<@amoloney:fedora.im>
15:05:09
!startmeeting Fedora Council
<@meetbot:fedora.im>
15:05:10
Meeting started at 2025-02-26 15:05:09 UTC
<@meetbot:fedora.im>
15:05:10
The Meeting name is 'Fedora Council '
<@amoloney:fedora.im>
15:05:38
!topic roll call
<@amoloney:fedora.im>
15:05:40
!hi
<@mattdm:fedora.im>
15:05:40
!hi
<@zodbot:fedora.im>
15:05:42
Aoife Moloney (amoloney)
<@zodbot:fedora.im>
15:05:42
Matthew Miller (mattdm) - he / him / his
<@dcantrell:fedora.im>
15:05:43
!hi
<@zodbot:fedora.im>
15:05:45
David Cantrell (dcantrell) - he / him / his
<@jonatoni:fedora.im>
15:05:52
!hi
<@zodbot:fedora.im>
15:05:53
Jona Azizaj (jonatoni) - she / her / hers
<@jbrooks:matrix.org>
15:06:17
!hi jasonbrooks
<@zodbot:fedora.im>
15:06:19
Jason Brooks (jasonbrooks) - he / him / his
<@asamalik:fedora.im>
15:07:42
hi!
<@asamalik:fedora.im>
15:07:43
!hi
<@zodbot:fedora.im>
15:07:44
Adam Samalik (asamalik) - he / him / his
<@amoloney:fedora.im>
15:08:41
I think were waiting on JWW (@jflory7) [away until 2025-02-25] and bookwar
<@amoloney:fedora.im>
15:08:49
They will join when they can Im sure :)
<@amoloney:fedora.im>
15:08:54
!topic Agenda
<@amoloney:fedora.im>
15:09:21
!topic Hackfest Summaries Check-in
<@amoloney:fedora.im>
15:09:59
some of us have some summary writing to do, this is a reminder moreso https://discussion.fedoraproject.org/t/council-meeting-2025-02-26/146104
<@mattdm:fedora.im>
15:10:15
we should probably actually include the agenda? :)
<@amoloney:fedora.im>
15:10:34
Its in the discussion post, but fiiiiine :d
<@amoloney:fedora.im>
15:10:38
Its in the discussion post, but fiiiiine :p
<@mattdm:fedora.im>
15:11:08
it will make the meetbot summary nicer
<@amoloney:fedora.im>
15:12:06
!info The agenda topics today are a check in on the hackfest summaries, the git forge update, and any other business council members want to discuss
<@jflory7:fedora.im>
15:12:14
!hi
<@zodbot:fedora.im>
15:12:18
Justin W. Wheeler (jflory7) - he / him / his
<@jflory7:fedora.im>
15:12:20
Sorry, had a brief internet outage
<@amoloney:fedora.im>
15:13:40
The 'how we work' summary is published https://discussion.fedoraproject.org/t/council-f2f-hackfest-2025-summaries-how-the-council-works/145310
<@zodbot:fedora.im>
15:14:20
jflory7 has already given cookies to amoloney during the F41 timeframe
<@amoloney:fedora.im>
15:14:37
The AI policy draft is also out https://discussion.fedoraproject.org/t/ai-policy-in-fedora-wip/144297/4
<@amoloney:fedora.im>
15:15:02
I have an action to write up one covering the other policy conversations - Legal DEI Event, etc
<@amoloney:fedora.im>
15:15:14
mattdm: you are on strategy
<@amoloney:fedora.im>
15:15:20
JWW (@jflory7) [away until 2025-02-25]: you are on budget
<@amoloney:fedora.im>
15:15:34
Sumantro Mukherjee: is taking mindshare
<@jflory7:fedora.im>
15:15:35
Is there a deadline?
<@amoloney:fedora.im>
15:15:43
and afaik they are the big ticket items covered
<@amoloney:fedora.im>
15:15:58
Ideally we have these all written up over the next 2-3 weeks max
<@mattdm:fedora.im>
15:16:06
I intend to have at least a useful draft by the end of the week. You can quote me on that.
