidal +1 11:10
glezos +1 11:10
caillon 0 11:10
notting +1 11:10
spot +1 11:10
f13 +1 11:10
stickster h\h: ? 11:11
h\h +1 11:11
h\h sry 11:11
stickster :-) np. So that's 8 for, 1 abstaining, approved. I'll take the action of getting the TM license agreement to Scott. 11:11
stickster Moving right along 11:12
stickster * (Creative Commons repo) 11:12
f13 I'm really unclear why this is coming to us 11:13
stickster This is a request for the Board to consider whether to have a repository for Creative Commons content 11:13
skvidal I'm really unclear what it is we get out of this vs you know, using google's CC search 11:13
stickster FESCo voted to escalate this to us 11:13
ctyler skvidal: yum installability 11:13
caillon or why if we have packages, they can't just go into the fedora repo 11:13
skvidal ctyler: yum install firefox 11:13
stickster So this would be for things like... diveintopython maybe? 11:13
* mdomsch is confused 11:13
skvidal caillon: b/c they would be massive and change less often 11:14
mdomsch is this a request for a separate yum repo for CC content? 11:14
ctyler skvidal: I don't disagree, just saying 11:14
skvidal caillon: and not really be bound to a specific release 11:14
skvidal mdomsch: yes 11:14
spot mdomsch: in the Fedora space, yes. 11:14
mdomsch or for git tree 11:14
skvidal mdomsch: yum repo 11:14
spot e.g. Fedora Creative Commons Content Repository 11:14
glezos sounds like a good idea to me. 11:14
notting on one hand... this is generally agreeable to our mission (as much as that it is defined) 11:14
f13 I'm not really sure I would want to deal with repos that are generic across releases 11:14
caillon skvidal, okay, not being bound to a release is a good reason 11:14
spot f13: there is no code in the repo 11:15
f13 that gets us into some trouble with how to generate the repodata, rpm features, etc.. 11:15
notting on the other hand.... i'm not really sure we want to be in the business of hosting repositories of music, art, sounds, books, photos, graphics, etc. 11:15
f13 spot: code isn't my concern. 11:15
skvidal f13: not A LOT of trouble - we do LCD 11:15
spot f13: it would be a separate repo, repodata would be regenerated as packages are added 11:15
skvidal so sha1sums 11:15
spot (added/changed) 11:15
* mdomsch agrees with stickster - why is this a board decision? 11:16
caillon is there a reason we don't link to this sort of stuff from say a wiki page which could then be added to the default set of bookmarks? 11:16
ctyler a few things to note: diveintopython has one of the longest build times of any package in Fedora, and the data in this repo could be large 11:16
mdomsch board can say "yes, we're ok hosting CC content" 11:16
spot they want to use the Fedora trademark 11:16
stickster is the meeting at which this was discussed by FESCo 11:16
mdomsch FESCO should say "and the best way to do that is in a separate repo" 11:16
spot they want to do it in a separate repo 11:16
skvidal they want to say 'FEDORA' on top - hence board TM issue 11:16
f13 I think I'd rather see some other more generally useful tool used to get CC content 11:16
f13 cross distro 11:16
skvidal f13: we have one 11:17
skvidal f13: firefox 11:17
f13 indeed 11:17
caillon yeah, see my question above. 11:17
f13 and that even "installs" it where the user can make use o fit 11:17
skvidal caillon: firefox is crossdistro, right? 11:17
skvidal :) 11:17
h\h html is :) 11:17
f13 rather than in / somewhere with root ownership 11:17
caillon skvidal, mostly. i think a few distros do the iceweasel thing... 11:17
caillon but yeah 11:17
skvidal okay - so - time to vote? 11:18
f13 I fear we don't have enough details of what they really want to accomplish 11:18
mdomsch ok, regarding the trademark usage, it seems this might be considered a "non-software good" if you will 11:18
mdomsch or service 11:18
spot they want to use the Fedora trademark to provide a repository of rpm packaged content under Free CC licenses 11:19
spot I'm inclined to permit this 11:19
glezos I suppose we are in favor of the trademark use but we are concerned about the engineering bits. So we could just say 'ok' and leave the final decision to FESCo. 11:19
h\h not a bad thing per se 11:19
stickster spot: That's the ticket. This isn't about us solving a technical problem, it's whether it fits into Fedora's scope. 11:19
mdomsch I think it fits within Fedora's scope 11:19
stickster I think we've consistently tried to pursue putting free culture content in front of people, whether through FF bookmarks or what have you. 11:19
f13 sure, I suppose. 11:19
* ctyler thinks we need next week's meeting before this week's meeting 11:19
stickster spevack brought up a good point, which is that you could have an "fedora-ambassador-presos" package, for example. 11:20
f13 I'm not yet willing to see this repo pre-configured/enabled in Fedora releases yet though 11:20
spot f13: i don't think they're asking for that yet 11:20
mdomsch f13, that's fesco / rel-eng to work out 11:20
