17:01:52 <stickster> #startmeeting 17:01:52 <zodbot> Meeting started Thu Nov 5 17:01:52 2009 UTC. The chair is stickster. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. 17:01:52 <zodbot> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #halp #info #idea #link #topic. 17:01:59 <stickster> #topic Roll call 17:02:03 <stickster> OK, that's sorted out, sound off! 17:02:05 * stickster 17:02:06 <mmcgrath> hahah 17:02:08 * mmcgrath 17:02:09 * dgilmore is present and accounted for 17:02:10 * mdomsch 17:02:15 * jwb is here 17:02:15 * notting is here 17:02:31 * poelcat here 17:03:24 <stickster> glezos_afk apologizes that he can't be here -- he had a pre-scheduled conflict because of the DST change. 17:03:39 * stickster sees caillon here as well 17:03:56 <stickster> And spot 17:04:12 <stickster> Let's get started then. 17:04:29 <stickster> One short note: 17:04:33 <stickster> #topic Fedora 12 release 17:04:59 <stickster> I want to say thank you to all the folks who are working so hard on the Fedora 12 release. I'm running it in a bunch of places at home and think this is going to be our strongest release yet. 17:05:39 <stickster> We're still looking for some nice pictures of people enjoying Fedora for the one-page release notes located here: 17:05:44 <stickster> #link https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_12_one_page_release_notes 17:06:28 <stickster> #info If you have pictures of people using Fedora or at an event you'd like to contribute, please send them along to the fedora-marketing-list, drop the link in IRC Freenode at #fedora-mktg, or just email stickster 17:06:41 <stickster> Anyone need to add anything here? 17:06:45 <mmcgrath> woot F12 17:06:50 <stickster> Or just a rousing chorus of "Thanks, keep up the AMAZING work!"? 17:06:55 <caillon> you're running f12 at home? where do i get mine? ;-) 17:06:56 <mmcgrath> yeah that. 17:07:04 <stickster> caillon: OK, you caught me -- F11.92 :-) 17:07:06 <jwb> Updates for F12 are enabled in bodhi now. just trying to get that word out as much as possible 17:07:08 <mmcgrath> caillon: a home? 17:07:10 <mmcgrath> :) 17:07:12 <stickster> But I did just get the new fedora-release-12-1 RPM 17:07:42 <mdomsch> I'm running it on several systems, looking pretty good 17:07:42 <stickster> #info Updates for F12 enabled in bodhi -- package maintainers take note! 17:07:59 <stickster> OK, moving on then. 17:08:03 <stickster> #topic Community Q&A 17:08:06 <stickster> The floor is open. 17:08:40 <stickster> Nothing piled up in the queue yet, I just poked the other channel for people to ask away. 17:09:07 <jwb> i can fill the time if we'd like 17:09:15 <stickster> jwb: Sure, why not take the first slot. 17:09:32 <jwb> did everyone here happen to see the LWN.net article on the Hall Monitor stuff from yesterday? 17:09:41 * mmcgrath did not 17:09:42 <stickster> jwb: I did 17:09:46 <mdomsch> stickster, I did 17:10:01 <mdomsch> jwb that was 17:10:07 <jwb> i'm curious if the Board thinks that is proceeding well enough, or if we need to revisit any of it 17:10:18 * caillon didn't see it 17:10:29 * stickster has an opinion but will voice it after letting others speak their mind 17:10:38 <notting> jwb: i dod not 17:10:39 * mmcgrath still wants to get rid of it. 17:10:39 <jwb> i should note that we did make a few changes recently on procedures, but the overall monitoring is the same 17:10:43 <mdomsch> jwb: there was one report I recall about the first few weeks or month, was there another? 17:11:06 <jwb> mdomsch, i'm doing quarterly reports. next one will come out a bit before end of year 17:11:12 <notting> jwb: url? 17:11:28 <jwb> one sec 17:11:49 <jwb> http://lwn.net/Articles/359271/ 17:11:50 <mdomsch> so I thought the first report was fair, but I have no other data on which to base an opinion 17:12:05 <stickster> I feel like the hall monitor policy has been quite clear about when it's enacted, to keep the development list oriented on development topics. In this particular case, we have not only a historical thread on fedora-legal-list but that list was also mentioned as a place to which the discussion could move if people wanted to continue it. 17:12:38 <mmcgrath> stickster: I don't think the means justify the ends. 17:12:53 <mmcgrath> We have a hard enough time pretending not to be big brother. 