18:01:27 #startmeeting Fedora Board 18:01:27 Meeting started Thu Jul 18 18:01:27 2013 UTC. The chair is rbergeron. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. 18:01:27 Useful Commands: #action #agreed #halp #info #idea #link #topic. 18:01:35 #meetingname Fedora Board 18:01:35 The meeting name has been set to 'fedora_board' 18:01:46 #topic Roll Call 18:01:55 Who's about, fair and lovely people? 18:02:10 * inode0 is here 18:02:18 * misc is here 18:02:19 * Sparks 18:02:33 bacon 18:03:57 hola 18:04:17 #chair inode0 misc sparks gholms rdieter 18:04:17 Current chairs: gholms inode0 misc rbergeron rdieter sparks 18:04:26 Here 18:04:31 #chair mjg59 18:04:31 Current chairs: gholms inode0 misc mjg59 rbergeron rdieter sparks 18:05:28 oh, internet. Lag lag 18:06:07 okay, I think that looks like a decent quorum for the momento. Annnnd let's get to it. 18:06:23 * rbergeron references her agenda superquick, realizes she left out things like announcements 18:06:33 #topic Announcements 18:07:38 Anyone, anything in this department? 18:07:52 not from me 18:07:58 not I 18:08:21 nada 18:08:35 Nope. 18:08:37 #info We just hit the Change Proposal Submission deadline a few days back, and the change freeze looms ahead in a few weeks, for those keeping track 18:08:42 #link http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Schedule 18:09:02 * rbergeron dons her jreznik hat for a moment 18:09:31 #info Flock is also right around the corner in August 18:10:01 * AnnaE is looking to see if someone from the Charleston Post & Courier wants to do a little writeup of Flock 18:10:19 I think that's about it, unless someone else has something they'd love to share, which it doesn't look like :) 18:11:17 annae: hi :) you know, you might talk to Gunnar and see if perhaps he knows anything - i saw that that mil-oss.org folks are doing a conference in charleston literally the three days before flock, and he was making some comments on it in his whatchacallit. 18:11:21 Podcast. 18:11:25 oooh :) 18:11:29 http://mil-oss.org/ 18:11:30 I'll get up w/ him 18:11:53 Ah - we could get him to promo it on his daily podcast 18:12:01 http://mil-oss.org/lant2/ <-- that, specifically 18:12:12 (sparks, that might be of interest to you too, actually, now that I think about it) 18:12:18 anyway. thanks for the thought :) 18:12:20 #chair jreznik 18:12:20 Current chairs: gholms inode0 jreznik misc mjg59 rbergeron rdieter sparks 18:12:26 moving onwards: 18:12:36 sorry for being a bit late - f19 release party ongoing upstairs ;-) 18:12:56 Hehe 18:12:58 #topic Release dedication discussion 18:13:05 jreznik: i hope you brought us snacks 18:14:19 So as we discussed a bit last week on the phone, and mentioned on the mailing list, we agreed that the most reasonable thing to do would be to dedicate the release in skvidal's memory, mcuh as was done for dennis ritchie for that particular release, rather than a naming-after. 18:15:29 And then plenty more follow-ons came, with suggestions of ... well, a release name, themes, dedications, and more. 18:16:36 So I've ascertained with family that those things are fine and kosher. 18:17:16 rbergeron, how about artwork? 18:17:18 any of those things, to be... non-specific 18:18:11 okay cool :) 18:18:18 mizmo: yes, a desktop theme was fine. I think it would be nice to perhaps run any final design by the family (or at least, a final drafty-type-version) 18:18:22 #info skvidal's family is fine with dedicating a release/theming/etc to his memory 18:18:37 (thank you, gholms) 18:20:13 mizmo: Should we jot down any action items in that vein? 18:20:23 at this point, I don't have any objections to having an artwork theme, jus wanted to get some consensus, yeah/nay, etc. 18:20:34 +1 18:20:36 Oh. Sorry. 18:20:38 +1 18:20:44 +1 18:21:11 I'm not necessarily interested in having the board be fully involved in every moment of what the design team does at all :) just want to make sure that they feel like it's okay to go run with it. or at least know something. :) 18:21:23 +1 18:21:34 if it doesn't make me cry every time I boot 18:21:59 I like the idea of a dedication and artwork/theme to Seth. I think it would be appropriate. 18:22:14 inode0, i was thinking of maybe a gears revival - we never used gears for a release, seems related enough to biking but not so related that it's sob-inducing 18:22:34 * jsmith likes that idea 18:22:37 but i wanted to see what other folks on the team thought but didnt want to bring it up unless the general idea of a theme was kosher 18:23:11 it is. :) 18:23:43 worksforme 18:23:57 I will respond to the mail with the confirmation of kosherness, and put the ball in the design team court for going forth and doing. :) 18:24:36 #action rbergeron to respond to the mail with the confirmation of kosherness, and put the ball in the design team court for going forth and doing. :) 18:25:16 * jreznik is ok with proposal 18:25:27 Okay, onwards: 18:25:30 Sounds reasonable 18:26:22 #topic Hall Monitor Guidelines request 18:27:27 so, I'd like to note that these are currently NOT in effect or used as far as I know. 18:27:36 they were tried and dropped later. 