stickster ctyler: Unless we're getting ready to bail on the free culture movement... :-) 11:20
f13 hrm, I should say yet a few more times. 11:20
stickster ...I think we'd be OK. 11:20
glezos caillon: On having them available in Firefox: Can a package add a bookmark to Fedora's Firefox? 11:20
notting but i'm not sure a CC repo is the best mechanism for ... open clipart. or video clips. 11:20
spot +1 on trademark permission 11:20
f13 glezos: yes, but only one package, not multiple packages. 11:20
f13 sure, why not, go forth and generate a repo under the Fedora name. 11:21
caillon stickster, but we do want to support free culture by way of sending people to those websites.... 11:21
mdomsch .mozilla/firefox/bookmarks.d/ ftw! 11:21
caillon glezos, sadly, no. 11:21
glezos caillon: indeed, sadly. 11:21
glezos I'm +1 for trademark usage, leaving the technical decision/bits to FESCo. 11:22
caillon but fedora-bookmarks is the package that can be changed. 11:22
h\h glezos, use the Menu in the panel? 11:22
skvidal <shrug> 11:22
skvidal +1 for tm usage 11:22
caillon and i'm open to changing that. actually, i would like to figure out a good process for maintaing that package... 11:22
h\h +1 11:22
glezos h\h: excellent idea, which could include Fedora docs too. 11:22
skvidal -1 for the repo itself but leaving it to fesco is fine 11:22
stickster To clarify, all we're voting on here is whether we permit the Fedora name on a potential CC-content repo. 11:23
ctyler assuming that we're not taking energy from our other work, +1 11:23
stickster But clearly there are quite a number of implementation details to nail dow. 11:23
stickster *down, even. 11:23
ctyler the dow's been nailed bad enough 11:24
stickster Heard that. 11:24
f13 401krap 11:24
caillon stickster, so our votes may be for naught because the repo isn't necessarily going to happen? 11:24
skvidal f13: but I feel so young! It's just like 1998 :) 11:24
stickster caillon: I think we'll probably survive the wasted effort if so :-) 11:25
notting stickster: seems odd to vote on oking the TM usage without actually agreeing whether or not it's a feasible 11:25
f13 this kind of feels like some of the other proposals we've turned down 11:25
* caillon agrees with notting 11:25
skvidal notting: what's feasible? 11:25
skvidal someone wants to make a repo with fedora's name on it 11:25
f13 where we've asked them to show up with an actual repo and people doing work before we grant a trademark name to it 11:25
skvidal that has free stuff in it 11:25
skvidal if it were not about including it in the distro 11:26
skvidal would we even have the discussion? 11:26
stickster f13: I think in those cases there was no agreement that the proposal was in the scope of Fedora. 11:26
f13 yes 11:26
f13 I'm extremely sensitive to slapping Fedora's name on any repo that isn't our one true repo 11:26
* stickster notes that we are at 15 minutes. 11:26
notting skvidal: well... is it going to live by the same definitions as content currently does? (must enhance the fedora users experience). or is it for any appropriately licensed content? 11:27
skvidal f13: you mean like fedoraforever? 11:27
skvidal f13: that you just voted in favor of? 11:27
stickster We have 5 votes +1 for TM usage. 11:27
f13 I've always held the position that if it's good enough to have Fedora's name, and free enough for Fedora to ship, it can go into Fedora's repos 11:27
f13 skvidal: that's not about software that isn't already in Fedora 11:27
skvidal this is not about SOFTWARE either 11:27
f13 hrm, too many negatives. 11:27
skvidal it's about content 11:27
spot f13: i think this is a case where there is merit in having it be separated. 11:27
mdomsch if FESCo / rel-eng decide they don't want another repo, then the point is moot 11:28
f13 We've been down the multiplre repos road before, it failed 11:28
skvidal f13: ?? 11:28
stickster And a substantial portion of that content does live in our Project in various places, incl. the wiki. 11:28
skvidal which road? 11:28
caillon for the record, -1 from me. I'd like to know exactly what the proposed implementation is before a vote. I also think this is the wrong way to push free content at users, since many free content publishers rely on pagehits. removing that will disenfranchise them and discourage free culture. 11:28
* glezos notes that this is more of a technical decision than a Board one. 11:28
f13 skvidal: there was plenty of fail in the relationship between core/extras 11:28
spot f13: it failed because we tried to have two sets of dependent software in separate repos. 11:28
spot f13: this is entirely different from that 11:28
f13 spot: your content is going to need readers 11:28
skvidal f13: oh cmon - that is very different 11:28
skvidal caillon: that's a fair point 11:28
stickster OK, we need to move on people. 11:29
spot f13: all content needs readers, most of them are already in Fedora 11:29
notting +1 to table for next week 11:29