17:13:03 <mmcgrath> well, not pretending but actually not being 17:13:18 <jwb> who is We in that sentence? 17:13:57 <mmcgrath> In particular the full time RHers 17:13:59 <jwb> btw, i agree with what stickster just said 17:14:14 <jwb> mmcgrath, which is why there are non RH hall monitors 17:14:23 <mmcgrath> I do to, the policy is quite clear. It should be removed. 17:15:05 <stickster> There was no delineation of who was going to be involved, mmcgrath, it was done by people volunteering. 17:15:40 <mmcgrath> Even without that argument, which is still valid any time someone from RH stops a thread, it's still bad form to go around squashing people. 17:15:51 <notting> if i'm reading right, mmcgrath objects to the policy as a whole, not the implementation thereof 17:15:53 <mmcgrath> jwb: just curious, how many times have non RHers stopped a thread vs RHers? 17:15:59 <mmcgrath> notting: correct. 17:16:35 <jwb> mmcgrath, all monitors have agreed before stopping a thread 17:17:17 <mmcgrath> ah. 17:17:42 <jwb> also, all monitors have agreed before placing someone in actual moderation 17:17:49 * poelcat is satisfied with the hall monitor process to date and thinks the LWN article was mostly good except the end which seemed kind of wishy washy 17:17:56 <jwb> (i am 90% certain anyway) 17:18:17 * stickster is voicing skvidal, who's the other of the three hall monitors currently working on f-devel-l 17:18:27 <skvidal> I think we've only ever moderated two folks 17:18:27 <stickster> skvidal: Did you have something you wanted to add? Feel free. 17:18:37 <dgilmore> i think the hall monitor policy is working, we have only enforced it a couple of times 17:18:41 * spot is only aware of the two moderations 17:18:44 <skvidal> all of us have issued "cool it" notices to threads that were getting nutty 17:18:46 <notting> i sort of agree with corbet that it would be nice to have a constructive discussion about cdrkit/wodim maintenance. but i don't think we would have been able to do that even if that thread wasn't moderated 17:18:52 <mmcgrath> dgilmore: how would you measure it? 17:19:01 <skvidal> notting: does it need to be on f-d-l, though? 17:19:09 <skvidal> notting: spot did suggest taking it to legal 17:19:10 <dgilmore> mmcgrath: if we dont use it its doing its job 17:19:13 <stickster> We did mention using f-legal-l instead. 17:19:33 <dgilmore> fedora-devel seems a nicer place these days 17:19:43 <notting> skvidal: corbet's point was that the technical bits (wodiim doesn't work to do X) are relevant for devel list. jeorg's WODIM IS ILLEGAL STOP SHIPPING IT rants are not, and should be on -legal 17:20:12 <skvidal> notting: okay - so right now 17:20:17 <mmcgrath> dgilmore: I didn't realize the point of the moderation was to not use it. 17:20:20 <dgilmore> notting: i agree there. 17:20:23 <skvidal> if we started a wodim/cdrkit discussion on f-d-l 17:20:27 <skvidal> and joerg were not involved 17:20:44 <skvidal> I don't see any reason why it would get nutty 17:20:44 <dgilmore> mmcgrath: if we have no need to use it then its achieving its goal 17:20:55 <skvidal> as a point of fact, before joerg was involved the thread didn't seem nutty at all 17:20:55 <mmcgrath> dgilmore: what's it's goal again? 17:21:13 <dgilmore> mmcgrath: to have everyone be excellent to each other 17:21:18 <skvidal> mmcgrath: to keep people from flaming and last-word'ing until people unsubscribe and ignore us 17:21:26 <dgilmore> mmcgrath: have discussions without personal attacks and flames 17:21:33 <stickster> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Hall_Monitor_Policy#Background 17:21:43 * mmcgrath sees that skvidal and dgilmore has defined two very different goals for the same thing 17:22:00 <skvidal> mmcgrath: I don't think so 17:22:03 <mmcgrath> I don't feel like arguing about this, I have fundamental issues with it. I've made it known. 17:22:05 <jwb> how are those very different? 17:22:28 * poelcat fears we are heading for the weeds... the policy is established, is someone making a motion to change it? 17:22:31 <mmcgrath> jwb: last wordsman ship.. .still happening all the freaking time. Personal attacks, less but still happening. 