http://blog.gmane.org/gmane.linux.redhat.fedora.advisory-board hourly 1 1901-01-01T00:00+00:00 http://gmane.org/img/gmane-25t.png http://gmane.org http://comments.gmane.org/gmane.linux.redhat.fedora.advisory-board/10753 <pre>Hello, I see that there are some local communities who want to be included to the same local fedoracommunity.org subdomain, such as Indonesia and now Italy. I'm directly involved in that issue, as webmaster of fedoraonline.it, the actual it.fedoracommunity.org and greatest italian community. I think this could be a problem in the future too, so why not discuss about some guidelines which helps the local communities but also the website team to define clearly the state of a community? I'm thinking about a solution like the Ubuntu communities: obviously, everyone can create a new local community, but only one community rappresent the single State. I remember there are regular "tests", which verify the activity of the local community and if the site is just online. If the test fails another local community site has the right to take the place of the precedent one. Sharing resources is more efficient than spreading users I think, so it should be obvious that the goal of the fedoracommunity site is to give the end user a clearly identified local community. I'm open to be an active part in finding new guidelines, if you want. Cheers Robert Mayr robyduck _______________________________________________ advisory-board mailing list advisory-board&lt; at &gt;lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/advisory-board</pre> robyduck< at >fedoraonline.it 2012-05-24T09:53:05 http://comments.gmane.org/gmane.linux.redhat.fedora.advisory-board/10751 <pre>As you have (hopefully) heard by now, elections for the Fedora Board, FESCo, and FAmSCo are quickly approaching. In each election cycle, a series of town hall meetings is held to give community members and opportunity to ask candidates questions - and hear their answers - via IRC. The town hall schedule for the upcoming election is as follows: Fedora Project Board: * Tuesday, May 29, 2012 at 17:00 UTC * Wednesday, May 30, 2012 at 20:00 UTC FESCo (Fedora Engineering Steering Committee): * Wednesday, May 30, 2012 at 17:00 UTC * Thursday, May 31, 2012 at 20:00 UTC FAmSCo (Fedora Ambassadors Steering Committee): * Sunday, May 27, 2012 at 16:00 UTC * Monday, May 28 at 17:00 UTC Not sure what time that is? Use a handy-dandy time zone calculator to find out when to show up: http://www.timeanddate.com/worldclock/converter.html Important information about how you can participate in the town halls via IRC, as well as the details of each town hall meeting, can be seen on the wiki here: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Elections#IRC_Town_Halls Additional details about the upcoming elections, including who the candidates are and the schedule for elections, can be seen here: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Elections IRC town halls are a great and interesting way to get to know the candidates for the various bodies. I encourage you to come and participate, and bring your questions! Cheers, -Robyn _______________________________________________ advisory-board mailing list advisory-board&lt; at &gt;lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/advisory-board</pre> Robyn Bergeron 2012-05-23T11:43:56 http://comments.gmane.org/gmane.linux.redhat.fedora.advisory-board/10750 <pre>*“And on the 17th release he saw the name, and YAY, it *was* good.” It recently dawned on me that some in Fedora have a goal of trying to make *everyone* happy. It’s NOT gonna happen. You are not engaged in *reality*. I would also suggest that you may not fully understand the greatness of the Fedora Project. We are NOT vanilla. We dont always take the *safe route*. We live on the edge, an edge that we usually forge ourselves. If you want to play everything safe, go ahead. I can point you to some very nice folks, in other Distros. IMHO, we have 3 camps in the *naming debate*. In the middle we have some common sense folks that want to create a balance (the core design team as well as Inode0). The other two parts are extremists. I realized that some of the push was from revisionists, and those with *no sense of humor*. I have decided to take up the other extreme of defending ANY perceived attack on the GLORIOUS Beefy Miracle. My offer to the other extreme; *stand down* and let the grown-ups decide this. Most likely I need to back off the cartoon hotdog thing a bit, and also accept that we can have *mildly silly* names for releases. The other side of the scale needs to work on your coping skills and maybe get a sense of humor. If you can’t get a sense of humor, it may be in your best interest to accept others ENJOY having a sense of humor. (For the record, I am COMPLETELY sidestepping objections from folks in India that may feel a religious slight at cow references. I acknowledge your opinions as valid, and choose not to enter a debate with you (-:) The rest of this diatribe is focused on my fellow extremists (wherever you may be). If you feel that we can have 100% of contributors happy, you are missing a bit of reality. I ask you to either reconsider, or respectfully I ask you to GTFO. Maybe go join a group with 12 people, the BSDs are a great option. They have an advantage of contribs being able to push stuff upstream in a few days, and everyone has areas they get to *control*. When we have chosen what I considered to be boring names, I complained a brief while, and then moved on. I accepted that my side (term used loosely here) had lost. Can