18:00:52 #startmeeting Fedora Board 18:00:52 Meeting started Thu Apr 4 18:00:52 2013 UTC. The chair is rbergeron. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. 18:00:52 Useful Commands: #action #agreed #halp #info #idea #link #topic. 18:01:12 o/ 18:01:15 #meetingname Fedora Board 18:01:15 The meeting name has been set to 'fedora_board' 18:01:36 my keyboard is being evil today. I apologize in advance for what will inevitably look like idiocy. 18:01:45 #topic Roll Call 18:01:49 Who's about? 18:01:50 hola 18:01:57 i am here 18:02:00 * Sparks is here 18:02:07 hey, /me is here 18:02:22 #chair misc sparks jreznik 18:02:22 Current chairs: jreznik misc rbergeron sparks 18:02:32 Hello, world! 18:02:43 rbergeron: You said 18:00 UTC and it is that now... 18:02:46 Hello, userbase! 18:03:00 #info pbrobinson apologizes for his inability to attend today due to $dayjob fires 18:03:07 StillBob: see, i'm already being an idiot. 18:03:31 What did I actually say? /me goes to look. All i know is: 11 my time. I'm at -7. 18:03:41 so I guess that is 18:00. 18:03:53 yep, 18 UTC = 20 CEST 18:03:59 #chair gholms inode0 18:03:59 Current chairs: gholms inode0 jreznik misc rbergeron sparks 18:04:04 inode0: lulz. 18:05:09 StillBob: I continue to apologize for my idiocy, for that and in advance :D 18:05:47 Okay, looks like we have humans on deck. Hooray humans. And it appears that we have a few folks popping into the channel as well to observe/participate, so yay for that. 18:05:52 #topic Agenda 18:05:53 * mattdm waves 18:06:19 So as posted on board mailing list, and in my blog like 12 seconds ago, and as discussed in last week's meeting.... 18:06:32 #info Today's major topic is: User Base Definition 18:06:43 * jreznik thinks we should set meeting format (how do we want it look like) as we were talking before going to any other business 18:07:12 #link http://wordshack.wordpress.com/2013/04/04/board-meeting-topic-for-the-day-user-base-aka-target-audience/ 18:07:16 especially for that big topic where we want more than just board 18:07:41 There are some useful links in there around descriptions. 18:08:10 jreznik: accepting suggestions, I don't want to spend a whole meeting figuring out meeting format. :) 18:08:18 Honestly: Interesting topics get people here. 18:08:21 Or things they are pissed off about. 18:08:27 * gholms nods 18:08:43 I hope we try to shy away from inducing the latter. :) 18:09:17 as I said - I'd really like to see this meeting more as community with time for Board issues, than Board meeting with a short community Q/A... but with interesting topic, let's see 18:09:40 +1 jreznik 18:10:01 Does anyone not on the board want to discuss anything with the board right now? 18:10:19 maybe just avoiding "Board" in meeting name and calling it community would help, not to scare people it's not their's business to speak etc... 18:10:45 * vwbusguy is interested on the "user base" discussion but has no specific points to bring up 18:10:46 * jreznik would like to give short status update aka where we are regarding alpha 18:10:46 inode0: let me think for open floor 18:10:47 jreznik: so community open floor, on a regular basis ? 18:10:59 jreznik: we could do it without having a meeting with everybody too 18:11:10 ( and do it more often ) 18:11:10 misc: moderated one 18:11:33 We tend to waste a lot of time waiting for stuff that doesn't happen - let's just get to work!? :) 18:11:36 How about this: Jreznik: are you willing to bring up meeting format on the board mailing list? 18:11:59 rbergeron: yep, I will (and I partially already did, without feedback ;-) 18:12:02 I think we should move it there. we have 49 minutes, and I suspect we will have plenty of fodder for discussion today. 18:12:35 People are popping in for this meeting, and we've had "open Q&A" on board agendas forever with little interaction. 18:12:41 Or as formerly called, "office hours" 18:12:44 So. 18:12:56 rbergeron: +1 18:12:57 Agenda is $hottopic. Basically. :) 18:13:17 #action jreznik to poke for further feedback on board mailing list re: board meeting format, inducing more participation. 18:13:30 #topic User Base Discussion 18:13:41 Before we dive in I'd like to say a few things sort of... to frame the discussion? 