spot i think we're very good at squashing good ideas in the earliest stages. :P 11:29
f13 I think they can do the work to produce a repo and have users before asking for Fedora's name 11:29
skvidal spot: well, that's the time to get them :) 11:29
skvidal spot: squashing them later is a lot more work 11:30
stickster In the meantime, we can ask FESCo to clarify the boundaries a little so we can have a more effective discussion. I take from this that the Board's comfort level depends on the implementation. 11:30
f13 so that we're not voting on a vague idea, and more on something that actually exists. 11:30
stickster OK, moving on. 11:30
stickster Last item -- approval for 11:30
stickster 11:30
mdomsch does the board have to vote on each * setup? I hope not. 11:31
spot Yes. No brainer. Or do we want to audit all of their content first? 11:31
spot Someone might have said a dirty word in tagalog! 11:31
spot :P 11:31
ctyler +1 for approval 11:31
caillon +1 11:31
stickster This is part of the process which I asked everyone to review, at 11:31
notting +1, assuming that the Phillipines have not been added to That List Of Countries 11:31
f13 spot: here, you can have your dagger back, thanks for chucking it at me. 11:32
mdomsch stickster, right. We recommend that local communities use a * domain name supplied by the Fedora Project, along with their own hosting. 11:32
f13 +1 11:32
h\h +1, assuming there are not 10 other phillipine community sites, which also want the domain :) 11:32
mdomsch To establish _any other domain_ with the word Fedora .... 11:32
skvidal +1 11:32
glezos +1 11:33
mdomsch hence my question as to why we're voting 11:33
mdomsch but oh well, +1 11:33
skvidal before the QA 11:33
stickster 'The Fedora Board will take a rapid "consensus vote." 11:33
stickster * The consensus vote essentially answers the question, "Can the community set up this domain?" 11:33
stickster * In most cases, it's expected the Board will answer "Yes."' 11:33
skvidal mdomsch: work for you? 11:33
mdomsch ok 11:34
stickster Excellent, unanimous. 11:34
spevack stickster: i'd like to add a question that specifically relates to this issue before we start the general Q&A 11:34
stickster spevack: Sure 11:34
* stickster notes moderator pushing to the front of the queue; what hubris! 11:34
spevack kambiz wants to know if this means that the Board approves of the idea (or whatever acronym they choose to use at the front of the domain). 11:34
* spot hopes it doesn't have the word "iran in it" 11:34
spevack stickster: there is another question related to this in the Q&A, but kambiz's question seemed pertinent to this discussion 11:35
spevack EOF 11:35
skvidal +1 to 11:35
skvidal farsi is not iran-specific 11:35
glezos skvidal: +1 11:35
stickster There are Farsi speakers all over the world. I don't see any reason we should be singling out languages 11:35
spot +1 from me 11:35
mdomsch as long as it's not hosted in iran... 11:35
mdomsch or other embargoed country 11:36
skvidal mdomsch: separate issue, imo 11:36
mdomsch skvidal, not really; * requires non-Fedora-provided hosting 11:36
f13 +1 to farsi 11:36
ctyler do we need an opinion from RH legal? 11:36
ctyler +1 11:36
caillon and we need to point dns to it... 11:36
h\h +1 11:36
skvidal mdomsch: yes it is - b/c you're assuming it might be :) 11:36
f13 ctyler: This might be better left unasked (: 11:36
stickster The domain should not be a problem. However, we would probably need to point at a server in a non-embargoed nation. Spot and I can check that with Red Hat Legal if needed. I'd prefer if the Farsi-speaking community can come up with a hosting option that makes that inquiry unnecessary. 11:37
caillon but +1 to it in general 11:37
notting +1 to farsi 11:37
-!- stickster changed the topic of #fedora-board-meeting to: Next public Fedora Project Board meeting: NOW! 11:37
glezos Let's note in public here that the Board is *forced* by law to not have actions in relation with some embargoed countries. 11:37
mdomsch +1 to farsi 11:37
glezos s/law/US law/ 11:38
skvidal let's also note that it doesn't matter what the domain is - none of our servers can be hosted in embargo'd nations 11:38
skvidal nonetheless 11:38
skvidal the domain could be - it still can't be hosted in cuba 11:39
glezos ie. the Board decides to follow the US law, since Fedora's trademark and legal 'existence' is in the United States. 11:39
* stickster is pretty sure skvidal was making a point just to use that example :-D 11:39
spevack kambiz notes that the machine that would provide the hosting for farsi.fc.o is located in the USA 11:39
caillon glezos, i think it's more than "decides to" 11:39
skvidal stickster: 11:39
stickster glezos: not so much "decides to" as "has to" 11:39
glezos right. 11:39
stickster This is unfortunately not up to us. Not even up to Red Hat Legal -- they're simply the bearers of bad tidings. 11:40
skvidal stickster: civil disobedience? 11:40