the other extremists do the same. You lost. Effing COPE. Get over it, move the eff on. When I started in FOSS years ago, I *never* planned on being known as *the guy in the penguin suit*. Or to be known for my debates/arguments/pissing contests. I also never planned on being so associated with a cartoon hotdog. It just sorta happened. Sometimes destiny picks you. To keep my words a *bit* more manageable, I will just address the extremists in this letter (reality based ideas can be addressed to the grown-ups next). Here is the deal; if you are on the extreme in the naming debate, consider my pointer finger *directly aimed at YOU* -- it is currently wagging your direction. To run with my metaphor, the other fingers are pointed *at myself*. I *know* I am being an asshat here. I am not sure the other extremists have this awareness. I will hold my extreme here as a counterbalance to you. Hopefully we cancel each other out, I’m pretty sure we will ;) With the grown-ups watching us, I walk to the playground and ask my fellow extremists to come *play*. Off the deep end I go... Let the D-baggery commence. It’s a hodog, stop fighting it, you LOST. You by definition are a *minority* of voters. You are NOT in the 50%+. Lick your wounds come back another day after regrouping. I’m pretty sure a few of you still want to come down to the gutter and debate. Bring it. You *still* want to push? Cool. I want to see if we can add a 5th foundation. Effing sense of humor. Good stuff. TRY it. And I will strike down upon thee with great vengeance and furious anger those who would attempt to poison. And you will know the name is the Beefy Miracle when vengeance is laid upon thee (Pulp Fiction paraphrased). If we open a quarrel between past and present, we shall find that we have lost the future. Winston Churchill&lt;http://www.brainyquote.com/quotes/quotes/w/winstonchu136286.html&gt; Give em another paraphrase? Beaches *love* Churchill. We shall go on to the end, we shall fight on mailing lists, we shall fight on IRC, we shall fight with growing confidence and growing strength, we shall defend *humor*, whatever the cost may be, we shall fight the beaches, we shall fight on the social media, we shall fight in debates and in the bikeshedding arguments (bikeshed.org), we shall fight in the shadows; we shall *never* surrender. Those with *common sense* will carry on the struggle, until, in the Hotdog’s good time, the Project, with all its power and might, steps forth to the rescue and the liberation of HUMOR. We are ALL on the same team. The Linux team. Supporters of the Penguin. We ARE a cult (a GOOD cult, but, a cult nonetheless [One of my talks on this; http://videos.mitrasites.com/linux-users'-group-of-davis.html]). Not to shock anyone, but I actually do have some factual and reality based opinions on the naming thing (that will be my next ML post). As project we can’t get to the core issue as long as there is a debate amongst us D-bags. This project is FULL of great people, we ALL have our moments. My fellow extremists PLEASE *stand down* so we can move on. Move the eff on. Let’s join reality again. http://www.thefreedictionary.com/stand-down -Mark If your browser does not support it, please be aware that most of this is written in &lt;sarcasm font&gt; Also, please note that this version is far more tame than my original, which was entitled *Get a sense of humor or GTFO** _______________________________________________ advisory-board mailing list advisory-board&lt; at &gt;lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/advisory-board</pre> Mark Terranova 2012-05-22T22:16:30 http://comments.gmane.org/gmane.linux.redhat.fedora.advisory-board/10749 <pre>Logs: http://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/fedora-meeting/2012-05-16/fedora_board_meeting.2012-05-16-18.30.log.html Minutes: http://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/fedora-meeting/2012-05-16/fedora_board_meeting.2012-05-16-18.30.html ===================================== #fedora-meeting: Fedora Board Meeting ===================================== Meeting started by rbergeron at 18:30:47 UTC. The full logs are available at http://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/fedora-meeting/2012-05-16/fedora_board_meeting.2012-05-16-18.30.log.html . Meeting summary --------------- * Roll Call and Gathering of Steam (rbergeron, 18:31:43) * probinson is unable to attend (gholms, 18:32:28) * rdieter sends regrets, as does abadger1999; cwickert is travelling to fudcon kuala lumpur (rbergeron, 18:33:09) * Announcements (rbergeron, 18:35:35) * F17 - RC1 for final/GA is available now. http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/test-announce/2012-May/000449.html (rbergeron, 18:36:21) * Please help out in testing, validating, if you can. (rbergeron, 18:36:34) * FUDCon Kuala Lumpur is this weekend - https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/FUDCon:KualaLumpur_2012 (rbergeron, 18:37:06) * Loving wishes going their way are welcomed. We look forward to seeing all the attendees' blog posts! (rbergeron, 18:37:27) * Agenda for Today (rbergeron, 18:38:36) * Agenda for today is short but sweet (just like me, ha ha ha): Open Q&amp;A, A quick checkin on the release naming topic, Perhaps a discussion on the Board continuing to report on personal goals, a check for any other missed business. (rbergeron, 18:39:52) * Open Q&amp; A! (rbergeron, 18:43:54) * LINK: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User_base (rbergeron, 18:46:58) * Naming Process... process (rbergeron, 