18:13:45 rbergeron: that would be cool, like a #fedora-board channel with office hours, and maybe a "suggestion box" type of thing 18:13:51 rbergeron: got for it :) 18:14:03 Just to... well, not avoid fires, but you know, make sure they are lit in an organized fashion. :) 18:14:13 dan408: #fedora-advisory-board is essentially that 18:14:14 dan408: We're halfway there already: join #fedora-advisory-board. 18:14:18 Should they be lit. 18:14:18 jinx 18:14:20 dan408: We already hang out in #fedora-advisory-board 18:14:21 thanks did not know about that 18:14:23 rbergeron: yep, we need format - any ideas? 18:14:25 * inode0 points dan408 at #fedora-advisory-board - you are welcome all the time 18:14:30 +4 18:14:40 #info FYI, there is a #fedora-advisory-board channel where anyone is welcome to hang out. 18:14:44 * dan408 lurks 18:14:46 Heh. 18:14:51 So: 18:15:19 #info Today's meeting is not going to involve "make a decision," and I suspect that "timeline for a decision" will probably be omething we need to take up on the mailing list. 18:15:48 #info If you have not read what the user base definition is, or aren't familiar with it, please read it before having a spherical cow, man. 18:16:03 #link http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User_base 18:16:28 If you are unfamiliar with the mission, vision, and all the other stuff written about what we do and why we're here, that is probably useful for you to know about as well. 18:16:46 #link http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Overview 18:17:02 dont you think that's a little dated? 18:17:23 We are here to discuss that 18:17:42 dan408: that's sort of the topic of discussion, eh? :) 18:17:49 yay progress 18:17:49 well, the first step would be to see if we want to revise everything, or just some part 18:18:12 i think over all it's good but i'd like to add "newbie" to the list 18:18:21 There are a few things we can discuss: 18:18:34 If the underlying assumptions about the user base continue to hold true, AS DEFINED 18:18:45 (note that "user base" is not "as we are" but more "as we wish to be") 18:19:06 * inode0 notes that user base is in reference to the default offering which is in reference to the gnome live desktop 18:19:08 If what we produce is appropriate to meet that user base, and if that can be changed. 18:19:32 If the mission/vision still hold true. 18:19:38 inode0: and that leads to the question - are we able to steer it or are we completely in a position to follow our upstreams? 18:20:02 We should have a user base statement of our own, and select upstreams that fit it. 18:20:02 that matters if we define Fedora as the the gnome live desktop or if we define Fedora as something larger than that 18:20:07 I think it might be useful to discuss "what we are actually producing" and whether or not that is doing anything for the user base "as defined" 18:20:27 we had about a 100 thread long discussion about this on the devel list for the default desktop 18:20:34 inode0: we could also have more than 1 user base, for more than 1 offer ? 18:20:35 there are 8 or 9 desktops in fedora 18:20:51 time to move on 18:20:54 seems odd that it describes a user base character-wise rather than a target set of use cases 18:21:01 we do now, each spin has one even if it is implicit 18:21:21 And if we have too much noise I will start asking people to raise their IRC hands or we will have a rambling discussion that will go nowhere. :) 18:21:29 :-) 18:21:46 The user base we want is contributors 18:21:48 IMO 18:21:54 +1 to vwbusguy 18:21:59 AndyP: We'd need thousands of use cases, and that's only to cover a single desktop 18:22:24 So rather than "what's freaking wrong" because we all have opinions... 18:22:30 vwbusguy: contributors are also users. you can't get contributors without users. 18:22:32 vwbusguy: does http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User_base_-_likely_collaborator fit, or need tweaking? 18:22:38 chicken + egg. 18:22:42 rdieter: you are totally going in the right direction. 18:22:42 * inode0 will slow down but thinks redefining Fedora to be something other than a live desktop is the correct place to start as what that is defined to be will guide the rest of this 18:22:49 I'll just say it out loud: We have a fair number of contributors that don't care about the user base as stated, and just ignore the wiki if htey even know it exists. 