stickster skvidal: I like sleeping in my own bed at night instead of in a 3'x3' box, thanks 11:40
mdomsch immediate loss of worldwide export privs for RH? 11:40
stickster But anyway.... 11:40
stickster spevack: Have we sufficiently answered your question? 11:40
notting skvidal: then why not civil disobedience on mp3, dvd-css, etc? 11:41
skvidal notting: indeed, why not? 11:41
spevack stickster: there is another question related to the whole embargoed countries topic. I can ask it now, or ask it when it comes up in the queue later 11:41
skvidal notting: man, you walked into that one ;) 11:41
* stickster threatens to bring in jeremy and voice him 11:41
stickster spevack: Let's give someone else a chance, but we'll stay for all comers 11:41
stickster spevack: Next Q 11:42
spevack kambiz wants the Board to clarify that the prefix -- be it farsi. or fa. -- is just a detail for them to decide. 11:42
spevack then we'll move on 11:42
stickster It could be one of those two. We're not giving blanket approval for "any third-level name you want," though 11:42
spevack ok. 11:42
stickster Either "farsi" or "fa" should be fine. 11:42
spevack next question will be pasted in a few parts, ending with EOF. 11:42
spevack inode0 comments that while the meeting minutes sent to f-a-b indicate what the Board has discussed and decided, he would like to see more transparency into the various arguments that went into that decision, and who advocated for various things. 11:43
spevack inode0 states that this would help the community hold individual Board members accountable, and also provide more insight and education into the process by which decisions are made. 11:43
spevack He goes on to note that watching the deliberations in this particular meeting has been particularly valuable/useful/edifying. 11:43
* stickster sort of walked up and stole the mic on that last one, hope nobody on the Board is angry 11:43
spevack EOF 11:43
ctyler Does that not amount (more or less) to a request to hold all of the board meetings publicly? 11:44
stickster Our intrepid secretary has greatly increased the granularity of the meeting minutes recently 11:44
spevack another question -- diauq mentions that the IRC meetings were a first pass at public meetings. Has the Board considered increasing the number of public meetings, either via IRC or listen-only VoIP? 11:44
stickster But I think there is a point at which we'd be asking the impossible of him. 11:44
mdomsch I want to balance the desire for transparency, with the desire to get things done. 11:44
* spevack figures the two questions are related 11:44
stickster IRC greatly reduces the bandwidth of the discussion, without a doubt. 11:45
mdomsch IRC isn't the most time-effective method we have for discussions 11:45
stickster I would like to get a monthly VoIP conference established to either replace or supplement this public meeting. 11:45
stickster However, that's been stalled for some time on resources that would allow it to be recorded and distributed. 11:46
stickster Without doing that, we'd be making the meeting *less* transparent for a lot of people. 11:46
spevack inode0 reiterates that his main point is that he would like to see -- in some way -- increased transparency of deliberations 11:46
caillon i agree. 11:47
f13 I think we could at least show vote results, if votes are taken 11:47
mdomsch would an additional scribe at meetings help? 11:47
caillon maybe we can figure out something on the f-a-b though? 11:47
f13 and those vote results could have some rational behind them. 11:47
f13 it'd take an effort on teh part of the board members to be verbose in the gobby session 11:48
* skvidal notes that public votes are a double-edge sword 11:48
skvidal on the one hand - accountability - yay 11:48
caillon and the ability to use gobby, which i have not had for the past few weeks 11:48
skvidal on the other hand - you can't vote your conscience about things 11:48
spevack skvidal: in what sense? 11:48
skvidal s/can't/may not be able to/ 11:48
skvidal spevack: sometimes you have to be the guy to make the unpopular decision 11:49
skvidal spevack: to say "this is unpopular but it is the right/correct thing to do 11:49
skvidal " 11:49
stickster s/decision/argument/ 11:49
skvidal yes 11:49
* spevack nods 11:49
caillon skvidal, you never have a problem being the unpopular guy... 11:49
caillon :) 11:49
stickster Who? MRoFS? 11:49
spevack inode0 says "make the unpopular decision in public then", and you'll have his respect 11:50
skvidal caillon: that was my platform the last time I ran for the board 11:50
spevack er, more of his respect 11:50
skvidal caillon: "You wouldn't believe the stupid ass shit I blocked".... 11:50
ctyler Transparency and openness are crucial. However, there are personality issues and dynamics, and those are often best discussed with the door closed, too. 11:50
h\h we can try to add more names to the next meeting minutes where possible and where it makes sense 11:50