<@amoloney:fedora.im>
15:16:14
were in week 3 since we met so its getting stale otherwise
<@mattdm:fedora.im>
15:16:41
yeah. guilty as charged :)
<@amoloney:fedora.im>
15:16:47
I also have an action to create action items for everyone who put their hand up for things in individual tickets. I have not forgotten, I just have not done it yet
<@jflory7:fedora.im>
15:16:50
I will probably have to punt mine until March, I have a lot of family health issues going on and I also am trying to keep up with Flock and routine budgeting work
<@jbrooks:matrix.org>
15:17:13
At Scale there's a Fedora/CentOS classroom Shaun and I are doing, and I'm set to talk about Fedora for like 10 min to start -- I'd like to touch on the 4 strategic initiatives in that
<@jflory7:fedora.im>
15:17:56
Might also consider asking some of the Fedora Ambassadors in #event-scale:fedoraproject.org if they want to get involved, but I know this is off-topic for this meeting right now. The four initiatives sound good to me
<@amoloney:fedora.im>
15:18:05
As a reminder, these are summaries of the conversations we had, and not when the work we identified as being needed to be done should be completed by
<@amoloney:fedora.im>
15:18:24
When is Scale?
<@jflory7:fedora.im>
15:18:32
Next week 🙂
<@amoloney:fedora.im>
15:18:50
mattdm: you up for the challenge to have a summary in place for then??
<@jbrooks:matrix.org>
15:18:54
That's just to say, I'll be paying attn to mattdm's end of week 🙂
<@mattdm:fedora.im>
15:19:05
Sounds fair!
<@amoloney:fedora.im>
15:19:40
then i will make an agreed statement that the next summary is on strategy items and itll go on discourse by the end of this week?
<@mattdm:fedora.im>
15:19:44
I will start the draft from the end and work backwards, so the pragmatic initiative summaries are first priority
<@mattdm:fedora.im>
15:20:17
I will commit to a decent draft in the working space by the end of the week. not necessarily publication
<@amoloney:fedora.im>
15:21:26
!agreed mattdm will draft a summary of the strategy conversation by the end of February (Friday 28th) for review on discourse
<@amoloney:fedora.im>
15:21:50
!topic Git Forge Update
<@amoloney:fedora.im>
15:22:20
We now have an official proposal for the git forge replacement as a community initiative
<@amoloney:fedora.im>
15:22:27
!info We now have an official proposal for the git forge replacement as a community initiative
<@amoloney:fedora.im>
15:22:33
!link https://pagure.io/Fedora-Council/tickets/issue/485
<@dcantrell:fedora.im>
15:22:47
yes, but have we really given enough consideration to going back to cvs?
<@mattdm:fedora.im>
15:23:07
is that the right link?
<@amoloney:fedora.im>
15:23:18
no its not :(
<@amoloney:fedora.im>
15:23:27
!link https://pagure.io/Fedora-Council/tickets/issue/525
<@mattdm:fedora.im>
15:23:46
Nice.
<@amoloney:fedora.im>
15:23:53
Sweet baby jebas this is hard work today
<@jflory7:fedora.im>
15:23:55
Pagure is working for me
<@jflory7:fedora.im>
15:24:04
!link https://pagure.io/Fedora-Council/tickets/issue/525
<@amoloney:fedora.im>
15:24:07
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Objectives/Git_Forge_Initiative_2025
<@jflory7:fedora.im>
15:24:16
!link https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Objectives/Git_Forge_Initiative_2025
<@amoloney:fedora.im>
15:24:49
Im requesting we vote on approving this proposal....or not (?)
