14:00:57 <mattdm> #startmeeting Council (2018-09-12)
14:00:57 <zodbot> Meeting started Wed Sep 12 14:00:57 2018 UTC.
14:00:57 <zodbot> This meeting is logged and archived in a public location.
14:00:57 <zodbot> The chair is mattdm. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.
14:00:57 <zodbot> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #halp #info #idea #link #topic.
14:00:57 <zodbot> The meeting name has been set to 'council_(2018-09-12)'
14:00:59 <mattdm> #meetingname council
14:00:59 <zodbot> The meeting name has been set to 'council'
14:01:01 <mattdm> #chair mattdm jkurik jwb langdon robyduck bexelbie dperpeet Amita dgilmore pbrobinson tyll bcotton
14:01:01 <zodbot> Current chairs: Amita bcotton bexelbie dgilmore dperpeet jkurik jwb langdon mattdm pbrobinson robyduck tyll
14:01:03 <mattdm> #topic Introductions, Welcomes
14:01:05 <mattdm> good morning everyone!
14:01:09 <mattdm> or afternoon or whatever :)
14:01:27 <langdon> .hello2
14:01:28 <zodbot> langdon: langdon 'Langdon White' <langdon@redhat.com>
14:02:31 <bcotton> .hello2
14:02:32 <zodbot> bcotton: bcotton 'Ben Cotton' <bcotton@redhat.com>
14:02:34 <mattdm> hi langdon and bcotton! anyone else around :)
14:04:12 <mattdm> bexelbie sent me a message saying he probably can't make it
14:04:25 <mattdm> if it's just the three of us i'm inclined to cancel -- it's a busy week
14:04:35 <dgilmore> hey
14:04:53 <mattdm> ah okay. four is a quorum, I say :)
14:04:59 <mattdm> let's see if we have anything to talk about :)
14:05:07 <mattdm> #topic Today's Open Floor Agenda
14:06:03 <mattdm> I guess the other reason to cancel is if we don't have any topics :)
14:06:12 <mattdm> what things do people have that we think should be covered?
14:06:40 <langdon> i really got nothing...
14:06:48 <dgilmore> we could talk about the cloud image trademarks
14:06:48 <langdon> no open tickets to discuss?
14:07:23 <mattdm> plenty of open tickets... any you want to pick
14:07:24 * pbrobinson o.
14:07:30 <mattdm> hi pbrobinson!
14:07:36 <pbrobinson> oh, o/ even, a little late
14:07:47 <mattdm> cloud image trademarks seems like a good topic. anything else?
14:07:57 <bcotton> some people have submitted bios!
14:08:00 <langdon> i thought pbrobinson was pointing at us
14:08:07 <mattdm> #info some people have submitted bios! yay!
14:08:12 <langdon> ohh shoot.. i should do that in parallel
14:08:26 <mattdm> I still haven't reviewed dgilmore's document :(
14:08:45 <mattdm> let's talk about that and move it forward
14:08:54 <mattdm> then we can add other topics if they come up
14:08:56 <mattdm> or just end early
14:09:02 <langdon> doc link?
14:09:10 <mattdm> #topic Updated trademark guidelines for cloud and vps providers
14:09:13 <langdon> i think i read it already .. but i am not sure how much has changed
14:09:16 <mattdm> #link https://pagure.io/Fedora-Council/tickets/issue/198
14:09:32 <mattdm> #link https://docs.google.com/document/d/1tfYKaG6ANeEvMYfitA8uRo8Kk9OnC08gcgWE4xbxSyo/edit
14:10:29 <langdon> oh right.. yeah.. i read this.. i thought it was pretty clear and understandable.. but i don't have a dog in the race so i can't really comment on if it is "complete" or gets to what we want
14:10:38 <mattdm> my first question is: should we require SELinux and other major configuration like that for the plain "Fedora" mark?
