13:00:01 <mattdm> #startmeeting Council (2017-05-24)
13:00:01 <zodbot> Meeting started Wed May 24 13:00:01 2017 UTC.  The chair is mattdm. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.
13:00:01 <zodbot> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #halp #info #idea #link #topic.
13:00:01 <zodbot> The meeting name has been set to 'council_(2017-05-24)'
13:00:03 <mattdm> #meetingname council
13:00:04 <zodbot> The meeting name has been set to 'council'
13:00:05 <mattdm> #chair mattdm jkurik jwb langdon robyduck bexelbie
13:00:06 <zodbot> Current chairs: bexelbie jkurik jwb langdon mattdm robyduck
13:00:07 <mattdm> #topic Introductions, Welcomes
13:00:14 <mattdm> Good morning and afternoon to everyone
13:00:20 <jkurik> .hello jkurik
13:00:21 <zodbot> jkurik: jkurik 'Jan Kurik' <jkurik@redhat.com>
13:01:29 <jwb> Hi
13:01:39 <bexelbie> .hello bex
13:01:40 <zodbot> bexelbie: bex 'Brian (bex) Exelbierd' <bex@pobox.com>
13:02:44 <mattdm> robyduck is out this week. So, waiting on langdon :)
13:03:07 <langdon> .hello langdon
13:03:08 <zodbot> langdon: langdon 'Langdon White' <langdon@fishjump.com>
13:03:10 <mattdm> awesome :)
13:03:14 <langdon> oops.. turned off notifies :/
13:03:16 <mattdm> #topic Today's Open Floor Agenda
13:03:34 <mattdm> Okay, so, here's some things I was thinking. The first two don't have tickets.
13:03:48 <mattdm> 1. Fedora 26 Schedule and Boltron/Modularity status
13:03:56 <mattdm> 2. Flock CFP -- how can we promote this
13:04:00 <mattdm> then, tickets
13:04:06 <mattdm> 3. LATAM FAD: any update?
13:04:15 <mattdm> 4. FAmNA budget request
13:04:21 <mattdm> oh and another one without a ticket
13:04:30 <mattdm> 5. Next steps for diversity advisor
13:04:43 <mattdm> Does anyone love or hate any of these topics for this morning?
13:04:45 <mattdm> Additional ones?
13:05:19 <bexelbie> they look fine - nothing else urgent comes to mind
13:05:34 <bexelbie> well, except that council members are reminded to check for private tickets
13:06:02 <mattdm> bexelbie: yeah. Maybe bring that to the council-private mailing list?
13:06:55 <mattdm> and, thoughts on this agenda, everyone else? Or should we dive in?
13:08:08 <langdon> im good.. although i am not sure what yo uwant on the first item :)
13:08:19 <jkurik> lets dive in
13:08:22 <mattdm> okay :)
13:08:29 <mattdm> #topic Fedora 26 Schedule and Boltron/Modularity status
13:08:39 <mattdm> langdon: just trying to put you on the spot :)
13:09:07 <mattdm> and jkurik too. It looks to me from the blocker list that we're probably going to ship the beta this week.
13:09:09 <mattdm> which is good :)
13:09:29 <mattdm> langdon: how do things look for modularity? are there blockers or problems we can help resolve?
13:10:28 <bexelbie> Do we have good messaging for how we want to promote Boltron?
13:10:30 <langdon> actually.. multitasking .. can we do mine before tickets? but not now?
13:10:34 <bexelbie> a clean concise problem statement, etc?
13:11:02 <mattdm> langdon:  like, in ten minutes?