<@jflory7:fedora.im>
15:25:20
I may have just renamed the wiki page 😛 https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Initiatives/Git_Forge_Initiative_2025
<@amoloney:fedora.im>
15:25:22
If approved, I volunteer as executive sponsor for the initiative for the council
<@amoloney:fedora.im>
15:25:38
ryanlerch: is initiative lead
<@mattdm:fedora.im>
15:25:46
In keeping with our "be more strict with initiatives" outcome from the hackfest, do we feel that the plan and milestones are detailed enough here?
<@jflory7:fedora.im>
15:25:56
They are not
<@jflory7:fedora.im>
15:26:20
I don't think we need to force something into a logic model if it does not make sense, but the the plan section and the milestones and timeframe section need to be more tightly bound
<@amoloney:fedora.im>
15:26:21
No, they need more work for sure, so I can take that back to the initiative lead and team to request they refine it more
<@mattdm:fedora.im>
15:26:51
_after_ I'm done with the other thing I committed to, I can help with the logic model part if necessary
<@amoloney:fedora.im>
15:26:56
i don have two clarifications needed from the team for us council people though as well
<@jflory7:fedora.im>
15:27:08
When will Forgejo be deployed? Is F42 GA release, or is it initial availability? When will dist-git packages be migrated approximately? Is there a window planned for testing? Have we talked about doing Test Weeks for different milestones?
<@mattdm:fedora.im>
15:27:10
But we should also give some better guidance than "make it better"
<@jflory7:fedora.im>
15:27:14
When is Pagure decommissioned?
<@jflory7:fedora.im>
15:27:21
What are the backend tools being developed?
<@amoloney:fedora.im>
15:27:27
This is very good
<@jflory7:fedora.im>
15:27:30
What about fedora-messaging?
<@jflory7:fedora.im>
15:27:34
Will Badges be supported?
<@jflory7:fedora.im>
15:27:41
We should make sure the broken Pagure badges are ported over to Forgejo
<@jflory7:fedora.im>
15:27:48
It will be an added incentive for people to adopt the new platform
<@dcantrell:fedora.im>
15:27:58
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dg7P5nVAvjA
<@jflory7:fedora.im>
15:28:33
I am -1 to the proposal as written because it gives me more questions than answers. Of course, I want this to be a successful proposal and I want to see it go through, so I just want to see a revision with some of these key questions addressed
<@farchord:fedora.im>
15:28:46
JWW (@jflory7) [away until 2025-02-25]: "_What exactly_ will get migrated over to Forgejo?"
<@jflory7:fedora.im>
15:28:50
Otherwise, we will lose a lot of time answering these questions in the community.
<@mattdm:fedora.im>
15:28:59
Maybe -- Justin and Aoife, can you collaborate on "what more we need?" to take to Ryan (and to work on!), hopefully so we can approve by next week's meeting?
<@jflory7:fedora.im>
15:28:59
Yep, breaking it down into smaller pieces is key
<@jflory7:fedora.im>
15:29:17
I really have to say no because I am overburdened right now and might have to take additional days off in the coming weeks
<@amoloney:fedora.im>
15:29:20
In the earlier meeting, I and the folks doing the work were talking about how to roll out this initiative better so this is very good feedback to get and bring back to the team
<@mattdm:fedora.im>
15:29:28
fair
<@amoloney:fedora.im>
15:29:42
I can take it, Justin did a lot of the work already with the prompts :D
<@mattdm:fedora.im>
15:30:02
Anyone else want to help?