18:27:41 I've lost track of this. 18:28:01 #link https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Hall_Monitor_Policy 18:28:21 The CWG policy originally said that different parts of the project were responsible for enforcing behaviour in accordance with the code of conduct 18:28:39 In which case I'd expect it to be up to the mailing list admins to choose policy 18:28:47 So basically this was a request for "can we actually make them a policy" - and part of me wants to say CWG, part of me wants to say "various groups doing the various work can apply as needed," 18:28:51 * nirik nods and agrees with mjg59 18:28:53 mjg59: +1 18:28:59 But then something happened to the CWG without anyone ever telling me (I only found out when I got unsubscribed from the mailing list) 18:29:15 So if things haven't changed, then I don't think we need to be involved 18:29:37 If people involved in managing the mailing lists think that this is the best way for them to keep them well-aligned with the CoC, I think they should just do that 18:29:39 part of me wants to say, "hey nirik, just curious about why they were tried and dropped" but perhaps that is just the curious historian in me 18:29:58 We didn't want the board to be involved in that kind of management 18:30:47 mjg59: yes, I think that accurately sums that up. 18:30:57 If the question is "Can the mailing list admins bring back the hall monitor guidelines" then I think the answer is "Yes, and they don't need to ask us" 18:31:16 * gholms agrees with the above 18:31:21 If the question is "Can the board say that the mailing list admins should bring back the hall monitor guidelines" then I think the answer should be "No, that's their decision" 18:31:22 my recollection is that it was setup, they moderated some people, people cried 'censorship!' to the board and the board asked them to stop moderating, so the hall monitors said "ok, this is useless" and stopped doing anything. 18:31:27 but I could be misremembering. 18:31:42 mjg59: was that (unsubscribe) recently or a long time ago? 18:31:48 abadger1999: Last year? 18:31:53 k 18:32:04 abadger1999: December 18:32:45 what incentive do the admins have to want to use the guidelines 18:32:55 So: I think part of this request was simply to have something to point at and say, "Hey, can you behave in a more reasonable fashion, please read $this." 18:33:01 If the question is actually "Will the board back the mailing list admins if they block people and people are unhappy" that's a fairly different issue 18:33:35 And I'm fairly certain that http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct can likely fulfill that purpose. 18:33:38 rbergeron: I'd suggest pointing to the code of conduct instead? 18:33:40 yeah 18:34:02 the c-o-c do, yes, but without people to enforce, it is just a document sitting on the wiki 18:34:11 Is the CWG still expected to be the first avenue of discussion if people disagree with enforcement? 18:34:46 (I could be remembering incorrectly re: purpose, there were a number of things brought up) 18:34:48 I'd like to note here that if people see someone disobeying the code of conduct on a mailing list, they should mail the list admins. IMHO. 18:34:54 mjg59: k. The CWG timeline would probably be when the new CWG took over... I didn't think I dropped anyone form the public list but maybe one of hte other members did a reset of hte subscribers. 18:35:14 abadger1999: That was from -private. 18:35:17 the request being discussed here didn't mention anything about enforcement, so I don't think there's any need to go down that rabbit hole now 18:35:32 misc +1 18:35:44 mjg59: I think so, yes. 18:35:45 mjg59: ah -- well, for that, there was a lot of notification about the cwg going through a change in membership. 18:35:54 mjg59: I know I cc'd you on a bunch of email about that. 18:36:00 abadger1999: Nope 18:36:09 Never received any of them 18:36:25 But not really the point now 18:36:47 ! 18:36:49 misc: well, actually, the wiki just points at the webpage now, but yes. 18:36:53 sparks: go for it 18:37:10 I have one issue with all moderation/cwg - it's hard to say when the border was crossed - for recent case(s) - I really don't see it as being crossed, some people thing different... 