13:11:07 <langdon> yeah
13:11:12 <mattdm> #info langdon asks we come back to this in a bit
13:11:23 <mattdm> #topic Flock CFP promotion
13:11:45 <bexelbie> we have people registering for flock - i haven't seen the CFP queue
13:11:48 <mattdm> #info hey everyone. flock registration and CFP is now open
13:11:50 <bexelbie> so the soft launch has worked
13:11:53 <mattdm> #link https://flocktofedora.org/
13:11:54 <bexelbie> :D
13:12:00 * bexelbie hasn't had time to write a magazine post yet
13:12:08 <bexelbie> while it is in the queue ... the queue is long
13:12:09 <bexelbie> :(
13:12:15 <mattdm> Is that what we are waiting for? That's my main question I guess. :)
13:12:30 <bexelbie> I think so
13:12:41 <bexelbie> I'll email the flock lists and see if I can rustle up a volunteer
13:12:51 <bexelbie> that a good next action?
13:12:53 <mattdm> I would volunteer to help but I still have to write the new mission/values page *and* the beta announcement... so I won't. :)
13:13:02 <mattdm> bexelbie: +1
13:13:20 <bexelbie> I feel your writing pain
13:13:34 <bexelbie> #action bexelbie to email flock lists and find a volunteer to write the flock/cfp announcement
13:13:35 <jwb> so
13:13:47 <mattdm> jwb yes?
13:13:50 <jkurik> mattdm: x3mboy has volunteered to write the beta announcement
13:14:10 <jwb> from an "outsider's" perspective, nobody really knows how to submit anything for flock right now
13:14:20 <mattdm> jkurik: yeah I'm working with him
13:14:28 <jkurik> ok
13:14:29 <mattdm> jwb: this is true from an insiders' perspective too :)
13:14:32 <jwb> because we've off-handedly said we want to get away from talks
13:14:42 <jwb> but haven't really elaborated on what fills those gaps
13:14:55 <bexelbie> There is some elaboration on the site about that I thought
13:14:57 * bexelbie goes to look
13:15:24 <bexelbie> fudge - there isn't
13:15:27 <jwb> bexelbie: very brief, but not really enough
13:15:28 <mattdm> bexelbie: it says "This affects the types of session proposals that will be accepted. A team status report is less likely to be accepted than a collaborative team working session or a workshop."
13:15:42 <bexelbie> I really thought I had written or seen more - it must have been in email
13:15:43 <mattdm> bexelbie: yeah, so I think the magazine post has to carry that weight
13:15:51 <bexelbie> yep and lead to a site update
13:16:14 <mattdm> bexelbie: although not necessarily a big one. it can just point to that post
13:16:26 <jwb> all of this is good, but it leads me to wonder how we're going to organize things like "person X needs to be at session Y"
13:16:42 <jwb> or "person X should be there, but didn't submit a session"
13:16:47 <bexelbie> The cfp is supposed to have a place to list the folks you need
13:16:55 <bexelbie> and the funding committee is supposed to take that into consideration
13:16:57 <bexelbie> aiui
13:17:13 <mattdm> bexelbie: it does not currently have that
13:17:15 <jwb> that would be good.  i fear people will assume others will be there so we need to make sure it's explicit
13:17:23 <mattdm> jwb++
13:17:40 <jwb> lastly, this makes it somewhat harder for managers to get people committed
13:17:49 <bexelbie> I know that was in stuff I talked to puiterwijk and mo about
13:17:54 <mattdm> you can add co-presenters but that's all
13:18:23 <mattdm> jwb: yeah. "going to give a talk" is like "special hall pass for attending conference" :(
13:18:31 <bexelbie> :( I'll try to bump this up for a greater follow up
13:18:52 <jwb> mattdm: true in multiple places
13:18:55 <bexelbie> jwb, iirc we said at our FAD that this would require folks to explain to their manager how their presence was important
13:19:13 <bexelbie> which helps us with people hopefully finding funding from their employers
13:19:58 <jwb> bexelbie: it does, yes.  but my point is that if person X isn't running a session but is invited(?) to one, that's confusing.  particularly since we have very little time before budgets need to be spent for tickets and such
13:20:26 <bexelbie> are you suggesting we change course?