14:11:40 <dgilmore> bcotton: helped me yesterday to make the problems being addressed a bit clearer
14:12:17 <dgilmore> mattdm: maybe
14:13:01 <dgilmore> mattdm: if they are basically using the Fedora image there should be no denials by default as that is part of the release criteria
14:13:30 <langdon> i wonder if "build on fedora" example should be something like webmin or redmine..
14:13:43 <langdon> rather than something as simple as ssh keys
14:14:08 * langdon notes.. not redmine as it isn't pkgd for fedora :)
14:14:18 <pbrobinson> I was going to give it a read through, I meant to yesterday but got shoved head first into grub2 blockers so I'll do it later today now that's resolved
14:15:47 <dgilmore> langdon: maybe, the idea is to not force someone to go the full remix route because they add code that makes users or sets up authentication
14:16:09 <mattdm> turns out I have a lot of questions and comments :)
14:16:18 <dgilmore> mattdm: excellent
14:17:40 <langdon> dgilmore: oh.. i read that as..  uses fedora as a deployment platform to enable some software for their users/customers
14:18:27 <dgilmore> langdon: not at all
14:18:35 <dgilmore> though we want them to do taht
14:18:50 <langdon> ha.. i guess i didn't find it all that clear :)
14:18:58 <mattdm> dgilmore: do you envision a new logomark for "Built on Fedora"?
14:19:05 <mattdm> we have one for Fedora Remix.
14:19:12 <dgilmore> langdon: google for instance has binaries that will let you add and remove users and ssh keys at run time
14:20:00 <dgilmore> mattdm: likely, it should be built on top of Fedora
14:21:01 <dgilmore> mattdm: the other option is to let them use the fedora mark in those cases, but cal out that it is built on and not entirely fedora
14:21:22 <mattdm> I kind of like that. First, it makes us not have to do another legal search
14:21:31 <mattdm> and second, vendors will definitely prefer it
14:21:45 <mattdm> turns out few people really like the remix logo
14:22:37 <mattdm> dgilmore: so in that google instance, if they're not added by rpm but dropped in to /opt/bin or something, they couldn't use "built on"?
14:22:49 <mattdm> (hold afk for two minutes sorry)
14:23:04 <dgilmore> If I am rembering right, we wanted to make it easy for cloud/vps providers to offer fedorabut have some clarity
14:23:21 <langdon> brb
14:23:39 <dgilmore> if a provider ships their own kernel, it is clearly not fedora and should be a remix
14:24:39 <dgilmore> mattdm: yes, that was the distinction, signed rpms in a dnf/yum repo for the code means that users can get updates
14:25:25 <langdon> back
14:25:33 <dgilmore> mattdm: if you just unpack a tarball into /opt and setup some symlinks or mangle $PATH means that any security issues would be clunky to fix for users
14:26:33 <dgilmore> mattdm: it was a line I drew in the sand that offers value for our users, the providers and us
14:27:17 * mattdm is back
14:27:51 <mattdm> dgilmore: What if there is another cloud-specific mechanism that updates that binary?
14:28:10 <mattdm> I'd rather have the guidelines call out the requirement rather than the tech
14:28:50 <mattdm> like, if we have a fedora-official source-to-container system a year from now that bypasses RPM but still gives the same advantages, I don't want to have to take this back to the lawyers for revision
14:29:05 <dgilmore> mattdm: that is fair. The problem trying to be solved is making sure that security is maintained for the users and that updates are available
14:29:30 <bcotton> yeah, i was kind of wondering the same thing. would a flatpak count?
14:30:03 <bcotton> maybe we say "the software must be installed from a user-updateable repository" or something to that effect?
14:30:25 <mattdm> well, not quite that, since the user doesn't need to update the *repo*
14:31:16 <mattdm> but yes in concept :)
14:31:26 <langdon> so where is the use case I was describing? webmin running on fedora.. is that not the same case? couldn't we broaden the scope?