18:37:22 In my opinion mailing list owners shouldn't need to speak with anyone else before taking action to keep their lists sane. 18:37:45 jreznik: That's a matter for the list admins to decide. If people feel that their enforcement is wrong in some respect then we have avenues to discuss that. 18:37:45 mjg59: I always wondered why you never replied to any of them... but then I think only robyn and nirik did so -- you were just one of the crowd. 18:37:46 IF the person who is moderated has a problem with that then they can open a ticket and we can refer the entire matter to the CWG. 18:38:06 I'd hope that the person would just need to cool down and then all will go back to normal. 18:38:09 EOF 18:38:17 well, they can just hopefully know that they can go to the CWG without having a referral from us. :) 18:38:24 right 18:39:01 does the CWG still exist 18:39:01 abadger1999: You weren't mailing them to my @redhat address or anything, were you? I'd lost access to that by then. 18:39:04 but the issue is that the cwg appear as dormant, due to its very nature ( ie, handling conflict privately if possible ) 18:39:20 I have no problem with a mailing list owner doing an emergency moderation on the entire list to give people time to cool down. 18:39:22 so I am not sur epeople think of the CWG as a recourse 18:39:23 mjg59: that might be... I'll have to check my sent mail folder. 18:39:40 The lists are for exchanging ideas and working on problems not causing problems and attacking others. 18:39:42 there is a motion in ticket 160 - should we take that up or discuss all this stuff for a few more weeks first? 18:39:46 also -- cwg could desperately use an organizer-type person. 18:40:41 The people who are on the cwg are good front line people but the gorup needs someone who has the time to get the process of deciding how to increase the membership, what things they're actively going to do are, how to train new members going. 18:40:52 Ok. What I'd *propose* the mailing list admins do is advertise their policy in whichever way they see fit (ideally referencing the CoC) and outline the options available to people who disagree with the choices they make 18:41:02 But I think it's fundamentally up to them 18:41:05 or take that responsibility back to board - we have board, we have cwg, we can't hardly find people for board... and when something happens, board is usually to take action... not saying anything bad about cwg and members, but we just don't have resources 18:41:16 18:42:11 If disciplinary actions are to be taken, it's better for those to come from outside of the cwg (mailing list admins or board... I think, like mjg59, that admins are good people to have that role if they want it) 18:42:39 * nirik notes mailing lists templates and such would be a great thing for CWG to actually help produce 18:42:56 But I don't think any of this is currently the board's business 18:43:26 i wonder if there was a better hub for the mailing lists other than the default mailman interface 18:43:31 if this stuff would be more visible 18:43:52 * nirik will try and move along hyperkitty deployment. might help. :) 18:43:56 eg if i visit the mailing list page it'd have a more readable and clean looking page with information about policy / moderation / reporting issues etc in plain view 18:44:04 i think so because i think the social problems are caused by the tech limitations 18:44:14 What problem are we trying to solve today? 18:44:27 gholms: good question, I'm getting lost 18:44:54 inode0: do you want to cover what the motion is in 160? 18:44:56 hall monitor policy was the topic 18:44:58 * inode0 is trying to close ticket #160 and put the Hall Monitor Policy to bed 18:45:26 * rdieter chears inode0 18:45:28 Does anyone object to the mailing list admins being allowed to implement an enforcement policy in line with the CoC? 18:45:34 AFAICT we should lay it to rest, especially considering it isn't used. 18:45:39 * gholms concurs with mjg59 18:45:52 mjg59: no objection 18:46:26 mjg59: same here, no objections 18:46:26 in fact, should be actively encouraged project-wide 18:46:30 when we speak of ml admins, are we talking of ml owner, or moderators, or the infrastructure team ? 18:46:31 mjg59: if no one has already objected why are we asking if anyone objects? 18:46:33 rdieter: +1 18:46:46 So can we just close the ticket with "Enforcement policy is up to the mailing list admins and does not require the board's permission" 18:46:48 gholms: It seems like ti's simply a matter of saying "This isn't the policy, and won't bethe policy, the policy is $here, and issues can be taken up with CWG" 18:46:57 list admins don't want to do the dirty work of list admins so they don't 18:46:58 Yup 18:47:30 and perhaps making sure it's pretty clear on the wiki regarding "which thing is the real thing" and which one is just a policy that was later dropped. 