19:08:58) * LINK: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Future_Release_Naming (rbergeron, 19:10:42) * Wiki page with people interested in participating in the possible rework of the release naming process going forward. (rbergeron, 19:11:03) * At this point, the thing this effort is lacking is someone to take charge -- organize meetings, etc. (rbergeron, 19:11:18) * ACTION: jreznik to ping folks tomorrow on moving onwards in the naming release process (rbergeron, 19:29:39) * Board Member Goals ... thoughts? (rbergeron, 19:30:56) * Open Floor / Any Other Business / Late additions to agenda (rbergeron, 19:50:37) * ACTION: gholms to check on the 18:00 UTC meeting time slot at today's EMEA meeting (gholms, 19:58:01) * Elections - nominations for Board, FESCo, and FAmSCo are now CLOSED. (rbergeron, 19:58:49) * LINK: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Elections (rbergeron, 19:59:04) * Please refer to the schedule for upcoming dates of interest. (rbergeron, 19:59:19) * Candidates should be sending their completed questionnaires by May 22 (rbergeron, 20:00:26) * Next Board public IRC meeting on 2012-05-30, same bat time, same bat channel (rbergeron, 20:01:53) Meeting ended at 20:03:38 UTC. Action Items ------------ * jreznik to ping folks tomorrow on moving onwards in the naming release process * gholms to check on the 18:00 UTC meeting time slot at today's EMEA meeting Action Items, by person ----------------------- * gholms * gholms to check on the 18:00 UTC meeting time slot at today's EMEA meeting * jreznik * jreznik to ping folks tomorrow on moving onwards in the naming release process * **UNASSIGNED** * (none) People Present (lines said) --------------------------- * rbergeron (148) * jreznik (36) * gholms (31) * jds2001 (14) * inode0 (14) * gomix (10) * th3sp00n (8) * zodbot (8) * brunowolff (6) * ke4qqq (5) * jsmith (2) * c0lored (2) * bconoboy (2) * pbrobinson (1) * gnokii (1) * fossjon (1) Generated by `MeetBot`_ 0.1.4 .. _`MeetBot`: http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot _______________________________________________ advisory-board mailing list advisory-board&lt; at &gt;lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/advisory-board</pre> Robyn Bergeron 2012-05-16T20:07:20 http://comments.gmane.org/gmane.linux.redhat.fedora.advisory-board/10747 <pre>Greetings! This is a friendly reminder that the Fedora Board will be having a public IRC meeting Today!, Wednesday, May 16, at 18:30 UTC. This meeting is open to everyone, participation and input is welcomed. We do have a few people expected to be out this week, we shall see if we have a quorum or not at meeting time, but Q&amp; A at the bare minimum can continue. If someone is available to do a ping in all the channels to notify of the Board meeting, I would be appreciative of that - some people miss it (and yes, I know, others detest it!). I'll be en route back from a doctor visit around the time when we'd want to do so (approximately a half-hour prior to the meeting.) When: 18:30 UTC (2:30pm US-Eastern), on May 16, 2012 Where: in #fedora-meeting on irc.freenode.net (assuming no conflicts) Meeting Info:http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Board/IRC Meeting Secretary: Robyn Bergeron Today's agenda is: * Announcements * Open Q&amp; A * Open Discussion items: ** Release Naming: Checking in to see if someone is willing to coordinate/lead. Perhaps that person could do a whenisgood time checkin for the people who are interested in being involved. ** Board members continuing to report in on their personal goals: Yay/Nay? * Any other business? * Next public Board IRC meeting time/date confirmation: May 30, 2012, 18:30 UTC -Robyn _______________________________________________ advisory-board mailing list advisory-board&lt; at &gt;lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/advisory-board</pre> Robyn Bergeron 2012-05-16T14:49:00 http://comments.gmane.org/gmane.linux.redhat.fedora.advisory-board/10715 <pre>At the last Board Meeting, the Board looked at the poll results asking whether people felt like continuing to name releases. The results seemed to show that many people do like having a name associated with Fedora releases. However, the discussion before and after has shown there is a desire to improve upon the current method of selecting the names. The Board decided that it would be worthwhile to come up with a new procedure for selecting the name for the Fedora 19 release and beyond to attempt to solve some of the issues that have been brought up. The Board is looking for volunteers who would like to do two things: (1) Answer the following questions: * What benefits does the Project get from the current release naming process? * What changes do people want to see in a revised process? (2) Come up with at least one proposal and analyze it according to the answers to the previous questions. If anyone is interested in coming to a weekly meeting to work on this, please feel free to contact me. If anyone would like to champion this, please contact me ASAP so I know whether there is someone else who's going to champion this or if I need to lead the effort. I've put up a wiki page that tries to summarize the answers to the first two questions that I've seen circulated on the advisory-board mailing list and a link to the only proposal I currently know of (mizmo's proposal to use a single theme for all of the new Fedora releases). Thanks, -Toshio _______________________________________________ advisory-board mailing list advisory-board&lt; at &gt;lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/advisory-board</pre> Toshio