14:31:34 * dgilmore needs to run for a work meeting
14:32:39 <mattdm> langdon: that seems like it'd fall under "software for enahancing systems functionality"
14:32:45 <mattdm> and so "built on Fedora"
14:33:03 <langdon> ok.. further afield.. redmine? alfresco?
14:33:37 <bcotton> my only concern, which is maybe what langdon is getting at, is where the line gets drawn
14:34:03 <mattdm> with the rules as written, that'd be a remix
14:34:42 <langdon> how is it a remix? there are no changes to fedora.. it is just new software
14:34:54 <bcotton> to some degree it has to be something where legal is willing to enforce it, so if we're vague we have no teeth
14:35:02 <mattdm> langdon: yep, with the current rules, that's literally what a remix is
14:35:10 <mattdm> fedora software mixed with non-fedora software
14:35:30 <langdon> ok.. so bad examples.. how about django?
14:35:45 <mattdm> django from our repo, or external?
14:35:49 <langdon> ours
14:35:58 <langdon> but preinstalled.. kinda paas like
14:36:24 <dgilmore> langdon: that is fedora
14:36:48 <langdon> ohh so that could be a straight fedora logo? even though it is not a default install?
14:36:51 <mattdm> dgilmore: but it hits against "The image should be as close as possible to the Fedora-provided Cloud or Server images. "
14:37:00 <mattdm> we should spell that out more.
14:37:34 <dgilmore> mattdm: that can be reworded then
14:37:44 <mattdm> i'm suggesting rewording now :)
14:37:56 <langdon> ok.. cool.. i think "remix" should also be clarified to "it might have installed open ssource software from elsewhere" .. the remix'ing described is way more drastic IMO
14:38:42 <dgilmore> what is trying to be allowed is allowing a provider to add software that is similiar to cloud-init for their environment
14:39:07 <dgilmore> while still letting it be "Fedora"
14:40:24 <dgilmore> langdon: if you wanted to make a image that has a bunch of stuff from rpmfusion and can funtion as say a video renering node, that is a remix
14:40:41 <langdon> yeah ok
14:40:58 <dgilmore> mattdm: the minimal funtionality should be as close as possible to fedora
14:41:14 <langdon> i think "built on fedora" sounds more obvious for that... i read "remix" as "new kernel" or "new other bits that are deep in the os"
14:41:36 <dgilmore> if someone setup a postgresql server cloud image and all the software comes from fedora, that is fedora
14:42:16 <langdon> bcotton: another random side note on bios, the interviews always seem to have a "whats your backgound in fedora".. what if we just pulled that by default?
14:42:42 <bcotton> langdon: that works for me
14:43:15 * langdon goes to cut and paste from his last one
14:43:53 <mattdm> okay, since dennis is supposed to be at another meeting, should we wrap this up?
14:43:58 <mattdm> I'll comment more in the doc
14:44:45 <dgilmore> yep
14:44:52 <mattdm> legal will help us get the wording right; we need to make sure we're clear about the intentions
14:44:56 <mattdm> #topic Anything Else?
14:45:40 <bcotton> #info robyduck, langdon, and pbrobinson still owe bios
14:46:08 <pbrobinson> bcotton: yes, still on my todo list, will try and do it tonight right after the IoT PRD stuff
14:46:20 <bcotton> you're too good to me, pbrobinson
14:47:05 <langdon> pbrobinson, bcotton at present the objective leads are a comma delimited list.. im making that bullets like the rest while updating so .. it won't be weird
14:47:41 <bcotton> langdon++
14:47:53 <mattdm> yeah sounds good
14:48:50 <mattdm> okay, closing meeting in 3 2 1 ....
14:48:52 <mattdm> 3
14:48:56 <mattdm> 2
14:49:00 <mattdm> 1
14:49:04 <mattdm> thanks everyone!
14:49:06 <mattdm> #endmeeting