18:47:41 But again this seems like something that isn't our job 18:47:45 Just to avoid confusion. But again, I think that's mostly suggestion for the CWG :) 18:47:51 mjg59: yep 18:47:56 So let's just close the ticket 18:48:03 +1 18:48:04 also, should we extend that to other mediums ( ie, irc, as asked in the ticket ) ? 18:48:25 misc: Yes, the IRC SIG are expected to be responsible for enforcement there 18:48:33 but in the interest of not perpetually having tickets show up on our doorstep 18:48:36 we aren't extending it to anything, we throwing it overboard 18:49:35 #proposal: Close ticket, make it clear that it's up to the admins of individual project communication channels to enforce policy in line with the CoC 18:49:42 We already have a code of conduct that people can enforce where needed, and a place to go to for disputes. That's pretty much it for the board-level stuff. 18:49:45 okay, so proposal looks like: Close the ticket, reaffirm that mailing ... 18:49:48 yes, that. 18:49:49 +1 mjg59 18:49:53 +1 to proposaal 18:50:00 +1 18:50:02 +1 18:50:20 +1 18:50:54 I think that's enough ones. 18:51:08 +2, hee 18:51:19 #agreed - Close ticket, make it clear tha tit's up to the admins of ind. project comms channels to enforce policy in line with the CoC 18:51:28 #proposal: Close the ticket making it clear the Hall Monitor Policy is no longer a policy and giving no instruction to how list admins do their business 18:51:43 someone should edit the wiki page... 18:51:51 inode0: It's a policy if the mailing list admins want it to be a policy 18:52:20 We shouldn't be making that decision 18:52:49 Yes, but the understanding at the moment is that it's *no longer a policy*, not because of someting we decided, but because it was decided long ago. 18:53:04 Oh, sure 18:53:07 It is not the Fedora Board's policy as that wiki page states 18:53:16 I agree with the removal of that part 18:54:13 * gholms nods 18:55:34 * gholms switches to his mobile phone 18:55:45 inode0: your line about "giving no instructoin to how list admins do their business" ? 18:56:00 I have to leave now for today 18:56:13 mjg59: thanks for coming. 18:56:18 I don't see why we need to instruct list admins about anything as a result of this ticket is all. 18:56:52 * rbergeron does note we're almost at the hour but would like to finish 18:57:21 Well, make it clear I took as "make it clear in the ticket" and not necessarily "make it clear and reinforce personally to all mailing list admins" 18:58:03 * rbergeron doesn't know if anyone felt otherwise 18:58:45 it seems a separate issue to me and I don't think very many will do that either 18:59:09 they will mostly "enforce" no policy at all just like they do now 18:59:16 does the person filing the ticket want the larger problem solved or do they just want the policy made clear 18:59:26 the latter, imo 18:59:53 ah ok 18:59:53 * gholms suspects the latter 19:00:08 i think thats where theres some breakdown in the discussion 19:00:43 yep. just make it all clear. 19:01:14 What's next? 19:01:26 Open floor? 19:01:45 * rdieter has to go soon too (to another meeting) 19:02:05 gholms: ideally, but I think we may be at the point of losing traction/humans to food/other obligations 19:02:24 I'm among them. :) 19:02:33 * jreznik should go now too, tomorrow pto, day after tomorrow wedding ;-) not a strategic move to be still in the office today :) 19:02:35 so let's get it done fast 19:02:36 inode0: does "make it clear" just in the context of the ticket seem okay? I think that's all that was meant. 19:02:59 Whether or not they do I think it another issue altogether. 19:03:04 not to me - who are we making anything clear to by putting a note in a private ticket? 19:04:18 The person who requested that the policy be put into place? 19:04:20 I am happy with anyone voting for that to go do whatever it was they were voting for :) 19:05:13 I can see adding a suggestion that if we feel like it needs to be made more obvious somepace, the cwg would e a better point for doing that, or coordinating with mailing list admins, or whomever, in theory. 19:05:36 GOOD GOD, mavis beacon, please save me from my typing. 19:05:39 * rbergeron sighs 19:06:14 okay. So I think we can close that as discussed then? Is anyoen willing to put that info in the ticket? :) 19:06:22 * rbergeron offers around a plateful of cookies 19:06:29 * misc take the task 19:06:37 misc: thank you :) 19:06:38 #info misc to complete the ticket and close it 19:06:49 awesome. 19:06:57 #topic Wrapping Up 19:07:54 Okay, so we're losing people, I don't know that open floor will be fruitful at this point. 19:08:08 add cookies, they will come back 19:08:28 So unless anyone has objections, I'll close out the meeting :) 19:08:36 worksforme 19:08:41 same 19:09:40 alrighty then. 19:09:58 Talk to y'all soon. :) 19:10:04 #endmeeting