18:23:12 +1 mitr 18:23:15 rdieter, nice 18:23:19 I think we *all* want Fedora to have more contributors. 18:23:28 kinda goes without saying that each sub community is in charge defining it's target audience ofcourse many sub community might be competing for the same target audience ( like the *DE are doing ) 18:23:31 because that's already linked in our User_Base document (1 of 4) 18:23:32 mitr: but you don't have to spec out every user, just every core feature. speccing out users limits your userbase 18:23:38 I don' tknow that the "likely collaborator" definition still fits. 18:23:41 * jreznik likes current definition, it's pretty generic but seems does not fit our current "default" offering 18:24:06 rdieter, For a quick glance, it looks good. I'll update it if I can think of anything later 18:24:39 And if those likely collaborators are as likely to collaborate as a group that might be more targeted. 18:24:41 gregdek: is that also what you had in mind, or ... does it need narrowing or broadening ? 18:24:42 * satellit it would be nice if anaconda did not start desktop in main hub but let user choose his DE 18:24:43 I'll note: 18:24:49 This was written in 2010. 18:24:52 Three years ago. 18:24:58 satellit: baby steps 18:25:06 the problem with "user" is that it simply means that they use Fedora for something, which is why we have so many packages. Starting from there along does little in terms of "defaults" 18:25:07 again, contributors don't appear out of nowhere. is there a book on fedora i can read? do i install fedora and then start reading every wiki page and become a contributor? there is no clearly defined path on a) how to become a contributor and b) how to plan to attract contributors c) a good place for contributors to start to learn the fedora beauracracy. 18:25:11 Can anyone point out what has changed in teh past 3 years that might make this list more or less relevant? 18:25:21 rbergeron: Cloud. 18:25:26 * j_dulaney notes that when he joined the project three years ago, he wasn't looking at user base docs or the like 18:25:53 #info List of things that have changed in 3 years since "likely collaborators" was written: Cloud. 18:25:54 rbergeron: also the explosion of different DEs in the past 3 years 18:26:01 rdieter: looks sensible to me. 18:26:01 #info explosion of different DEs. 18:26:03 I think we are seeing a potential set of crontributors who seem more interested in cloud images than desktops. These seem to be people who want involved with Fedora. 18:26:05 rbergeron: for now, i do not think something changed, but that's likely boiling frog issue, etc 18:26:06 I will add: 18:26:14 rbergeron: I don't know about the past 3 years, but I don't think that the idea of requireing web forums and not mailing lists will allow anyone to become a contributor to Fedora as it exists 18:26:18 Github has gone from like 100k accounts to 3M users and 5M repositories. 18:26:26 Are those folks likely collaborators who care about open source? I would say yes. 18:26:36 s/people who want/people who we want/ 18:26:39 dan408, basically, if I understand you right, you'd like Fedora to be more noob0friendly in hopes that they might grow into being contributors 18:26:47 *noob-friendly 18:26:49 vwbusguy: yes. see ubuntu. 18:26:55 ARM, raspberry pi, maker culture. Are those folks more likely collaborators more easily targeted? Possibly. 18:26:56 or linuxmint 18:26:56 well, we're not Ubuntu 18:26:59 #info github rised, people who likely care about opensource 18:27:02 I KNOW WE'RE NOT 18:27:08 Thank goodness 18:27:10 * j_dulaney doesn't think Fedora should follow Ubuntu's path 18:27:13 dan408, so how would you do this differently in Fedora 18:27:21 Do people still believe in "THE YEAR OF THE LINUX DESKTOP" ? 18:27:26 make it easier to use and stop breaking it every release 18:27:28 I am using a Rpi and test fedora remixes 18:27:33 * jreznik does not want to bash GNOME (you were warned) - but do we know the user base of current gnome and target audience and as it's our current default offering - does it match our? 18:27:34 rbergeron: yes. it was 2002. 18:27:34 i do 18:27:34 rbergeron: I don't 18:27:39 rbergeron, yeah, but it might be in the form of Android or ChromeOS 18:27:48 a question, is it a important mission of Fedora to spread free software to the masses? 