Kuratomi 2012-05-09T08:39:18 http://comments.gmane.org/gmane.linux.redhat.fedora.advisory-board/10714 <pre>I'm pleased to announce the appointment of Garrett Holmstrom to the Fedora Board. In this election cycle, three Board seats are open for election, and two Board appointee seats are open; the first appointee, Garrett, is being appointed prior to nominations opening, and the second will be appointed after elections are completed. Garrett (aka: gholms) has been involved in the Cloud SIG since the "early days" (early 2010, to be more precise), as the maintainer of the euca2ools package. As the group has progressed, he's taken on a number of tasks, doled out much advice and opinion, and has shown himself to be an excellent leader and communicator. He's also a regular in the #fedora-devel channel, willing to help out and answer questions as he can. I'm delighted that he has agreed to serve on the Board; I believe that, as a community, we should constantly strive to nurture and grow new leadership, and I think that Garrett's communication skills and positive attitude will be a fantastic asset to the Board as Fedora continues to evolve. Garrett will be taking seat A3, previously held by Rudi Landmann. (And a big thank you to Rudi for his contributions as a Fedora Board member -- your time and efforts are greatly valued!) I'd also like to remind everyone of the ongoing elections process; today, May 8th, is the last day to submit questions to the elections questionnaire. Beginning tomorrow, May 9th, nominations for the Board, FESCo, and FAmSCo will be open, closing on May 15th. Additional information about Elections can be seen here: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Elections A complete history of Board Members is available here: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Board/History Cheers, -Robyn _______________________________________________ advisory-board mailing list advisory-board&lt; at &gt;lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/advisory-board</pre> Robyn Bergeron 2012-05-08T17:29:41 http://comments.gmane.org/gmane.linux.redhat.fedora.advisory-board/10708 <pre>Hi there! Summary: We have received a request on the websites list[1] to change the link in fedoracommunity.org (thereafter called "fc.o") from "id.fedoracommunity.org" to "fedora.or.id". After digging a bit, I found that the ID community have two "portals", and that they are not working together. With this email, I kindly ask either the board or the FAmSCo to come back to us (infra AND websites) if any action has to be taken (about the id.fc.o domain and/or the fc.o website). As I've not signed for community management, I am not sure to follow the whole story starting now :). The story: Back in November 2011, Arif Tri Waluyo have requested the id.fc.o domain name, to point to his community portal. Once approved by the board and done in the infra, he has sent to the Websites team a request to add it on fc.o[2]. By that time, the website was really awesome, with a really nice them. I remember having congratulated them. Yesterday, we received a request from Yafiz Haris Nasution[3] to change "id.fedoracommunity.org" to "fedora.or.id" in fc.o/apac without anymore details. Because I would see this clever to change the id.fco redirection I've asked for more details. After a quick check, yesterday id.fc.o was redirected to an ugly WordPress administration page. My feeling now is that there is something not fair here. I've brought Arif Tri Waluyo on the discussion and only him replied in public, while Yafiz replied to me in private (I am going to share it soon, on the original thread, as there is nothing that should be hidden). I've also asked Yafiz about the fedora.or.id trademark agreement name, without having a one line clear answer. Spot, could you please approve? Later yesterday, Arif Tri Waluyo asked the infra team to change the id.fc.o redirection[4], which now points to an "Under maintenace :p" website. I feel the hurry here. Arif, why did you need that? Couldn't you have waited to have a working webpage on your server? As explained yesterday on the amba mailing list, I really love the Fedora Project for its community, therefore I would like to prevent this conflict to go forward. Shouldn't we have only one local portal in order to have a strong local community? I strongly think so. Moreover, I've asked recently in trans and websites list (I should have probably asked on the amba as well)[5] every community to check their entries. There were no feedback. Assumed correct. [1] http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/websites/2012-May/019518.html [2] http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/websites/2011-November/019006.html [3] http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/websites/2012-May/019518.html [4] https://fedorahosted.org/fedora-infrastructure/ticket/3272 [5] http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/websites/2012-March/019367.html Best Regards, </pre> Kévin Raymond 2012-05-04T08:13:17 http://comments.gmane.org/gmane.linux.redhat.fedora.advisory-board/10704 <pre>Sorry for the confusion. :) We're meeting at 18:30 UTC, so for those in the US, that is 2:30pm eastern, 11:30 am pacific. On IRC. -Robyn _______________________________________________ advisory-board mailing list advisory-board&lt; at &gt;lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/advisory-board</pre> Robyn Bergeron 2012-05-02T17:06:49 http://comments.gmane.org/gmane.linux.redhat.fedora.advisory-board/10701 <pre>Greetings! This is a friendly