<@amoloney:fedora.im>
15:30:12
Ill pull the questions JWW (@jflory7) [away until 2025-02-25] asked from this meeting to be addressed
<@farchord:fedora.im>
15:30:49
We may need a place to submit bugs/issues with Forgejo (There might already be one)
<@farchord:fedora.im>
15:30:58
may it be in Matrix or in pagure/forgejo
<@jflory7:fedora.im>
15:31:02
I also think a logic model might not fit for _every_ Initiative. Like, I really want a clearly documented roadmap more than I want to understand the logic. We have been talking about the logic for maybe five years now 😛
<@mattdm:fedora.im>
15:31:08
definitely
<@jflory7:fedora.im>
15:31:11
I want a roadmap with clear deadlines, milestones, and a tight timeline
<@jflory7:fedora.im>
15:31:18
Room for flexibility, of course
<@farchord:fedora.im>
15:31:21
Agreed
<@jflory7:fedora.im>
15:31:21
But like, give us some dates pls
<@jflory7:fedora.im>
15:31:41
Or even Fedora release cycles
<@farchord:fedora.im>
15:31:49
I'm assuming F44+ lol
<@dcantrell:fedora.im>
15:31:54
dates and specifically the order of operations, but also contingency plans. what happens if a step fails or encounters a major problem
<@jflory7:fedora.im>
15:31:59
An Initiative can run for maximum three Fedora release cycles
<@jflory7:fedora.im>
15:32:04
So that is something to consider too
<@mattdm:fedora.im>
15:32:18
I expect that a lot of the specific work will be executed as a series of Changes. It would be nice to list the anticipated proposals and their timing.
<@jflory7:fedora.im>
15:32:21
(in terms of building a roadmap and timeline, because I understand absolute dates are very hard for a complex project like this)
<@amoloney:fedora.im>
15:32:23
So in the proposal, points 2 - 5 are going to be change proposals to FESCo
<@jflory7:fedora.im>
15:32:41
Yesssss, I would love it so much if this included Change proposal proposals 😛
<@dcantrell:fedora.im>
15:32:44
ok, good
<@jflory7:fedora.im>
15:32:52
Really, this is how technical work in the distro should be driven, through a series of Changes
<@dcantrell:fedora.im>
15:32:56
the change proposals can get in to the weeds then
<@jflory7:fedora.im>
15:32:58
The Initiative is just like a big container bin to catch them all
<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>
15:33:04
does that mean the bootc initiative is ending then?
<@mattdm:fedora.im>
15:33:06
exactly!
<@farchord:fedora.im>
15:33:12
Before those changes are submitted, you prolly also need to delegate teams/people to each tasks so they're not just a bunch of empty promises XD
<@dcantrell:fedora.im>
15:33:21
but not an immutable container
<@amoloney:fedora.im>
15:33:25
Point 1 is a deployment and is not touching fedora linux as we know it, but the rest all need more planing and sign off
<@mattdm:fedora.im>
15:33:30
yes. we need to wrap that up, and plan to have something related to replace it.
<@jflory7:fedora.im>
15:33:31
I defer this one to Jason Brooks 🙂 Or you could ask him at SCaLE for the full scoop next week
<@jflory7:fedora.im>
15:33:44
+1
<@jbrooks:matrix.org>
15:33:54
It was set to be one year, and that'll be in May
<@farchord:fedora.im>
15:33:56
You'Re assuming that neal is going to scale! :P
<@nhanlon:beeper.com>
15:34:01
wooo scale!
<@jflory7:fedora.im>
15:34:16
Hahah. No, Initiatives definitely need to be mutable. An immutable Initiative would never survive the Fedora Project 😛
<@jflory7:fedora.im>
15:34:47
I am, but precedent gives me some added weight in that assumption 😛
<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>
15:34:47
considering I spent all the money for plane tickets and hotel, I sure as heck hope I'm going
<@jflory7:fedora.im>
15:35:01
Anywayssssss…
<@farchord:fedora.im>
15:35:05
lol
<@jbrooks:matrix.org>
15:35:05
ppl can weigh in at https://gitlab.com/fedora/bootc/tracker/-/issues/62
<@amoloney:fedora.im>
15:35:05
I need to pull us back to the topic at hand please - Git forge proposal
<@jflory7:fedora.im>
15:35:07
Not to get too far off the Git Forge Initiative path here
<@jflory7:fedora.im>
15:35:15
Aoife Moloney: Any next steps here other than the feedback?