spevack jjmcd_ notes "some sort of distillation would be ideal IMO. e.g. quaid voted -1 because he thought it would take too much effort, stickster +1 because he wanted to be disruptive -- would allow easy digestion of a lot of discussion" 11:51
notting but there is a limit to the amount of reasonable transcribing that can be done. i don't think we're there yet, though 11:52
glezos I don't see any reason not to make the meeting minutes more verbose. We _very_ rarely discuss things that are sensitive to be public. 11:52
spevack inode0 says "last comment from me, I'm just asking the board to find ways to *increase* transparency - not asking for total transparency and they can certainly decide this was too spicy to post or that was too sensitive based on their judgments" 11:52
stickster glezos: Um, on the contrary I think we've done quite a lot of that lately. 11:52
stickster But we should also continue to push public-facing discussion to the FAB list. 11:52
caillon I think that this a good topic for FAB list. (based on what time it is) 11:53
stickster We just recently started doing a collaborative note-taking effort at our meetings using a private gobby server. We can all pitch in to improve the granularity of the notes and take a readin gnext month. 11:53
stickster caillon: Agreed. 11:53
stickster spevack: Next Q? 11:53
* ctyler wonders about the queue length 11:53
spevack 3 more questions 11:54
spevack currently 11:54
spevack nirik asks if there is any news regarding The Incident from last year, or if there is any news on when there might be news. 11:54
spevack EOF 11:54
* ctyler and many on the board listen for the answer 11:54
stickster Nothing new to report, other than that I'm continuing to work on getting a final disclosure out as soon as I can. I'm as anxious to complete this as the community is to read it. 11:54
stickster EOF. 11:55
spevack next question? 11:55
stickster spevack: +1 11:55
ctyler q++ 11:55
spevack jjmcd_ wants to know if there is any concern that we might have overextended ourselves with F11, in particular whether or not we have the QA and docs resources to properly test and document the vast multitude of features that are lined up for the release. EOF 11:55
glezos stickster: do we have _any_ indication for an ETA? 11:55
stickster No. 11:55
glezos If not, can we ask for one? 11:56
stickster You can ask. 11:56
* glezos would use 'demand' but is being kind tonight. 11:56
glezos :) 11:56
stickster (Not meaning to be flippant, but seriously, it is what it is.) 11:56
spot Well, I'm not losing sleep over the F11 featureset. 11:56
caillon jjmcd_, I think it's pretty cool actually that so many people are doing so many features. 11:57
spot I think honestly we've had close to this level of feature churn for some time now, its only recently that we've been able to track it as well as we are. 11:57
mdomsch I'm glad to see so much activity 11:57
notting it's great that we're getting so much stuff added and tracked 11:57
* stickster thinks this is an excellent opportunity to once again thank the largely unseen hand of Mr. Poelstra. 11:57
spevack +1 11:57
f13 right. 11:57
ctyler three cheers for John! 11:57
spot I think that folks like wwoods and adamw are doing good work building up the QA efforts and Rel-eng is doing a great job with the necessary rebuilds 11:57
f13 the amount of churn isn't new. The amount of visibility into that chrun is 11:57
stickster Precisely! 11:58
glezos Feature spree. Dominating. Mega-release. Unstoppable. 11:58
h\h glezos, :) 11:58
f13 We specifically gave F11 a full 6 month cycle in order to handle the churn on tap, rather than shorten its cycle to get back to our prvious release marks 11:58
glezos Fedora 11: M-m-m-monster Release. 11:58
caillon glezos, you forgot forever :) 11:58
spot We could just sit back and wait for someone else to do all the hard work, but then we'd be "Fubuntu" 11:58
stickster 've seen a growing rate of uptake in the test days and other QA efforts, which bodes very well. 11:58
ctyler Plus, we're at feature freeze, and some things will get dropped or postponed (I've had to move multiseat to F12 due to the state of the open source drivers, for example -- no point releasing a feature that requires closed-source bits) 11:59
stickster I'm pretty happy with the fact that our features get uptake from other consumers through their distro of choice. That's not a minus for us, it's the proof in the pudding. 11:59
spevack ready to move on? 12:00
spot stickster: indeed. my point was that i'm not at all frightened by the size of the challenge, i'm thrilled at being part of a community that is doing so much 12:00
caillon stickster, what proof is your pudding? that may explain quite a bit.... 12:00
mdomsch 151 12:00
stickster caillon: triple digit, baby. 12:00
stickster That's all I'm sayin'. 12:01
stickster spevack: Next Q 12:01
spevack This is the last question, unless people add more to the queue. MostafaDaneshvar wants to know what the Board's position is regarding embargoed nations. EOF 12:01