reminder that the Fedora Board will be having a public IRC meeting on Wednesday, May 2, at 18:30 UTC. This meeting is open to everyone, participation and input is welcomed. When: 18:30 UTC (1:30pm US-Eastern), on May 2, 2012 Where: in #fedora-meeting on irc.freenode.net (assuming no conflicts) Meeting Info: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Board/IRC Meeting Secretary: Robyn Bergeron Today's agenda is, approximately: * Open Q &amp; A * Follow-up on Toshio's ticket, Board as a Single Point of Failure See you there, -Robyn _______________________________________________ advisory-board mailing list advisory-board&lt; at &gt;lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/advisory-board</pre> Robyn Bergeron 2012-05-02T15:48:12 http://comments.gmane.org/gmane.linux.redhat.fedora.advisory-board/10697 <pre>Executive Summary The Fedora Board had a public IRC meeting on Wednesday. We barely had quorum si we stuck largely to discussing the F18 naming election which needed to be done soon. Toshio also announced a first draft of policy to make the Board less of a Single Point of Failure and sent the draft to the advisory board list for comment. ========================================= #fedora-meeting: Fedora Board IRC Meeting ========================================= Meeting started by abadger1999 at 18:32:59 UTC. The full logs are available at http://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/fedora-meeting/2012-04-18/fedora_board_irc_meeting.2012-04-18-18.32.log.html . Meeting summary --------------- * Roll Call (abadger1999, 18:33:17) * gomix, ke4qqq, gomix, pbrobinson, rdieter, and rbergeron won't be here today (abadger1999, 18:34:56) * Announcements (abadger1999, 18:35:50) * congratulations to everyone who helped get Fedora 17 beta out the door yesterday (abadger1999, 18:37:36) * Open Floor (abadger1999, 18:38:35) * Open tickets (abadger1999, 18:46:19) * Ticket 130, make the Board less of a single point of failure (abadger1999, 18:47:31) * LINK: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Toshio/Board_single_point_of_failure (abadger1999, 18:47:59) * ACTION: abadger199 to take ownership of sending the draft to advisory-board for comments (abadger1999, 18:49:48) * Fedora 18 Name Election (abadger1999, 18:51:16) * dates for the election (abadger1999, 18:52:57) * Fedora 18 naming election will run from April 20th through end of day April 26th (UTC) (abadger1999, 18:56:20) * choices for the "Continuing to have release names" poll (abadger1999, 19:03:53) * Fedora 18 proposed names are here: https://admin.fedoraproject.org/voting/about/f18-name (abadger1999, 19:29:31) * ACTION: abadger1999 to create the poll with two options * Stop having release names [0|1] * Keep release names (possibly changing how they're chosen) [0|1] (abadger1999, 19:55:18) Meeting ended at 19:55:38 UTC. Action Items ------------ * abadger199 to take ownership of sending the draft to advisory-board for comments * abadger1999 to create the poll with two options * Stop having release names [0|1] * Keep release names (possibly changing how they're chosen) [0|1] Action Items, by person ----------------------- * abadger1999 * abadger1999 to create the poll with two options * Stop having release names [0|1] * Keep release names (possibly changing how they're chosen) [0|1] * **UNASSIGNED** * abadger199 to take ownership of sending the draft to advisory-board for comments People Present (lines said) --------------------------- * abadger1999 (143) * cwickert (37) * jds2001 (33) * VICODANAX (21) * jreznik (20) * EvilBob (10) * inode0 (10) * nirik (7) * zodbot (6) * rudi_ (4) * gnokii (3) * jsmith (3) * jreznik_n9 (1) Generated by `MeetBot`_ 0.1.4 .. _`MeetBot`: http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot _______________________________________________ advisory-board mailing list advisory-board&lt; at &gt;lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/advisory-board</pre> Toshio Kuratomi 2012-04-20T23:10:03 http://comments.gmane.org/gmane.linux.redhat.fedora.advisory-board/10680 <pre>Since the problems withgetting the new banner onto fedoraproject.org for the SOPA blackout day, the Board has had a ticket open to look into ways that it can be less of a single point of failure in the future. I've organized the ideas presented onhttps://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Toshio/sopa-post-mortem into some guidleines and policy that the Board can implement to "keep itself honest" -- making so that they address at least some of the issues that showed up during the decision and implementation ofwhat Fedora would do forthe SOPA blackout. The draft is here: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Toshio/Board_single_point_of_failure Although not exactly a work in progress, this is by no means set in stone. Feel free to read, comment, and suggest alternatives to address the issues brought up on either of the two pages. Depending on how much people want to change here, the Board will discuss and possibly vote on adopting those guidelines at their next week's meeting. THanks, -Toshio _______________________________________________ advisory-board mailing list advisory-board&lt; at &gt;lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/advisory-board</pre> Toshio Kuratomi 2012-04-19T00:10:55 http://comments.gmane.org/gmane.linux.redhat.fedora.advisory-board/10679 <pre>I hereby respectfully petition the Fedora Board to dissolve the current FAmSCo and call new elections. FAmSCo voted in their meeting tonight to shorten the term of the lowest vote-getters from the last