18:27:58 But I've used linux as my desktop since 1994 18:28:03 #info arm, maker, people extending the idea of free software and sharing on different topic 18:28:06 j_dulaney: ubuntu is not *all* bad, we should look at what they're doing right, doesn't mean we have to do the opposite 18:28:24 andreasn: for me - to spread free software and free culture - the second is imporant for me 18:28:27 What ubuntu used to do right, and does right no longer, is focus. 18:28:27 +1 mattrose 18:28:35 well 18:28:40 what do you think linuxmint did? 18:28:41 :) 18:28:42 andreasn: Yes, But does that mean that Fedora has to be their desktop? Can Fedora be *on* their desktop? Can they use Fedora to develop with? Are we okay with our technology being used to spread open source culture, even if we aren't getting credit? 18:28:44 misc: yep, that's "free culture" world 18:28:58 andreasn" take a look at the mission statement. in fact, that IS the mission 18:29:00 if linuxmint were yum based i would have been gone a long time ago 18:29:10 Okay, halt: THIS IS NOT ABOUT UBUNTU, or wanting or wishing to be like ubuntu. We are not them. 18:29:11 producing a linux distro is just one of the projects we happen to undertake. 18:29:21 * j_dulaney also notes that he has used fluxbox for a DE for longer than he has been a contributor 18:29:30 This is about making *us happy*, and having something that we think people want to contribute to. 18:29:31 At one point in time Fedora™ had something to do with the "hobbiest" and the "tinkerer" 18:29:31 anyways 18:29:33 * j_dulaney was a user for several years prior to being a contributor 18:29:47 At that time the Fedora™ concept made sense 18:29:52 * mattrose is only a user of fedora 18:29:59 StillBob: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User_base_-_voluntary_Linux_consumer 18:29:59 Where *us* == people contributing, people who care, RIGHT NOW. 18:30:02 Yes StillBob it was how we defined ourselves once 18:30:02 What I would think are potential goals are: Human readable documentation, reasonably self-explanatory defaults, and ability to run on the hardware users wish to run it on, FOSS drivers permitting 18:30:05 mattrose: You are here. You are contributing. :) 18:30:06 making it easier new users to adopt fedora, turns into more contributors down the road, stabilize the changes being made to fedora a little bit, i think that's what im trying to get at here 18:30:16 I was mostly curious in the context of target of likely collaborators as that is sometimes used as a bat for making things less non-hacker-friendly 18:30:30 +1 vwbusguy 18:30:33 Back to what else has changed: Anyone else have anything of note? 18:30:38 tablets 18:30:48 rbergeron: rise of social network and stuff like this ? 18:30:52 arm team is working hard on that 18:30:57 I don't know that Fedora™ is still for that type of person, hell I question if the Fedora™ concept makes sense today at all on any level. 18:30:58 rbergeron: Did you see my note? Cloud. 18:30:59 +1 18:30:59 rbergeron: centos and scientific linux have their acts together. 18:31:00 Proliferation of tablets? Android being everywhere? Many people using macs while Linux still stays at a whopping 2 percent of the desktop/laptop market? 18:31:06 rbergeron: virtualization is much more prevalent 18:31:09 gholms: yes, I info'd it. 18:31:17 Sorry 18:31:21 #info virtualization is much more prevalent 18:31:30 I'd say fedora on tablets would be important 18:31:35 DiscordianUK, +1 18:31:35 +1 18:31:38 -1 18:31:40 guys: feel free to add info's on relevant points 18:31:48 this is simple really we want people to participate. each sub community defines it's target audience and what's wrong with the current picture is we have default ( what ever it might be ) if the plan here is not to discuss dropping I doubt this meeting will lead to something useful 18:31:56 mattdm: you think Fedora on tablets is not at all important? 18:31:58 also please remember - we are distribution - and out there, there's a lot of places where to collaborat, probably more funnier with more credits - let's get these contribution in the way we know best - integration to the distribution 18:31:58 I think being the fifth-place also-ran on tablets is very uninteresting. 