f13 less pudding, more slurry 12:01
f13 THe "board" doesn't have a position on it 12:01
spot we're still waiting for formal advice from Red Hat Legal 12:01
f13 other than that the board is bound by US Law 12:01
h\h no position to change 12:01
f13 Individual members of the board have extreme distaste for the US laws in particular 12:01
h\h true 12:02
f13 and are taking individual action to express our concerns to our local congresscritters 12:02
spot i think the situation is depressing, but i also think the DMCA is depressing, software patents are depressing, the lack of free firmware is depressing, etc, etc 12:02
stickster Now would be an excellent time for individuals to make those views known... 12:02
f13 the board wont however take any action that would threaten Red Hat's ability to do business in and outside the USA 12:02
spevack jjmcd_ notes notes that he appreciates the board standing up to handle this stuff 12:02
ctyler As a Canadian, I find the position we're put in distasteful and strange, but recognize that there's nothing to be done in the sort term. 12:02
glezos The best approach with such issues is simply for a mass of people to start ringing the phones of congresspeople and members of the parliament. 12:03
stickster I personally think the effectiveness of embargoes varies a little (not a lot) based on what you think they're supposed to achive. 12:03
stickster If they're supposed to encourage social change toward any of the principles we espouse in Fedora, I don't think they're succeeding in that. 12:03
f13 I also like the creative solution of grouping people by language rather than origin 12:04
f13 as to avoid such embargo issues 12:04
spevack f13: yeah, that's a great idea from kambiz 12:04
stickster I think being able to participate in free expression of ideas, software, culture, what have you, is the best solution, and it sucks that we can't do that. 12:04
h\h embargo for mathematics, arts and common knowledge is senseless 12:04
skvidal f13: that solution is not about avoiding embargos 12:04
skvidal that solution is about providing a common language location 12:04
f13 skvidal: right. 12:04
stickster skvidal: +1. 12:04
skvidal right? right. 12:04
f13 right. 12:04
* spot shakes his head 12:04
h\h freedom of speech :) 12:05
notting it's irritating, and it isn't right that we have to do this. but it's not a board policy, really 12:05
skvidal h\h: istr germany has some odd rules about stuff like this, too 12:05
skvidal and france 12:05
skvidal and the UK 12:05
stickster Much (maybe all?) of the EU does, I believe. 12:05
skvidal nod 12:05
skvidal and china has a few rules 12:05
h\h sure 12:05
skvidal and I think Japan does, too 12:05
skvidal and australia 12:05
* skvidal wonders if Canada does, too 12:06
stickster Like some of the legal problems we have in software, this is another sticking point that doesn't just involve the USA. 12:06
stickster I guess we should get some credit for being honest about it, at least. 12:06
spevack stickster: the queue is now empty. 12:06
stickster Fedora: Never sticking our heads in the sand when pouring it in our pants is easier. 12:07
f13 stickster: tiem to pass the pudding around. 12:07
notting stickster: what's in your pants is your own business 12:07
stickster Maybe that would have been funnier if I said "more challenging" instead of "easier." 12:07
stickster I have nothing else of value except more pudding. 12:07
stickster Once again, thank you spevack for serving as our moderator! 12:08
f13 thanks spevack 12:08
stickster And thanks to the community for attending our meeting and posing such good questions. 12:08
spevack my pleasure, guys 12:08
spevack good meeting, i thought. 12:08
-!- stickster changed the topic of #fedora-board-meeting to: Next public Fedora Project Board meeting: 2009-04-07 UTC 1800 12:09
glezos thanks all. gnite 12:10


inode0 May we begin dumping questions into the queue? 11:01
spevack ok everyone. I'm your moderator today. 11:01
spevack The Board has some agenda items to cover 11:01
spevack but feel free to start dumping questions into the queue 11:01
spevack and when we get to the Q&A, i'll send them over, plus comments/followups 11:01
spevack inode0: did you have some questions you wanted to ask? 11:02
inode0 Yes, but it isn't quite simple to state. 11:03
inode0 At least in a nice way and I mean to ask it in a nice way :) 11:03
spevack anyone else? 11:04
inode0 It is about accountability of the board to those who elect them and how the current level of transparency of board deliberations impedes that ... 11:04
inode0 Can the board find ways to increase the level of transparency of board *deliberations*? 11:05
spevack ok. so i assume that your concern is that there isn't sufficient transparency being shown by the Board right now in its discussions. 11:05
inode0 I don't see their discussions anywhere, am I looking in the wrong place? 11:05