election and to have those as the seats that get re-elected next to start the new staggered terms. It also just so happens that the ones that voted for that proposal are the ones that would benefit by that proposal by not having to stand for reelection at the next election. This is a conflict of interest and thus they should not be allowed to vote on that matter. If they want to implement the staggered terms starting with the next election, all members of FAmSCo should stand for reelection, and have it noted that the top voted people would serve two releases and the others would serve one. This way the voters would know what we are voting for. Also, our current FAmSCo seems unwilling to vote gbraad out, despite his repeated failure to attend meetings, or participate in any discussions. Respectfully submitted, Nicholas E. Bebout nb&lt; at &gt;fedoraproject.org _______________________________________________ advisory-board mailing list advisory-board&lt; at &gt;lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/advisory-board</pre> Nick Bebout 2012-04-18T15:54:28 http://comments.gmane.org/gmane.linux.redhat.fedora.advisory-board/10674 <pre>Greetings! This is a friendly reminder that the Fedora Board will be having a public IRC meeting Today!, Wednesday, April 18, at 18:30 UTC. This meeting is open to everyone, participation and input is welcomed. When: 18:30 UTC (2:30pm US-Eastern), on April 18, 2012 Where: in #fedora-meeting on irc.freenode.net (assuming no conflicts) Meeting Info: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Board/IRC Meeting Secretary: Rex Dieter Today's agenda is: * Announcements * Open Q &amp; A * Peter Robinson on his Board member goals * Open Tickets: ** 130: Make the Board less of a Single Point of Failure * Any other business? ** We can look through, report status, and close old tickets if we have time remaining. * Next public Board IRC meeting time/date confirmation: May 2, 2012, 18:30 UTC -Toshio _______________________________________________ advisory-board mailing list advisory-board&lt; at &gt;lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/advisory-board</pre> Toshio Kuratomi 2012-04-18T15:42:16 http://comments.gmane.org/gmane.linux.redhat.fedora.advisory-board/10673 <pre>Fedora Board Phone Meeting Minutes:: 2012-04-11 When: Wednesday, April 11, 2012 &lt; at &gt; 18:30 UTC Where: Phone Meeting Invitees: * Guillermo Gomez * Jon Stanley * Rudi Landmann * Rex Dieter Attendees: * Christoph Wickert * David Nalley * Robyn Bergeron * Peter Robinson * Toshio Kuratomi * Jaroslav Reznik (on Gobby only today) * Jon Stanley (showed up a little later) Regrets: * none Today's lucky secretary: Christoph Wickert Today's goal reporting folks: Rudi Landmann, Rex Dieter ======================================= * Announcements none * Quick updates on Rudi/Rex board member goals none of them was present in the meeting * Updates on trademark stuff * Tickets/Actual Meat of Agenda #117 Fedora on Launchpad.net: Page cannot be removed for technical reasons but we can change the text. Toshio might be able to contact somebody to update it once we provide something. #95 Board's position on spins: Add Adam to CC and have him update the ticket in order to figure out which questions still persist and need to be addressed. #102 Fedora QA as a sub-project: QA still needs to discuss it. * Open floor Naming suggestions for F18: Although we are late (elections should be open soon) we still need to wait for some Red Hat-internal review. Should be finished on Monday. * Next meeting: 2012-04-18 _______________________________________________ advisory-board mailing list advisory-board&lt; at &gt;lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/advisory-board</pre> Christoph Wickert 2012-04-11T19:28:02 http://comments.gmane.org/gmane.linux.redhat.fedora.advisory-board/10665 <pre>People are starting to reasonably ask questions about what is going on with this election now. The published schedule shows that we are supposed to be in the middle of the voting step now but we don't seem to have started it yet. https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Name_suggestions_for_Fedora_18#Naming_Schedule Has the list been dealt with by the Board at this point? Has the result been passed on for legal review yet? Can we change the wiki to indicate the delay so folks stop trying to vote now? John _______________________________________________ advisory-board mailing list advisory-board&lt; at &gt;lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/advisory-board</pre> inode0 2012-04-10T16:53:15 http://comments.gmane.org/gmane.linux.redhat.fedora.advisory-board/10664 <pre>Greetings! This is a friendly reminder that the Fedora Board will be having a public IRC meeting Today!, Wednesday, April 4, at 18:30 UTC. This meeting is open to everyone, participation and input is welcomed. When: 18:30 UTC (2:30pm US-Eastern), on April 4, 2012 Where: in #fedora-meeting on irc.freenode.net (assuming no conflicts) Meeting Info: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Board/IRC Meeting Secretary: David Nalley Today's agenda is: * Announcements * Open Q &amp; A * David Nalley on his Board member goals * TM Guidelines discussion, ongoing * Open Tickets: ** 130: Make the Board less of a Single Point of Failure ** 84: Annual User Survey ** 81: Where should start.fp.o point? (ie: Non-FOSS search engine, or ?) * Any other business? * Next public Board IRC meeting time/date confirmation: April 18, 2012, 18:30 UTC -Robyn _______________________________________________ advisory-board mailing list