13:20:56 <mattdm> I don't think we should change course
13:21:08 <mattdm> I think maybe we can make some official-looking invitation letters though
13:21:18 <jwb> no.  i'm saying we need to move faster.  i'm saying we need to really clarify CFP, get the proposals in, and get decisions made on acceptance as fast as possible.  it is essentially june, which means Q1 budget is gone
13:21:20 <mattdm> which might help
13:21:31 <bexelbie> I can do letters
13:21:36 <mattdm> bexelbie++
13:21:52 <jwb> Q2 budget is going to start getting spent.  the longer this takes, the less likely funding will be available even in the event of acceptance
13:22:13 <bexelbie> jwb, how would you suggest we move faster - we are trying to get the announcement out asap
13:22:17 <bexelbie> the time is running on CFP submissions
13:22:55 <jwb> bexelbie: what's the turn around time for acceptance after CFP closes Jun 15?
13:23:13 <bexelbie> as fast as possible
13:23:14 <jwb> bexelbie: particularly given that we have essentially a 2 week CFP that isn't announced.
13:23:32 <jwb> and we had to extend CFP last year by 3 weeks, and it was open much longer to begin with
13:24:36 <jwb> so, stay the course, but start sending emails about submissions to devel list NOW.  stop waiting for magazine articles
13:24:39 <bexelbie> I understand your concerns and agree with them and this process is moving as fast as I think it can - I don't see other options for speeding this up
13:24:48 <mattdm> We may need to do a second round.
13:25:06 <mattdm> Rather than extending, let's see what we get by the first deadline and approve what we can from that
13:25:11 <bexelbie> the text of a -devel list email is about the same as a magazine article as soon as it is ready it will be sent
13:25:15 <mattdm> and then if need be put out an additional call
13:26:24 <jwb> bexelbie: it doesn't have to be.  "Hi Devel List!  Flock CFP is open!  Please start thinking about your submissions and registration now.  We'll send more details on the kind of submissions we're looking for ASAP, but if you already have an idea in mind submit it today!  kthxbai"
13:26:44 <mattdm> jwb++
13:26:51 <bexelbie> that seems to go against what you said about needing a lot more clarity to get submissions we wanted
13:26:56 <bexelbie> but we can definitely get that sent
13:27:35 <mattdm> bexelbie: maybe add in a sentence or two above focus on hackfest/do-sessions?
13:27:39 <jwb> bexelbie: there's a chicken-egg here.  we want quality submissions, but our timeframe is very short and people aren't generally aware CFP is even open.  so we need submissions period, and can refine
13:28:06 <jwb> i'm happy to email devel list if that helps
13:28:12 <bexelbie> that woudl be great
13:28:15 <jwb> will do
13:28:17 <mattdm> awaesome. thanks jwb
13:28:39 <jwb> hopping on a work meeting, so multi-tasking but i'll try to keep up
13:28:47 <mattdm> ok, that seems like a plan for now. next item -- langdon, you ready?
13:28:51 <mattdm> #topic Back to Boltron
13:28:56 <langdon> ha.. mostly
13:29:25 <mattdm> I guess the main things are:
13:29:33 <langdon> ok.. so what kind of update are you looking for..
13:29:34 <mattdm> 1. How does the technical side look right now?
13:29:53 <mattdm> 2. Are there non-technical/political/social/resource blockers we can resolve?
13:29:54 <langdon> actually pretty good
13:30:00 <mattdm> 3. How should we promote?
13:30:14 <langdon> ok.. actually single-tasking now
13:30:19 <langdon> so.. 1)
13:30:51 <langdon> the modules are building pretty well, containers are building, cleaning up some of deps and modules still
13:31:09 <langdon> we have a container with a hacked in dnf and some modules local to the container
13:31:19 <langdon> qcow is getting there.. but not built yet
13:31:24 <langdon> problems:
13:31:29 <langdon> 1) no qcow yet
13:31:37 <langdon> 2) brt container not in osbs yet
13:31:43 <langdon> 3) koji still slow
13:31:49 <langdon> otherwise.. cooking with gas
13:32:03 <langdon> questions before I hit the next items?