skvidal inode0: the minutes? 11:05
spevack inode0: aside from the legal stuff (which has been high volume lately, it seems), are there some specific examples that come to mind? 11:05
inode0 The minutes are nice for knowing what is decided, but they almost always say the board discussed this or the board decided that. 11:06
* spevack begins summarizing some of inode0's comments 11:06
MostafaDaneshvar spevack: ! 11:06
nirik Q: any news on the "incident" last year yet? Or news on when there might be news? :) 11:06
spevack MostafaDaneshvar: yes sir 11:06
inode0 That does not help with individual accountability because who made this argument and who made that argument is removed. 11:07
spevack nirik: *nod* 11:07
MostafaDaneshvar spevack: what's Board position about embargoed nations? 11:07
spevack MostafaDaneshvar: i have added it to the queue of questions 11:07
inode0 I want to emphasize my question isn't just about accountability, but also about education. We will understand the issues at hand better if we see more detail about the process rather than just the outcome. 11:08
kambiz spevack: I'd like to hear what the feedback is (when you get there) ... on my proposal to side step the issue and setup a farsi fedora community portal. 11:08
spevack kambiz: i'll include that into MostafaDaneshvar's question 11:08
jjmcd_ Another one - Is there concern that we may have overextended ourselves on F11? 11:08
spevack jjmcd_: in what sense? 11:08
jjmcd_ We have an awful lot of features to produce 11:09
jjmcd_ Not that features are a bad thing, I just wonder whether we have the gas to do it 11:10
spevack jjmcd_: is your concern from a QA perspective, or the perspective of unfinished features in the final release? 11:10
vwbusguy I'm here 11:11
jjmcd_ QA and docs ... of course my perspective is more from docs, but really i wonder whether we can do all that with the quality we have come to expect 11:11
vwbusguy thanks! 11:12
spevack ok... I've queued up questions from inode0, nirik, MostafaDaneshvar, kambiz, and jjmcd_ 11:13
stickster nirik: anyone_from_FESCo: Do we have the current topic right? 11:14
spevack stickster: is this CC thing a repo for *content* that is encapsulated into RPMs? 11:15
* spevack doesn't understand what would go in such a repo 11:15
stickster spevack: I believe so. 11:15
* stickster looking for meeting minutes from FESCo 11:15
stickster 11:16
spevack stickster: the next question I'd ask then is "why don't we have RPMs with all the Fedora Art team's stuff and all the Fedora marketing presentations, etc." 11:16
spevack yum install fedora-ambassadors-stuff 11:16
spevack and you have a bunch of stuff for a show 11:16
spevack anyone: is that a good idea or a dumb idea? 11:17
delhage I like it 11:17
jjmcd_ I can see plusses and deltas 11:17
* spevack likes the idea of being able to have an "upstream" for content that is well-edited and well-vetted, but it doesn't necessarily have to live in a RPM. It could just as easily be a web page. 11:18
jjmcd_ Yeah, I think there is something to that. Rather not see PackageKit slower and more cumbersome than it already is 11:19
jjmcd_ good call, Paul 11:19
diauq spevack: a question: The IRC meetings were a first pass at public meetings. What does the Board think about increasing the % of Board meetings that are public, either in IRC or listen-only VoIP? For example, 50% public, 50% private. 11:19
spevack diauq: added to the queue 11:20
* inode0 thinks this is the best townhall yet because he actually gets to watch the board deliberate (instead of answering our questions) :) 11:22
* jjmcd_ likes glezos idea 11:23
diauq kambiz: fwiw, I think farsi.fp.o is a great idea :) 11:24
* kambiz scrolls back 11:26
MostafaDaneshvar diauq: fa.fc.o 11:27
diauq right, fedoracommunity.o 11:27
* diauq gets all the backronyms confused 11:27
spevack stickster: why is the name important? why aren't they just asking "hey, would you mind including this repo in anaconda as an optional add-on b/c if fits in with Fedora's spirit, in our opinion" or something like that. 11:28
spevack i think they're getting ready to start the Q&A 11:30
spevack when they do, feel free to post followups here, and i'll pass them through 11:30
* inode0 really wants to see what just happened be more common - that is exactly the deliberation I was talking about in my earlier question. 11:31
spevack inode0: i have noted that in the text that i will paste 11:31
diauq +1 to automatically passing through *.fc.o, that's a waste of time to vote for it's why the site was setup in the first place! 11:31
kambiz does that mean the board aproves of ? 11:32
spevack kambiz: good question. :) 11:33
jjmcd_ that's what I'm hearing 11:33
jjmcd_ although is their decision limited to jurisdictions ? 11:33
mohsensaeedi kambiz: I think is better than farsi.* 11:34
mmcgrath 11:35
kambiz lol ... thanks mmcgrath 11:35
kambiz I feel the love 11:35
spevack heh 11:35
MostafaDaneshvar mmcgrath: :D 11:36