advisory-board&lt; at &gt;lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/advisory-board</pre> Robyn Bergeron 2012-04-04T15:24:13 http://comments.gmane.org/gmane.linux.redhat.fedora.advisory-board/10653 <pre>I'm back again and while I tried asking questions and giving feedback to the earlier draft on the legal list none of my questions were answered there so this time I'll just give my feedback to the Board knowing that legal reads this list as well and can take them or leave them as they deem appropriate. If the Board shares any of my concerns perhaps they are better situated to work with legal to resolve them. The current draft for reference is located here http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Pchestek/TMGuidelinesDraft#Non-Software_Promotional_Goods My first concern which still remains in this draft is singling out Fedora Ambassadors when they are not the only contributors who have done this work. So the way this reads now is if you are a Fedora Ambassador this long section with 3 external links applies to you and if you are doing exactly the same thing but you are not a Fedora Ambassador it seems you just ask the Board for permission (which frankly seems to be the path of far less resistance to me). Please generalize these guidelines so that they apply equally to everyone producing merchandise for use at Fedora events. Bullet point #2 quoted here for reference: * The Goods must be of a Pre-Approved Type (currently that is shirt, sweatshirt, hat, sticker, temporary tattoo, button, balloon, banner, poster, cup, or pen/pencil). Items printed on "normal" sized paper are not considered Non-Software Promotional Goods in this context, and are acceptable as long as any Trademark and/or Logo use is in compliance with the Fedora Trademark and/or Logo Guidelines. This is an interesting list of pre-approved types. Some of these items have previously been produced, others haven't in my memory. Other items that have been previously produced are not included on this list. What qualifies types to be pre-approved, specifically for items that we have been producing for years? Does "sticker" mean any sort of sticker or only some particular stickers? Can this list be generalized at all to include common types that are produced by Red Hat itself and other corporations for professional events so we don't need have some process to go through to make a frisbee or a can koozie? With any list, no matter how we tweak it today, the existence of this list means we will all be less likely to produce anything not already on it because that will involve extra work. So my bigger concern here is why the contributors who have been picking these types without embarrassing Red Hat or the Fedora Project for years are now not trusted to continue doing so? Bullet point #3 quoted here for reference: * The Goods must use a Fedora Approved Design (as found on the Fedora Approved Designs page) &lt;LINK&gt;. Fedora Approved Designs are designs which have been reviewed by Fedora Legal for compliance with the Fedora Logo Guidelines. This hides the process behind a missing link making it impossible to give any feedback regarding whether or to what extent this process will be a burden. I can ask one question about it though. Why are only designs used on Fedora Ambassador produced goods subject to this requirement for a Fedora Legal compliance check? Bullet point #4 quoted here for reference: * The Goods must be produced by a Vendor who is listed as a "Good Vendor" on the "Fedora Non-Software Vendors" wiki page &lt;LINK&gt;. Vendors marked as "Bad Vendors" must not be used. New Vendors must be added by the Ambassador to the "Good Vendor" list, and can be then be immediately used. Ambassadors are expected to move Vendors into the "Bad Vendor" list if/when they receive poor quality goods or have extreme difficulties dealing with the Vendor. This is a deal breaker for me. Red Hat claims no responsibility for any content on the wiki and expects me to present a vendor in a negative light on it? Vendors and really any business will get cranky about things like this and who will they take it up with if they are cranky enough to bother with it? Red Hat isn't responsible for this content so who is? Me? No thanks. The final sentence of this section says "If a Fedora Ambassador wishes to produce Non-Software Promotion Goods of a New Type or a New Design, they must first receive approval for the New Type or Design from Fedora Legal. For details on how to request approval, see &lt;LINK&gt;." Again a missing link where all the details will be revealed. In the first draft there was a lot of information about tracking and record keeping using a trac instance. There is none in this draft currently but will all of that resurface in the details on this &lt;LINK&gt;? While I think this entire process is antagonistic toward contributors who have been helping Fedora present itself in a good light for many years I don't know how we are really supposed to give feedback when there isn't full transparency about our obligations under these new guidelines. My feathers are admittedly ruffled because I find it absurd that the work that we have done for years is resulting in our being singled out as a group that needs to be micro-managed by Fedora Legal. I'm sure that isn't the perspective of Fedora Legal, at least I hope it isn't. But I have not been given any reasonable justification for treating Ambassadors this way and no one else. While I know Ambassadors would like to have all the missing details revealed so they can really understand what they are going