17:22:34 <skvidal> mmcgrath: I think we defined the same thing - I defined it by what we don't want to have happen, dennis by what we want to have happen 17:22:51 <skvidal> mmcgrath: and we only bring up the monitoring when things get out of hand 17:22:52 <stickster> I've had enough people in the greater open source community talk to me personally about the problem of the tone of our lists that I refuse to pretend it doesn't exist. 17:23:05 <skvidal> it's not about stopping EVERY instance - it's about making it less nutbar 17:23:15 <stickster> Constructive, vigorous arguments are not a problem. 17:23:26 <mmcgrath> skvidal: you went all moderation on me and jesse because he said I said something offensive. That offensive thing was that there's no way to revert issues that come up in rawhide. 17:23:28 <skvidal> mmcgrath: I guess my point is - we cannot fix everything - but we can mitigate the ugliness 17:23:38 <mmcgrath> that wasn't, in any way, a personal attack but out came the mderation flag. 17:23:56 <jwb> mmcgrath, you have never been moderated 17:24:02 <skvidal> mmcgrath: can you point me to the thread? b/c I'm having trouble remembering this 17:24:05 <mmcgrath> jwb: Nope, got threatened. 17:24:46 <skvidal> mmcgrath: which thread was it? 17:25:05 * stickster believes the monitor policy should be used rarely, and equally no matter where a problem originates. 17:25:11 <skvidal> I'm looking for sent mail 17:26:25 <jwb> finding a specific instance isn't going to really be productive at the moment. should we move on to the queued questions? 17:26:25 <stickster> When I've seen the monitors pipe up, as often as I can recall, it's a response to a thread in general, and not "You, person X, stop it," except for the particular instances of people keeping a thread open that's been quieted. 17:26:43 <skvidal> jwb: I'm just trying to figure out what I said 17:27:12 <stickster> Yes, there are community questions coming in now, so let's move on, and we can come back to this later if needed. 17:27:16 <mmcgrath> skvidal: https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-devel-list/2009-October/msg00618.html 17:27:36 <stickster> mmcgrath: skvidal: Can we move to another question and come back to this? 17:27:43 <skvidal> stickster: fine w/me 17:27:43 <mmcgrath> stickster: lets 17:27:50 <skvidal> mmcgrath: umm - that's to jesse,actually :) 17:27:53 <stickster> #topic website redesigns 17:28:12 <mmcgrath> skvidal: I know, thats what my problem was. I thought his response was completely approperate. 17:28:14 <stickster> nirik: Go ahead, sir 17:28:16 <nirik> question: whats the status of the new download/get-fedora pages? are they up in staging yet? is the board happy with that outcome? 17:28:39 <stickster> The overall download page has been delayed at this point, because of the time it's taken to put together the spins mockups. 17:29:14 <stickster> The Board agreed that a more effective and full-featured Spins site was a prerequisite for the overall download page redesign. 17:29:17 <nirik> ok. Still planned for before f12 release though? 17:29:32 <stickster> nirik: I can't see that happening at this point, in all honesty. 17:29:46 <nirik> ok, so f12 goes with the old setup? :( 17:29:47 <stickster> Unless someone is hiding a bunch of extra HTML/CSS volunteers under their petticoats. 17:30:18 <jwb> this doesn't have to switch on a release boundary, does it? 17:30:19 <mdomsch> http://spins-test.fedoraproject.org/ 17:30:25 <mdomsch> is what's proposed right now 17:30:27 <stickster> The folks who are doing the Spins redesign have done a splendid job by the way. 17:30:30 <jwb> it can go live after F12 GA 17:30:32 <stickster> mdomsch: Thanks for the link 17:30:37 <stickster> #link http://spins-test.fedoraproject.org/ 17:31:03 <stickster> #info Spins site redesign is almost complete and should be able to go live soon 17:32:13 <stickster> jwb: I don't see why not. 17:32:21 <mdomsch> stickster, to that point, should we (or someone) put out a call for more websites volunteers 17:32:22 <mdomsch> ? 