13:32:04 <mattdm> are #1 and #2 likely to be resolved by the beta release next week?
13:32:13 <mattdm> or are we looking for a post-beta deliverable?
13:32:24 <mattdm> this has impact on #3 :)
13:32:25 <langdon> mattdm, not connnected.. hoping for asap..
13:32:33 <mattdm> *nod*
13:32:41 <langdon> mostly relying on brt and factory
13:32:45 <mattdm> on, so, #2... blockers?
13:32:49 <langdon> and i think all of us being hurt by #3
13:33:03 <mattdm> oh I meant the other #3 from *my* list
13:33:10 <mattdm> one of us should have used letters
13:33:12 <langdon> ok.. now i am confused by numbers..i should have used letters
13:33:14 <langdon> :)
13:33:23 <langdon> ok.. mine are abc
13:33:25 <mattdm> nice.
13:33:46 <langdon> so a,b not connected to beta release per se..
13:33:55 <langdon> but impacted by c
13:34:05 <mattdm> is B based on a layered image, or is it a docker/oci base image?
13:34:20 <langdon> b = base image based on the brt module
13:34:25 <bexelbie> brt?
13:34:31 <langdon> base runtime
13:34:32 <langdon> sorry
13:34:33 <mattdm> bexelbie: Base RunTime
13:34:41 <langdon> team slang
13:34:45 <mattdm> not to be confused with BuildRooT
13:34:53 <bexelbie> ahh
13:35:13 <mattdm> so, is that being produced in koji and just not a "from" option in OSBS?
13:35:28 <langdon> currently not a FROM option is the problem
13:35:43 <langdon> i don't know the details why.. need to talk to contyk
13:35:57 <mattdm> ok. i won't dwell on that here then. :)
13:36:20 <mattdm> so, what about my item 2.... anything the council can do to help?
13:36:27 <langdon> yeah... i don't think there is anything anyone can "do" besides let them "work"
13:36:51 <langdon> i think on #2 we will need help in 2-3 weeks.. when we have a "beta"..
13:37:15 <langdon> i am not sure we will hit the "real" beta date .. but it will be nearby..
13:37:19 <mattdm> ok. let's make sure to have groundwork in place before so no surprises
13:37:34 <mattdm> knock on wood beta is next tuesday. so probably not :)
13:37:56 <mattdm> on my item 3, communication...
13:37:59 <mattdm> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_26_talking_points
13:38:16 <bexelbie> We can also talk this up at OSS Japan and LinuxCon China
13:38:16 <mattdm> there's nothing in the talking points. it would be nice if there were. something to take to the team please?
13:38:33 <langdon> and "beta" is a tough term... like we may have something by tues.. but i don't think we will be happy with it.. I am really looking for something im semi-happy with the week of the 5th
13:38:41 <mattdm> although obviously that section should say it will be post-beta
13:39:15 <mattdm> langdon: ok, that's helpful. by beta here I just mean "the main Fedora release beta"
13:39:24 <langdon> yeah.. i get it..
13:39:47 <mattdm> we should have *at least* a Magazine article lined up ready to go at that point, too
13:39:59 <langdon> yes.. ugh.. work :)
13:40:08 <mattdm> langdon: yes. writing assignments for everyone! :)
13:40:18 <mattdm> ok, that's 10 minutes on this. more, or next topic?
13:40:23 <langdon> we are imagining a qcow and a container that people can play with ..
13:40:36 <langdon> maybe we should have a "special" meeting to talk about outreach?
13:40:43 <langdon> or slot it in to marketing or something
13:40:46 <bexelbie> If we can get your crib notes about that mag article, I can have them as part of our pitch in Japan next week
13:40:54 <langdon> like I am not sure this is council .. but I could sure use hte help
13:41:01 <mattdm> langdon: let's slot it in to marketing.