<@amoloney:fedora.im>
15:35:30
yes i have some feedback from the team for US to guide please
<@jflory7:fedora.im>
15:35:32
I would love if the Initiative owners could give us changes by the next Council meeting in 2 weeks
<@jflory7:fedora.im>
15:35:39
That is my wish list
<@jflory7:fedora.im>
15:35:49
These meetings are good forums to discuss and get wider feedback on Initiative proposals
<@jflory7:fedora.im>
15:36:00
And of course, log an official vote
<@amoloney:fedora.im>
15:36:13
Thats somewhat doable. The change proposals may not be available all together though as they will take time to architecturally create
<@amoloney:fedora.im>
15:36:28
but a more fleshed out initiative proposal is doable
<@amoloney:fedora.im>
15:36:54
once I fix the page to describe what are the requirements for initiatives to meet when submitting
<@jflory7:fedora.im>
15:36:54
Yep, that is all I want
<@amoloney:fedora.im>
15:36:58
its one big loop ha
<@jflory7:fedora.im>
15:37:22
Happy to review a MR. I am slowly iterating on some of the old docs tickets we have, ahead of our own move to Forgejo
<@jflory7:fedora.im>
15:37:33
(which BTW, we should totally be one of the first groups to migrate and be a leader in using the new platform)
<@jflory7:fedora.im>
15:37:40
(when the time is right)
<@jflory7:fedora.im>
15:37:54
This is also related to my other agenda topic I hope we can cover today 🙂
<@amoloney:fedora.im>
15:38:13
so speaking of that....here is the first clarification the forgejo development team needs from council
<@amoloney:fedora.im>
15:39:03
It has been said we (fedora) will *not* offer general project hosting. Instead, in order to host your project on our git platform, your project must serve the Fedora Project in some way
<@amoloney:fedora.im>
15:39:08
is this a true statement?
<@jflory7:fedora.im>
15:39:35
Oh, great question
<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>
15:39:38
whoa, what?
<@jflory7:fedora.im>
15:39:48
I have an opinion
<@mattdm:fedora.im>
15:40:02
I don't think we want to get into the business of strictly policing that
<@jflory7:fedora.im>
15:40:04
Hard and firm policy? No, we do not want the job of deciding whether something is Fedora-related or not
<@jflory7:fedora.im>
15:40:16
Guidelines and advice? Yes. Projects should serve the Linux ecosystem in some form.
<@amoloney:fedora.im>
15:40:28
I like this sentiment
<@jflory7:fedora.im>
15:40:29
We should be clear that projects that serve the needs of Fedora and upstream Linux are the priority
<@mattdm:fedora.im>
15:40:47
Yeah that
<@jflory7:fedora.im>
15:40:50
We are not going to prioritize an open source Windows game's needs for a git hosting platform
<@jflory7:fedora.im>
15:41:04
But we would want to listen to say, NetworkManager or the Design Team as stakeholders
<@mattdm:fedora.im>
15:41:25
Upstream Linuxy software, to be clear. Not strictly Linux Kernel
<@jflory7:fedora.im>
15:41:30
Also, maybe we _should_ say FOSS only?
<@jflory7:fedora.im>
15:41:37
That one could be spicy
<@jflory7:fedora.im>
15:41:42
But seems easy and practical for Fedora
<@jflory7:fedora.im>
15:41:43
IDL
<@jflory7:fedora.im>
15:41:45
IDK
<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>
15:41:46
that one was already the rule
<@jflory7:fedora.im>
15:41:50
Maybe the FPCA covers this sufficiently
<@jflory7:fedora.im>
15:41:53
Oh.
<@jflory7:fedora.im>
15:41:55
TIL 😛
<@jbrooks:matrix.org>
15:42:07
This might work better as a written proposal to process and discuss
<@jflory7:fedora.im>
15:42:13
Now is a good opportunity to reaffirm whether we want a rule or not
<@jflory7:fedora.im>
15:42:18
Actually, yes
<@jflory7:fedora.im>
15:42:32
Could the Initiative owners be put to task on drafting this as part of the Initiative?