18:32:12 who cares about market share 18:32:16 mattdm: w'ere 5th place? HOLY CRAP 18:32:17 it's about user base 18:32:20 rbergeron: MacOSX still the easiest way to just get shit done, both as a user and a dev 18:32:24 Hello everyone 18:32:27 Viking-Ice: a gigantic +1. 18:32:28 skvidal: that's a best-case asperational goal 18:32:29 look at the Rapberry Pi and all of the people it brings in 18:32:38 I disagree with mattrose 18:32:44 Can we... step back a little and make sure that the board agrees whether it is attempting to define a vision for (existing or potential) contributors to follow, or to codify a vision that reflrects contributors we actually have? 18:32:48 I think that Fedora has proven to be a valuable platform for people who want to take it an extend upon in HOWEVER THEY WISH to achieve their user ends. 18:32:49 I very much disagree with mattrose 18:32:57 OLPC does this with the XOs and sugar. 18:33:12 rbergeron, +1 18:33:12 Arista Networks uses Fedora for their EOS for their switch things. 18:33:12 +1 18:33:25 I will even tread lightly and say that Red Hat uses Fedora as the basis for RHEL. 18:33:33 You can *disagree* with mattrose but it's definitely representative of the world as it stands. 18:33:34 What I've always liked best about Fedora is the ability to empower sub-communities to do awesome things. I'd like to extend that ability. 18:33:37 rbergeron: OLPC and XO is in a different position - their's target is pretty clear, one hw... 18:34:04 There are a lot fo people who use Fedora to buid things. ARM devices, etc., you name it 18:34:04 soas is fedora as a spin with OLPC DE 18:34:06 mattdm: well, not sure it's true anymore 18:34:16 And I'd like to see a structure that allows sub-communities to identify common problems and work together on them. 18:34:16 gregdek: so serving as a basis for derivative, kinda like debian ? 18:34:17 Not exacty there is windows for the OLPC etc 18:34:23 gregdek: that is what mde it cool for us tinkerers and hobbyists 18:34:29 misc: absolutely. 18:34:29 gregdek, +1 and +1 18:34:34 The reuse is tied to our instance on using free software. With Ubunutu you have to worry about what you can reuse. 18:34:36 jreznik: it is absolutely true everywhere startup and cloud-focused that I look. 18:34:50 mac on the desktop, linux in the cloud 18:34:50 to that end probably need to drop http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User_base_-_computer-friendly , sub communities and spins can pick that up 18:34:58 gregdek, and for what it's work bodhi and abrt have been tangible steps toward that goal 18:35:06 I now run Fedora in Vagrant on a Mac, fwiw. 18:35:19 OLPC on the XO has a dual boot with fedora on some of it's software 18:35:21 rdieter: why not drop "newbie friendly" and have a sub-community pick that up? 18:35:26 Rdieter brings up an important point, which I alluded to recently on te marketing list. 18:35:36 * j_dulaney is attending this here meeting with Fedora running on an ARM device 18:35:41 * DiscordianUK runs Fedora on my desktop and laptop as native systems 18:35:46 mattdm: +1. I think each sub-community would have to figure out its own definition of "noob-friendly". 18:35:47 mattdm: huh, newbie friendly is not a current User-base target. ? 18:35:48 if we want Fedora to be a base for other things, we have to be *way* more solid than we have been 18:36:10 * vwbusguy runs fedora at work for development, at home on desktops and laptops, and powering his media servers 18:36:14 brunowolff: in practice and given the number of derivative, not everybody care about that :/ 18:36:21 I'd run it on my Nexus tablet if I could too :-) 18:36:24 rdieter: "ability to use a text editor" is pretty much a newbie 18:36:26 rdieter: umm - if it is a target I think it's a failed target 18:36:27 The chromebooks will become important 18:36:30 left with "potential collaborator/contributor" +1 keep 18:36:43 I want Fedora on my Nook HD 18:36:49 +1 on chromebook fedora 18:36:58 * dan408 notes there is a #fedora-arm channel 18:37:09 rdieter: I think that there is a wide perception that "the user base" as defined is more or less perceived as "must be newb friendly" / lowest common denominator. Someone who can locate information on the internet to perhaps solve their problems. 