13:41:13 <mattdm> langdon: can you post to the marketing list?
13:41:31 <langdon> sure.. but i may need your (mattdm) help on composition
13:41:42 <mattdm> langdon: sure
13:41:51 <mattdm> okay, moving on?
13:42:10 <mattdm> #topic LATAM FAD -- any update?
13:42:24 <mattdm> this is from a ticket, but hold on, pagure is suddenly slow
13:42:33 <langdon> yeah... i think that is all i have to update... but i think ill try and come back with a formal story next time or the time after on the marketing situation (and I am sorry i am always laggy ;) )
13:42:42 <mattdm> #link https://pagure.io/Fedora-Council/tickets/issue/116
13:42:58 <mattdm> this may be quick. do we have any update from the LATAM community?
13:43:22 <bexelbie> They are looking at other city options per email traffic
13:43:30 <bexelbie> but alexove didn't give me a specific update to share
13:43:44 <mattdm> bexelbie: okay, thanks. so I guess this will just wait
13:43:46 * bexelbie waits on pagure to load
13:43:58 <mattdm> there it's loaded for me
13:44:50 <mattdm> but anyway I guess the action there is "wait on LATAM"
13:44:58 <mattdm> #topic FAmNA budget increase request
13:45:04 <bexelbie> ye
13:45:05 <mattdm> https://pagure.io/Fedora-Council/tickets/issue/108
13:45:29 <mattdm> #link https://pagure.io/Fedora-Council/tickets/issue/108
13:45:37 <bexelbie> I saw that this got discussed in the NA meeting - I did not see resolution in that meeting or updates here
13:45:45 <bexelbie> I have received no updates from NA Ambassadors or award directly
13:46:01 <langdon> bexelbie, award?
13:46:02 <mattdm> last correspondence in the ticket is that the request is for media, and then your response that media did not seem like a good use of money, and then nothing
13:46:17 <mattdm> langdon: "andrew ward". not literally an award :)
13:46:29 <bexelbie> yes
13:46:29 <langdon> mattdm, ha.. sorry.. did not parse
13:46:44 <bexelbie> The work with the Federator seems promising
13:46:45 <langdon> "award money" was how i read it
13:46:46 <bexelbie> and may resolve this
13:46:58 <bexelbie> the question I think we may have to answer at some point is about printing USB sticks
13:47:07 <bexelbie> but I'd like to see it both asked and justified before we answer it :)
13:47:59 <mattdm> bexelbie: ok, so, any action here? I guess my main comment is that Q1 is gone, so we should be talking about Q2/Q3 expendentures
13:48:12 <bexelbie> yes, but we haven't authorized additional budget
13:48:18 <bexelbie> we were waiting for the mission to resolve, iirc
13:48:32 <mattdm> bexelbie: okay, so we're basically waiting on me. fair. :)
13:48:58 <bexelbie> :D
13:48:59 <bexelbie> sorry
13:48:59 <mattdm> although I think we're resolved with the mission update enough that we can probably move forward
13:49:50 <mattdm> but anyway I'll get that written soon so you can point to it
13:50:38 <bexelbie> at our FAD we had discussed the idea of allocating smaller Q2-4 budgets to the regions to allow for ideas to bubble up related to the mission
13:50:46 <bexelbie> and to give robyduck some room to drive mindshare
13:50:51 <mattdm> bexelbie: AIUI right now we have allocated $0.
13:51:02 <bexelbie> iirc, we had said $3K/quarter for q2-4 per region
13:51:13 <bexelbie> that is correct, today we have not allocated any budget for Q2-4 for the regions
13:51:39 <mattdm> bexelbie: ok, can you put together a proposal to allocate that $3k?