17:32:40 <mdomsch> surely there are people in the community with that skillset that would like to participate in that manner 17:32:43 <stickster> mdomsch: Yes, I've done that in a few places myself and would appreciate any additional voices shouting as well 17:32:48 <mmcgrath> I'm quite surprised that todate we still don't really have a webmaster 17:33:15 <stickster> There are some notable people coming up in the Websites team such as sijis and Hiemanshu 17:33:25 <stickster> sijis has done quite a bit of work on the Spins redesign, as a matter of fact 17:33:47 <mmcgrath> Yeah, they've been doing great work. But I don't think either of them has really taken on a leadership role. 17:34:02 <mmcgrath> ricky's been doing that a bit but I know $DAYSCHOOL has been taking up much of his time. 17:34:13 <stickster> mmcgrath: This may simply be a matter of ricky having a decreased amount of time. 17:34:28 <stickster> In the past he's been the Websites lead but it's obvious he has IRL issues that have to take precedence. 17:35:23 <stickster> I think the websites team may not know at this point if he's still acting in the capacity of Webmaster. 17:35:43 <stickster> If not, we can ask for ricky to clarify that, but that doesn't put anyone in the seat immediately. 17:35:48 <notting> do we need to 'recruit' one? 17:36:03 * stickster notes that "leading" often starts with the person who's "doing." 17:36:24 <stickster> s/person/person(s)/ 17:36:45 <mmcgrath> stickster: yeah but ricky is also uber infrastructure involved. 17:36:52 * dgilmore does think we should deploy the new spins pages as they become available 17:37:24 <stickster> mmcgrath: Right, I didn't mean that ricky wasn't busy with lots of interesting Fedora related tasks wherever he can fit them in. 17:38:09 <stickster> I found at the FAD Fedora Talk how easy it is to contribute to web work, but it still needs someone who is responsible for making a judgment call on the rare occasions where it's needed. 17:38:30 <mmcgrath> stickster: yeah, I guess I just always saw someone with ricky's UI implementation abilities, but without any of the sysadmin abilities he has :) 17:38:39 <mmcgrath> because then they wouldn't have to share time 17:38:46 <stickster> So let's agree that we need to start beating the drum for someone to take on that role -- it's not a 40-hour day job, I'm pretty sure. 17:39:11 <stickster> mmcgrath: Would you agree that it's something a volunteer could work on in the 10-20 hour/week range? 17:39:27 <stickster> Probably more like <5 in quiet times. 17:39:28 <mmcgrath> stickster: I think so, I think that whole position would be less then 10-20/week but bursty. 17:39:32 <stickster> Right. 17:39:37 <mmcgrath> times like now would get up there for sure. 17:39:41 <stickster> It tends to be heavier when we're coming to releases. 17:40:12 <stickster> But that's also the time when we tend to have an easier time ramping up volunteers to do things as well -- as in the case of sijis, jds2001, hiemanshu, nb, et al. 17:40:27 <stickster> (and hey, me too!) :-) 17:40:33 <stickster> OK. 17:41:21 <stickster> #agreed Board members to talk to ricky about clarifying the open role of webmaster, and based on that, work on recruiting someone with substantial time outside of Infrastructure team 17:41:50 * stickster looks for any dissent and sees none 17:42:32 * stickster checks for questions in other channel. 17:42:48 <nirik> oh, I had one more unless someone else has one. 17:43:00 <nirik> question: is the Board finished with the 'what is fedora' question now? or thats still ongoing? 17:43:44 <stickster> Not finished. 17:43:57 <jwb> but we have some more targeted items, correct? 17:44:06 <stickster> What we need to do is to turn our general idea of target audience into one or more user profiles 17:45:25 <stickster> Because by understanding that user profile at a more detailed level we can actually help resolve the kind of questions that people ask, like "should we have defaults that make behavior X, or behavior Y?". 17:46:34 <stickster> I'd like to take the general information we have now, and start constructing that more detailed profile in a collaborative way 17:46:35 * poelcat hopes we can also use these profiles to be clearer about our release critiera... IOW what MUST work to ship and how we define "success" for a release 17:46:37 <nirik> but wouldn't there be too many profiles to really be usable? 17:46:51 <stickster> poelcat: Yes, I think that's something else having detailed profiles will help. 17:47:09 <stickster> nirik: There don't have to be, no. 17:47:10 <nirik> ie, if the 'server admin' and 'desktop neophyte' conflict what do you do? or if you have 10 that don't match up on something. 17:47:27 <nirik> or you order them ? 17:47:43 <stickster> nirik: The latter, I think. One has to prioritize. 