18:37:09 DiscordianUK: then Fedora, as a goal, should make it easy for you to find people like you to make it happen. 18:37:23 gregdek, agree the way forward is give more power to sub communities I'll even go so far as saying working torwards them being able to define and control their own release cycle 18:37:44 I'm not a devel I lack too many clues for that 18:37:45 Maybe that's not true. I mean, if nothing else, the user base information is not exactly, um, short and to the point. 18:37:49 Viking-Ice: tricky, that. Not fundamentally opposed, but coordination becomes a huge challenge. 18:37:56 I am however a long term user 18:38:00 need to add something about "cloud" and/or "derivative distro maker", imo 18:38:22 gregdek: be easy to fork, be easy to integrate back 18:38:28 * vwbusguy points out that his grandmother runs Fedora on her laptop and she'd never used a computer before 18:38:34 or heck, even explicitly say "maker of fedora spins" 18:38:46 gregdek: How does "Fedora as a platform" relate to the "user base" focus we have now? Does it replace it? Change it? 18:39:03 What I do observe is this: With the definition *as it stands* - and how it defines the *default offering* - we are entirely desktop driven. 18:39:05 gregdek, nobody said it was going to be easy but before we can do that we need a stable release synced core or baseos which they themselves can then build upon ;) 18:39:11 gholms: it puts user base focus on individual sub-communities. Where, in my opinion, it should be. 18:39:19 The brand dilution that Ubuntu has experienced is our future if we as a community do not protect the Core and Foundations. 18:39:25 LTS distros? 18:39:31 StillBob: I totally agree 18:39:34 gholms, I like the idea of vanilla android vs vendor forks as a model. Vanilla Android is both user friendly and easily customizable for forking 18:39:34 as someone with experience in making derivative distributions, if we _really_ want to be friendly to that, that has _huge_ impact on how we do many things. (updates policy, for example) 18:39:47 "more spins" is not the answer 18:40:00 "Based on Fedora" is not the answer 18:40:07 Coming back to the substanive question: the market such as it is perceives Fedora as Gnome-OS 18:40:22 What about "on top of Fedora"? 18:40:23 substantive 18:40:48 DiscordianUK: I think that's probably largely fair to say 18:40:48 DiscordianUK, Yes. We have a strong KDE and XFCE community and it seems like they kind of get the back seat with our labelling 18:40:59 vwbusguy: yep. Have for years. 18:41:02 DiscordianUK good question. I don't have any non-speculative answers; does anyone? 18:41:04 (not saying it's correct, just saying I think that is the perception) 18:41:06 and now a mate and cinnamon community 18:41:13 and a sugar community 18:41:17 We have many DEs 18:41:24 right like i said earlier 18:41:27 Small groups splintering the community because of increased "power" to sub-committees I don't think will make fedora™ stronger or help define a userbase. 18:41:35 vwbusguy: they could just call it kedora or xedora :) 18:41:38 * satellit_ This is f19 Mate on my netbook 18:41:46 The largest perception I see in the wild (after a decade!) is "that's the RHEL beta test thing, right?" 18:41:47 +1 satellit_ :) 18:41:54 vwbusguy: and basically, we could sahre the work, but split the communication ? 18:41:59 If you look at the iRCops very few run Gnome 18:42:01 * inode0 again suggests that is one core problem - Fedora == linux desktop distribution 18:42:16 yes. And we have many, many use cases that go beyond "as what's on mylaptop or desktop machine as the primary OS" 18:42:42 rbergeron: so... maybe instead of targeting a user-base, target use-cases ? 18:42:50 Sub-communities will include more than just DEs. Will also include cloud platforms, web development platform, mobile platform... and so on. 18:42:55 inode0: that kinda paradoxal, since people think that's RHEL beta, but few people use Fedora on server, and few people use RHEL on desktop 18:42:56 we're getting closer with the multi DVD but I liked that the OpenSuSE installer used to just give you the option of which to install with a screenshot and brief description 18:42:57 inode0: and is it a problem? do we want to be more? do we have contributors to be more? chicken - egg problem 18:43:00 rdieter: target all humans 18:43:12 gregdek: we have such communities 18:43:17 targeting the universe is the opposite of strategy 101. 