13:51:45 <mattdm> I don't think we have time to decide it now
13:51:55 <bexelbie> so do we want to authorize $9K/region ($3K/quarter) to be used for continuing work and local priorities with the balance to go through council/robyduck related to the new mission - holding back stuff for "big ideas"?
13:52:00 <bexelbie> alright, I'll work on a ticket
13:52:28 <bexelbie> or would you prefer a council-discuss email?
13:52:37 <mattdm> I'm generally in favor of the words you just now said. but yeah, let's ticket it
13:52:37 <langdon> im a little concerned here.. bexelbie are you not seeing requests?
13:53:16 <bexelbie> langdon, no, we aren't.  APAC appears to have no plans at all so far this year - I am trying to find the time engage with them - but my focus has been in China with LinuxCon and Japan with Open Source Summit
13:53:30 <bexelbie> LATAM is planning a FAD to figure out how to work within their budget and plan new activities
13:53:38 <langdon> that i think is good
13:53:38 <bexelbie> they seem to understand the challenges FUDCon has had
13:53:49 <langdon> didn't apac also have a fad? or about to have one?
13:54:05 * langdon doesn't remember the dates
13:54:07 <bexelbie> EMEA is currently moving forward with ides - they have not made requests for new money - and may be slightly overspent on the current money
13:54:17 <bexelbie> APAC has not had a FAD in my recent memory
13:54:22 <bexelbie> there was not one at their last FUDCon
13:54:41 <bexelbie> EMEA may just need a prod - I'll try ot deliver that along with the new allocation we approve, if any
13:54:56 <mattdm> bexelbie APAC had a planning FAD in 2015
13:54:57 <langdon> ok.. i just want to be sure we spend the money...
13:54:58 <mattdm> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/FAD_Singapore_2015
13:55:03 <bexelbie> NA seems to be disengaged from the rest of the Ambassadors and has plans but is otherwise in the same boat as EMEA
13:55:09 <bexelbie> langdon, yes
13:55:19 <mattdm> however, those plans did not really pan out
13:56:01 <langdon> ok.. we can move on from my comments.. im just worried
13:56:17 <bexelbie> I will suggest a FAD for APAC as that may be needed - it'd be nice to see what happens in China and Japan first though
13:56:21 <mattdm> langdon: yeah. it's a fair worry.
13:56:26 <bexelbie> very fair worry
13:56:37 <bexelbie> I know robyduck has plans that should start moving in June, iirc
13:56:44 <bexelbie> and minshare should help drive htis
13:56:45 <bexelbie> I hope
13:56:49 <bexelbie> mindshare, this
13:56:50 <langdon> btw.. i did submit a modularity talk for linuxcon na.. and plan too for emea
13:56:52 <mattdm> *nod*
13:56:57 <mattdm> langdon: cool.
13:57:05 <mattdm> where is linuxcon na this year?
13:57:12 <bexelbie> langdon, we have booth opportunities to test the message in Japan and China langdon
13:57:14 <langdon> west coast somewhere
13:57:40 <mattdm> langdon can you make sure bex has what he needs for that message testing?
13:57:47 <langdon> bexelbie, im hesitant cause i don't have anything to "show" next week.. but we can give you the pitch deck we have been using like at rh summit
13:57:56 <bexelbie> Japan is next week
13:58:01 <bexelbie> China is 19 June
13:58:04 <bexelbie> sure, let's do that
13:58:13 <langdon> ohh china would be good then
13:58:22 <langdon> i thought you were saying they were both next week
13:58:29 <bexelbie> nope
13:58:43 <mattdm> #topic meeting wrap up
13:58:48 <mattdm> okay one minute left
13:58:56 <mattdm> we didn't get to "next steps with diversity advisor"
13:59:07 <mattdm> I'll bring that to the mailing list because we really should get moving
13:59:35 <mattdm> and, unless anyone has an emergency comment, ending the meeting....
13:59:52 <mattdm> #endmeeting