17:48:19 <stickster> And also one has to keep in mind that in most cases, doing something that makes things better for a single target user profile doesn't automatically make things worse for someone else. 17:48:22 <poelcat> stickster: how many profiles are we shooting for? 17:48:25 <stickster> More often than not it's the opposite. 17:48:50 <stickster> I'd prefer to have one profile, but I have to admit I'm not an expert in this field and I think we'll need to get help from people who know more about user-centric design. 17:49:41 <stickster> I've done a little reading on this, and it seems like having one very detailed profile tends to be better than several that aren't as well developed. 17:49:56 <stickster> (See for example "desktop neophyte" vs. "server admin".) 17:49:57 <poelcat> that makes sense 17:50:33 <mdomsch> which is different than "desktop neophyte with an nvidia 200-series graphics card" 17:50:44 <stickster> mdomsch: :-) 17:50:55 <mdomsch> as that gets messy in a hurry, but also, is where much of our pain resides 17:51:03 <nirik> one profile? so if it doesn't match that profile it just doesn't matter? 17:51:30 <stickster> nirik: If something doesn't match the profile it doesn't mean you ignore it, it simply means that you pick some priorities 17:52:00 <stickster> Fixing things outside the profile isn't forbidden. (Again, this is my understanding.) 17:52:26 <nirik> yeah, but if it's outside of the profile it will be much harder to realize it's a factor, etc. 17:52:45 <stickster> There are a lot of false dichotomies that people think happen when you center design on a user profile, but again, invariably by making things better for that profile, you tend to make a much better whole that is more appealing to people outside that profile as well. 17:52:47 <nirik> anyhow, just wanted to know the status, and if it was still being discussed. ;) 17:52:54 <stickster> nirik: It most certainly is! 17:53:17 <stickster> I think the quietude on the FAB list, while being a little disappointing, is also a bit natural given that we're right in front of a release and people are a bit distracted. 17:53:57 <stickster> I'm very keen on trying to have some constructive discussion at FUDCon to move forward on this, especially since we'll have a large segment of community people there, incl. a majority of the Board and FESCo. 17:54:13 <poelcat> stickster: what are the next actions needed from the board members? 17:54:20 <nirik> perhaps having each spin and/or sig do a profile and then collate them might help. 17:54:35 * poelcat is a little fuzzy on if I'm supposed to be working on something or not 17:55:09 <poelcat> and I'm wondering if we are meeting next week as well 17:55:27 <stickster> poelcat: I think the next action for the Board is (1) to start figuring out the right methodology for getting the user profile together. 17:55:52 <stickster> (I'm not sure collation is the right answer, because just combining a bunch of disparate needs could put us back where we were before we started.) 17:56:01 <mdomsch> stickster, you have a methodology to figure out the methodology ... ? ;-) 17:56:17 <jwb> mdomsch, heh :) 17:56:32 <jwb> nirik, i like your idea 17:56:34 <stickster> mdomsch: Some of the reading I've done suggests that the user profile comes from market research. But that's a pretty long and involved process. 17:57:12 <stickster> We can definitely start with the collection of where each SIG aims to go. 17:57:36 <stickster> But then simply putting those all in a list and saying "Here's our target profile," I think, is not the right solution. 17:57:49 <nirik> I think there will be overlap in many cases... ie, lots of areas build on a desktop to provide a base for their target user, (IMHO) 17:57:50 <stickster> We might be able to find common details, however 17:57:56 * nirik nods. 17:57:57 <stickster> And put those together into the list 17:58:30 <stickster> My worry is that simply writing up a profile blindly is also not the answer, thus the action above. 17:59:37 <stickster> poelcat: I'm not sure I answered your question, however. 17:59:37 <notting> what sort of user profile/user-centered design people/resources do we have to call on? 17:59:54 <stickster> notting: Well, obviously mizmo knows something about this 18:00:05 <stickster> notting: I think jmccann also does 18:00:39 <stickster> we may also have one or two people in the Marketing team and elsewhere who could help us attack this problem. 