18:43:25 what happens when sub-communities' needs clash? that's kind of the point of having one default target originally. 18:43:26 YOU CANNOT BE ALL THINGS TO ALL PEOPLE. 18:43:26 We are short on packagers. I am not sure about other areas. 18:43:28 jreznik: sure do. are they happy? 18:43:28 sub community also define their own target use case by their own existing nature 18:43:30 rbergeron: +1 18:43:39 I want to do way more - that should be one end product so long as people are interesting in doing it 18:43:40 brunowolff: we will always be short on packager 18:43:47 Let us do things well 18:43:48 brunowolff: packaging sucks. Also: "hey, i'm one of 5M people on github, and we just get shit there." 18:43:48 mattdm: exactly. that's the kind of problem that the Fedora board should be regularly dealing with, and making decisions. 18:43:51 +1 rbergeron 18:43:58 To those people: packaging really sucks. 18:44:05 I do'n tknow that they understand the value. 18:44:09 even if it means we can't do everything 18:44:10 But we should attract more people who want to build other things too and we aren't because of our desktop focus. 18:44:12 packaging sucks? 18:44:21 I don't know that swinging the pendulum back is that easy. 18:44:35 rbergeron +1000000 18:44:39 dan408: it's pretty rare to meet a developer who loves packaging :) 18:44:48 I don't feel it sucks, but I wish I could spend the same time on fewer packages. 18:44:51 open source contribution has largely changed from "i work on the linux operating system" to "I get shit done for my dayjob" and "i scratch my own itch" 18:44:58 gregdek: so you prefer subcommunities but wants one central board thing to make decisions? 18:44:59 brunowolff: SHort on packagers? And still a back log of people looking for sponsors and first package reviews? 18:45:00 rbergeron: Especially with how much 'clout' the Gnome folks have with Fedora 18:45:04 mattdm: with the proper sponsor and mentorship anyone can be a packager. 18:45:10 brunowolff: to you it doesn't, you've been doing it, and you recognize the value. 18:45:21 dan408: well sure. or a lion tamer. 18:45:28 well i had both i guess 18:45:29 jreznik: one central board to handle disputes and apply scarce resources to common problems, yes. That's exactly what I want. 18:45:30 :) 18:45:34 rbergeron: Actually, for me, it's still "I work on the Linux operating system" 18:45:43 To people whose experience is basically "github" as far as open source contribution, which i would argue is far more likely to tap as potential contributors than "ANYONE ON EARTH IN USER BASE," 18:45:44 for packaging - better tooling could help us to automate it more, less sucks and so on 18:45:54 To some degree we don't get to decide what we will be, we start somewhere and the community takes us along for the ride. 18:46:01 I just use Fedora 18:46:09 it's, well, a hell of a lot more work. 18:46:11 DiscordianUK: me too :D 18:46:12 rbergeron: Exactly. Can we be more things to more people? Right now our target is one thing. 18:46:15 gregdek: but board do not control people 18:46:21 gregdek: yep, I agree in this way but I don't see we hit such issues very often 18:46:36 misc: but we can say "no" to things 18:46:55 rdieter: Only if the board is asked 18:46:56 We can occasionally reset the starting point, but ultimately people contributing will again reframe the direction we go from there. 18:46:59 I still like the notion of how people *use* Fedora rather than who is signed up on github as a better model 18:46:59 i liked the earlier suggestion of not having a user base but instead having prioritized use cases 18:47:05 rdieter: I used to do that a lot, and people just did it anyway outside of the project 18:47:05 StillBob: board can be proactive too 18:47:12 StillBob: and Board wasn't asked for years :) 18:47:16 jreznik: I think we hit them all the time. Like "better package build tooling", which could benefit everyone. 18:47:22 rdieter: How many things are happening without that happening? 