to be required to do to comply with these guidelines, what is already revealed is enough for me to respectfully ask the Board to not approve them in their current form. The Good Vendor/Bad Vendor bit is enough by itself to make me stop dead in my tracks. John _______________________________________________ advisory-board mailing list advisory-board&lt; at &gt;lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/advisory-board</pre> inode0 2012-03-29T17:08:56 http://comments.gmane.org/gmane.linux.redhat.fedora.advisory-board/10649 <pre>I recall from the last public IRC meeting that the Board was planning/hoping to perhaps make a decision about approving the new guidelines at its next public IRC meeting (which I think is April 4). I know the Fedora ambassadors in North America have this subject on the agenda for the next FAmNA meeting on April 3 and I understand from the most recent FAmSCo meeting that they plan to discuss it also during its next meeting on April 4 (later in the day after the Board meeting has concluded). To enable regional ambassador groups and FAmSCo to provide feedback on this to you would it be possible to delay any Board decision until the public IRC meeting on April 17? John _______________________________________________ advisory-board mailing list advisory-board&lt; at &gt;lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/advisory-board</pre> inode0 2012-03-29T15:34:53 http://comments.gmane.org/gmane.linux.redhat.fedora.advisory-board/10644 <pre>Hi, Concerning the Fedora trademark policy: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Legal:Trademark_guidelines#Non-software_goods Would this his the right place to request an approval for commercial usage of Fedora Logo? Some background: The selling would happen thru NixStickers.com (site still under construction at the moment); the site is about OpenSource related stickers; *nix like distros, software (Apache, Tomcat, etc.), Database (PostgreSQL) and programming languages (Python, Perl, etc.). The selection will depend on the responses/approvals from the trademark/logo owners. The idea is to raise the awareness of OpenSource software with fashionable stickers that developers and users can use to decorate their hardware. The site is commercial, but it is not really about making money; just enough to keep it floating (estimated price for a sticker is around 0.70-1 euros at the moment). I would like to request permission to use Fedora logo and perhaps text Fedora on a sticker - see attached file for early draft version (about the same design that unfortunate UnixSticker.com had - this request is not affiliated with them). Could you please guide me to the right direction with this query or reply if this request can be approved even partially, and if so what should be changed in the sticker design. The original idea is to get these ready for LinuxTag2012 in Berlin, I would like to visit Fedora Project stand to give out some stickers from the first production batch. Best Regards, Teemu Otala http://nixstickers.com info&lt; at &gt;nixstickers.com_______________________________________________ advisory-board mailing list advisory-board&lt; at &gt;lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/advisory-board</pre> info< at >nixstickers.com 2012-03-29T10:45:39 http://comments.gmane.org/gmane.linux.redhat.fedora.advisory-board/10639 <pre>Today the Board decided that the Fedora 18 release naming process was already in progress and therefore we would continue to work with the current process for naming Fedora 18. However, we could change things for Fedora 19 and above. The question was how. Several of the Board members felt that the release names were valuable, at least one expressed the opinion that the current method of choosing release names was fun and one expressed synmpathy with getting rid of the release names. All pretty much agreed that they wanted to know whether there was an overwhelming feeling that release names should go, should not go, or just that the current system was broken. What we'd like to do is have a poll that runs at the same time as the Fedora 18 Release Name voting to determine whether to continue to have release names for Fedora 19+. The poll will be in the voting system and have three choices: * Get rid of release names * Keep release names with the present process * Keep release names but have the Board and community create new criteria/process for choosing them The Board will use the results of this to decide whether to have a new release name for Fedora 19 and if so, whether the process will use the current criteria or we'll create a new one (for instance, mizmo's gathering of ideas for themes for release names). Two notes that the Board wanted to be clear about this proposal: 1) If the Board chooses to create a new process that will likely happen with the people who are doing the work to revamp the process rather than be put to another vote. 2) The Board wanted to make clear that this is a poll, not a binding vote An overwhelming vote will likely influence the Board to go along with a certain plan much more than a close vote where the Board members will feel that there isn't a single definite path being sought for by the community. -Toshio _______________________________________________ advisory-board mailing list advisory-board&lt; at &gt;lists.fedoraproject.org https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/advisory-board</pre> Toshio Kuratomi 2012-03-28T22:44:02 Search the mailing list at Gmane query http://search.gmane.org/?group=$group=gmane.linux.redhat.fedora.advisory-board