18:01:19 <stickster> So we should try to get those people together on FAB and see if we can (1) figure out the right way to flesh out this profile, and (2) do it. 18:01:44 <poelcat> stickster: with a time limit? 18:01:59 <poelcat> we only have 30 days to be done :) 18:02:44 <stickster> poelcat: What if we start that discussion today and try to at least have an answer to (1) by mid-next week, and get started on (2) immediately thereafter. 18:02:54 <mdomsch> I presume we'll cover this during Hackfest time at FUDCon? 18:03:17 * mdomsch is trying to figure out how to get everything done in those 3 days that is getting pushed there :-) 18:03:23 <stickster> mdomsch: I'd like to make sure that we aren't eating into too much hackfest time, because I have a feeling a lot of people will want to hear what's going on. 18:03:59 <stickster> I'd rather we had a technical session of an hour that discusses progress so that hackfests are more concentrated on implementation instead of ideation 18:04:56 <stickster> mdomsch: Does that make sense to you? 18:05:37 <mdomsch> ok, so it'll be a session on Saturday, but other sessions can still happen in parallel 18:05:45 <stickster> Correct. 18:05:59 <mdomsch> fair enough 18:06:22 <stickster> That way Sunday and Monday don't end up with a couple "broad issues" taking the spotlight away from the nuts and bolts work people are coming together to do. 18:06:45 * stickster thinks there are a lot of Board members who have been very silent throughout. 18:06:59 <stickster> Anyone else want to jump in with a comment? 18:07:16 <jwb> i won't be there, but would be happy to review 18:07:18 <mdomsch> separately - other large org conferences do things a little differently 18:07:19 <notting> the plan as described above seems reasonable 18:07:42 <mdomsch> the exec board arrives a day or 2 early to have such f2f discussions, then presents to the whole assembly 18:08:00 <poelcat> stickster: are you starting the f-a-b thread? it seems like you are doing all the heavy lifting on this 18:08:08 <mdomsch> now, we've been doing a lot on email and on the board calls already, so that's our approach 18:08:55 <stickster> mdomsch: Yes, the approach of having an early f2f meeting is something a couple other people have mentioned to me, and I think I'd like to try that in the next big conference in the North American region 18:09:04 <stickster> And bring *all* the Board members together instead of just the majority 18:09:33 <stickster> That's something I can lobby for resources to support 18:09:58 <stickster> poelcat: I could really use help, what with the heavy interview schedule I have for the rest of this week and next week's absence in AUS 18:10:03 * notting wonders if we should have quarterly, or semi-annually, f2f 18:10:09 <notting> but hey, not my budget ;) 18:10:24 <poelcat> notting: i think we should have annual at a minimum 18:10:34 <stickster> notting: Right, a regular meeting could be really beneficial -- I'd think annually or semi-annually. 18:10:49 <stickster> If it was annual, then it would be very easy to simply attach to the annual North American FUDCon event. 18:10:57 <poelcat> and i think the cost would minimal and worth the cost 18:11:07 <notting> an annual meeting for a semi-annually elected body is a little odd 18:11:20 <mdomsch> stickster, you're coming to Austin? :-) 18:11:38 <stickster> notting: Good point -- we'd at least get a cost savings out of one of the meetings if attached to FUDCon.l 18:11:44 <stickster> mdomsch: Could be! 18:11:55 <notting> mdomsch: fudcon austin? 18:11:56 <stickster> mdomsch: Maybe you can help us get the next NA FUDCon there! I think people are tired of the cold. 18:11:59 <poelcat> notting: okay, one at fudcon and one another time... semi-annually :) 18:12:22 <notting> mdomsch: although if we do december -> toronto, june -> austin, we're sort of doing it wrong. 18:12:40 <stickster> #action stickster to pursue resources to support a regular Fedora Board f2f meeting. 18:12:53 <mdomsch> notting, yeah... 18:13:04 <stickster> poelcat: To return to your earlier question, about help in rolling things along on FAB 18:13:09 <stickster> Yes, I could use assistance. 