18:47:25 So, rbergeron: There is a new, gigantic community of people building cool stuff with open source for which Fedora as it stands is completely irrelevant. That gigantic, growing community isn't a fluke -- it's just the result of the _general trend_ in computing. 18:47:25 rdieter: not saying we should say "yes", of course 18:47:32 grrr 18:47:41 rdieter: How many things are happening without being asked? 18:48:06 mattdm: I have to wonder: Are we okay with knowing people are using Fedora, or are benefitting from Fedora, WITHOUT IT BEING the bright shiny thing on their desktop? 18:48:15 StillBob: if no one notices or is hurt, not a big deal. when it causes problems or conflict, step in. 18:48:20 if you focus on a user base i think people look at it and think that if it's not them, it's a problem, and they disagree with it and ignore it 18:48:22 gregdek: better packaging tools are not Board decision - someone has to do it, Board can't say "from today, you're not Mate packager but you're working on tools"... it even does not work in companies, I expect dan408 would leave such company 18:48:30 Or saying Fedora in a big ass logo on it? 18:48:34 rbergeron: if they metnion in their docs on setting up their app/tool/service yes 18:48:35 if you focus on a set of use cases we want to support, and they are cool things our community wants to do, it might be easier to build support for them 18:48:38 rbergeron: I think that's just fine 18:48:38 Our mission is to _lead the advancement of free and open source software and content_. 18:48:39 Knowing that people are benefitting from open source? 18:48:44 mizmo: yes! 18:48:53 I think that's perfectly okay. 18:48:57 jreznik: immediately. 18:49:09 mattdm: I am not sure we are leading on the content part, to be honest 18:49:13 and again, let's think about why i packaged mate in the first place. 18:49:14 rbergeron: We want a user base, not nevessarily a desktop base. 18:49:19 out of complete frustration. 18:49:28 misc: and I'd really like to see that content part! 18:49:29 misc: and increasingly, the movement around free software is _going elsewhere_. 18:49:33 * gholms is crippled by his phone keyboard 18:49:35 * DiscordianUK nods 18:49:44 we want people to make cool shit using fedora right? isn't that what everyone wants? 18:49:48 mizmo: If the community wants to do them already, why would we need to define the use cases in the first place? 18:49:56 We are at the :10 to the hour mark. 18:50:02 I think that is one reason why Fedora rocks dan408 18:50:04 mitr: yes, that's what we want 18:50:04 mitr, if they aren't defined, then they are harder to get support for 18:50:09 Not just from Fedora; from working on distros. Not because we suck; in fact, because we did such a good job that it's boring. Interesting problems are now at a higher level. 18:50:11 mizmo: what's cool about Gnome 3? Absolutely NOTHING IMO 18:50:11 jreznik: isn't it the job of a already existing community ( like wikipedia, etc ), so maybe we should think how we can complement them 18:50:15 DiscordianUK: it is. 18:50:21 I am not sure developers really understand what free software is really about. I have had some interactions with upstream for some things where they really didn't understand licensing and claimed their stuff was GPL when they were using non-free assets. 18:50:21 (goddamnit, my kid is sick and skylanders giants disc is BROKEN) 18:50:24 mitr, for example, if we decide that building cool robots using fedora is a priority use case, then we can get funding to go to robotics conferences and talk about fedora there 18:50:40 +1 for #fedora-arm and the things they are doing.... 18:50:45 anyways 18:50:48 +1 18:50:49 mitr, if it's just a small subcommunity doing robot stuff, it's hard to get other teams in fedora like marketing and design and ambassadors and events all supporting it - because the priority is not clear 18:50:52 made my point 18:50:58 satellit, +1 18:50:59 without priorities, everything is equally able to be ignored / put to the bottom of the pile 18:51:02 I want fedora on my nook dammit 18:51:03 They seemed to think if they could get something from a public web page, that it was free. 18:51:04 mizmo: That's talking about some prospecitve comunity that doesn't exist. OK, I was thinking in context ov _existing_ contributor base. 18:51:06