kambiz mohsensaeedi: ya ... either way ... I'm just hoping we can escape the political trappings of having something associated with Iran ... and focus on a language based community site. 11:36
mmcgrath or :) 11:36
spevack kambiz: did that answer your question? 11:36
-!- stickster changed the topic of #fedora-board-public to: Next public Fedora Project Board meeting: NOW! 11:37
kambiz <-- how's that? (kidding!) 11:37
kambiz the host this site would point to btw ... is based in the US 11:38
mohsensaeedi kambiz: do you think about 11:38
kambiz mohsensaeedi: I dont think persian will work honestly ... anything that can link the site specifically with Iran will not work. 11:39
spevack kambiz: any follow-ups on this topic, or has your question been addressed? 11:40
kambiz mohsensaeedi: the host is on right? which as best a I can tell operates in Pensylvania, US? 11:40
kambiz spevack: I think I'm fine .... mohsensaeedi ? 11:40
jjmcd_ Funny how the Internet sometimes makes jurisdictional boundaries seem so foolish 11:41
mohsensaeedi spevack: we have a shared host in 11:41
kambiz spevack: farsi.fc.o or fa.fc.o is just the finer details at this point right? 11:41
mohsensaeedi kambiz: yes, 11:41
kambiz spevack: would work? I'm guessing not for the same reason iran would not work ... but I thought I'd ask ... (sorry to belabor the point) 11:44
inode0 and the question is spevack? 11:44
spevack inode0: it's more of a series of comments that you'd like them to discuss, i figured :) 11:45
spevack inode0: did i miss your point? 11:45
spevack kambiz: i'd just ping stickster or spot with the "persia" question, if I were you. 11:45
inode0 Well, I really want them to do something to increase transparency of deliberations. IRC logs (even redacted) would be great. Public meetings would be great. 11:46
spevack stickster: ^^^^^^^^^ 11:46
inode0 Other things might be great. Announcing the board discussed X and the board decided Y is not great. 11:46
inode0 make the unpopular decision in public then, I'll respect it more if you do 11:49
delhage so making right/correct deciscion should not be public? I don't ollow hime 11:50
delhage follow* 11:50
jjmcd_ some sort of distillation would be ideal IMO. e.g. quaid voted -1 because he thought it would take too much effort, stickster +1 because he wanted to be disruptive -- would allow easy digestion of a lot of discussion 11:51
inode0 last comment from me, I'm just asking the board to find ways to *increase* transparency - not asking for total transparency and they can certainly decide this was too spicy to post or that was too sensitive based on their judgments 11:51
* jjmcd_ continues to be amazed at just how transparent the fedoraproject is, doesn't mean it couldn't be better tho 11:53
* inode0 thanks spevack and the board and runs to another meeting 11:53
spevack inode0: ttyl 11:54
* jjmcd_ is very glad he doesn't have stickster's job 11:55
* spevack used to have stickster's job, and sympathizes 11:55
jjmcd_ good to hear 11:58
* jjmcd_ notes that last month's LXF said "Fedora 10 kicks Ubuntu's ass" on the cover 11:58
skvidal LXF? 11:59
jjmcd_ Linux Format Magazine 11:59
jjmcd_ British I think 11:59
skvidal ah 12:00
skvidal how is LinuxFormat Magazine 'LXF'? 12:00
skvidal and not LFM? 12:00
jjmcd_ I dunno, but that's what they call themselves on the spine and inside the editorials 12:00
skvidal LinuX Format magazine? 12:00
skvidal okie doke 12:01
spevack any other questions for the Board? 12:01
spevack the queue is now empty 12:01
* jjmcd_ notes that he appreciates the board standing up to handle the crappy stuff 12:02
jjmcd_ and lets the rest of us have the fun 12:02
jjmcd_ Yeah, but one Indian community would be a lot more manageable than 400 languages or whatever it is they have 12:04
spevack last chance to ask any additional questions for this meeting..... 12:05
spevack going once... 12:05
spevack twice... 12:06
spevack ...and gone. 12:06
jjmcd_ thanks spevack 12:06
spevack no problem. thanks for your comments jjmcd_ 12:06
MostafaDaneshvar spevack: thanks 12:07
spevack MostafaDaneshvar: my pleasure. And let me add that I'm personally sorry for the situation regarding the embargoed countries. 12:07
spevack but like they say, we *must* obey the US laws, since Red Hat is a US-based company. 12:08
kambiz (pointing out that ISO-639-1 lists Farsi as "fa" while ISO-639-2 lists it as either "per" or "fas") 12:08
skvidal MostafaDaneshvar: you can feel free to be cranky about the embargo as loudly as you like - just don't be cranky at the board nor fedora nor even red hat 12:08
MostafaDaneshvar :-D 12:09
skvidal MostafaDaneshvar: I'm pretty sure the group to be cranky at is the US state department 12:12
skvidal well, and if you disagree the gov't of the nations that are being embargo'd 12:12
skvidal if you agree with the gov't of those nations then just be cranky at the us state dept 12:12
* MostafaDaneshvar agrees with skvidal 12:13

Generated by 2.7 by Marius Gedminas - find it at!