18:13:36 <poelcat> I started the last snowball.. who wants to start the next one? 18:13:42 * stickster does not want the release to block the work we have left on this issue. 18:14:10 <poelcat> is there another board member willing to help on this? 18:15:53 <stickster> poelcat: Why don't you and I take this up on FAB then. 18:16:09 * poelcat is disappointed that no one else is stepping up 18:16:14 <poelcat> is it something I said? :) 18:16:31 <stickster> poelcat: let's move on, I think there's still a question left in the queue 18:16:37 <poelcat> okay 18:16:56 <stickster> #action poelcat and stickster to gear up FAB thread, getting experienced UI/design people to help with user profiling 18:17:18 <stickster> Also, I note that inode0 passed on some reference to Six Sigma, so I'll look into that as well, thank you John. 18:17:33 <notting> mmm, buzzwords. 18:17:56 <stickster> jjmcd_: You had a comment about a press release issue? 18:18:08 <jjmcd_> Yes, caught me by surprise 18:18:16 <poelcat> notting: aren't you a SS black belt? ;-) 18:18:35 <jjmcd_> We now have 9 or 10 guides and were planning a a release to that effe3ct around F12 18:18:49 * stickster notes that the Docs team has sprouted a LOT of work this cycle 18:18:55 <jjmcd_> I was wondering whether it made sense to have press releases for new guides, there are at least a couple on deck 18:19:18 <stickster> #link http://docs.fedoraproject.org/drafts.html 18:19:39 <stickster> jjmcd_: Yes, I think that's a completely achievable goal. And it doesn't need to be tied to a release either. 18:19:57 <jjmcd_> We have always gotten good press around docs, seems like we could get more mileage out of that\ 18:20:17 <stickster> jjmcd_: The way I would envision it is that the maintainer for a particular guide could work with the Fedora Marketing team to issue a standard press release to the list of outlets that we maintain on the wiki. 18:20:20 <poelcat> jjmcd_: i wonder if the marketing team could help with this? 18:20:30 * stickster reads poelcat's mind when he's not looking 18:20:36 <jjmcd_> that sounds like a good plan to me 18:20:53 <notting> yeah, just get the docs and the marketing people together. go forth and do. :) 18:21:03 <jjmcd_> sounds good to me 18:21:29 <stickster> jjmcd_: If you could either (1) be at the Marketing meeting in two weeks (when mchua returns) or invite her to the Docs meeting in two weeks, it should be easy to get traction very quickly on this. 18:21:37 <stickster> Also, if you need help with press releases themselves, there is now a wiki page for that. 18:21:44 <stickster> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/How_to_write_a_Fedora_press_release 18:21:56 <jjmcd_> excellent, we'lll do that 18:22:22 <stickster> jjmcd_: Fantastic idea, thanks for bringing it up. 18:22:33 <stickster> We are always looking for ways to promote the work that Fedora teams are doing. 18:22:53 <stickster> OK, I don't see anything else in the queue at this point. 18:23:48 <stickster> Board members, thanks for your time and your thoughts. 18:23:52 <stickster> #topic wrap up 18:24:07 <mmcgrath> :) 18:24:09 <stickster> Community members, thanks for being here, asking questions, and giving us your thoughts too. 18:24:18 * mdomsch thanks inode0 for stepping up to help coordinate elections 18:24:52 <mdomsch> nominations are open - nominate yourself or a friend (with permission) 18:24:54 <stickster> mdomsch: And also, let's note that next week (IIRC) we open up suggestions for the Fedora 13 release code name. 18:25:18 <notting> falco ftw. 18:25:27 <stickster> #info Fedora 13 release name schedule: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Name_suggestions_for_Fedora_13#Naming_Schedule 18:26:30 <jwb> oh, that 18:26:34 <stickster> And to everyone, thank you for helping make Fedora 12 look to be a fine release! 18:26:53 <jwb> i suppose i should actually look at the naming thing or find someone to do it :) 18:27:07 <stickster> jwb: You and I can stump for that on FAB too. 18:27:35 <stickster> #action jwb and stickster to get help with naming process 18:27:45 <stickster> That's all I haven 18:27:47 <stickster> *have. 18:28:09 <stickster> If there's nothing else, meeting will close in 30 18:28:27 <stickster> 15 18:28:40 <stickster> 5 18:28:42 <stickster> 4 18:28:44 <stickster> 3 18:28:46 <stickster> 2 18:28:48 <stickster> 1 18:28:50 <stickster> #endmeeting