<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>
15:42:33
it wasn't enforced because we didn't force FPCA flow for pagure.io
<@mattdm:fedora.im>
15:42:38
Good call — this is down in the details.
<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>
15:42:39
but it was already a rule
<@jflory7:fedora.im>
15:42:42
I don't think the Council should own drafting this, but we should review this
<@amoloney:fedora.im>
15:43:24
this is why I am asking, to both debunk any notions that might accidentally become canon, and reaffirm what we expect from our new project hosting service
<@jbrooks:matrix.org>
15:44:00
I don't see any rules at pagure.io
<@amoloney:fedora.im>
15:44:07
No I dont think thats fair on them
<@mattdm:fedora.im>
15:44:19
I kind of think the Council should own it, to shield the initiative from arguing about it
<@amoloney:fedora.im>
15:44:21
They are asking council for guidance
<@amoloney:fedora.im>
15:44:30
we should own it, 100%
<@amoloney:fedora.im>
15:44:37
this is literal project governance
<@jflory7:fedora.im>
15:45:01
Also, we are not Forgejo experts and it would be nice to have the context about features like license scanning or what tools could enforce this for us
<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>
15:45:08
they were present several iterations of the UI ago :/
<@amoloney:fedora.im>
15:45:13
I like Jason Brooks idea of creating a draft though for feedback
<@jflory7:fedora.im>
15:45:16
I would prefer a draft from the Initiative owners that covers 50% and the Council addresses the final 50%
<@jflory7:fedora.im>
15:45:24
I just think giving us this task of owning it is biting off more than we can chew
<@jflory7:fedora.im>
15:45:30
We have soooo many follow-ups from the Council hackfest
<@jflory7:fedora.im>
15:45:33
We need to delegate more somehow
<@jflory7:fedora.im>
15:45:54
I don't want these to suffer because git forge takes us off the rails yet again
<@amoloney:fedora.im>
15:45:55
This is literally the councils job though
<@jflory7:fedora.im>
15:46:18
Then we need to set a realistic deadline on when we think we can deliver it. I am not confident for F42, this is not that far away
<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>
15:46:34
then push back the deployment and migration dates
<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>
15:46:37
it's not that big of a deal to wait
<@amoloney:fedora.im>
15:46:59
tbh we dont even have to do that
<@amoloney:fedora.im>
15:47:20
we can continue with the deployment if we really want to, and bring in the project hosting guidance at a later stage
<@jflory7:fedora.im>
15:47:35
We _could_ submit something for Flock, like a roundtable or BoF
<@jflory7:fedora.im>
15:47:40
I mean, the CFP is open for one more week 😛
<@jflory7:fedora.im>
15:47:45
Or, just roll it into the Council panel
<@jflory7:fedora.im>
15:47:50
As a discussion topic
<@amoloney:fedora.im>
15:48:01
I dont see why we cant just take what we use for pagure, make some edits, propose it for feedback and see what comes back and agree to something
<@amoloney:fedora.im>
15:48:12
I do like this idea
<@jflory7:fedora.im>
15:48:14
I also admit to never knowing about these guidelines for Pagure
<@jflory7:fedora.im>
15:48:21
I would contend that they are not as understood as we think they are
<@jflory7:fedora.im>
15:48:29
And I have been here 10 years and I am saying that 😛
<@jbrooks:matrix.org>
15:48:42
that's a good start, the trick is finding those rules
<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>
15:48:48
the guidelines for gitlab.com/fedora are basically the same rules for pagure.io
<@jflory7:fedora.im>
15:48:56
Where are these rules though??
<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>
15:49:04
I dunno, you told me them :P
<@jflory7:fedora.im>
15:49:13
Me??? O.O
<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>
15:49:18
yup
<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>
15:49:24
when the gitlab.com/fedora namespace launched
<@amoloney:fedora.im>
15:49:24
yeah lets not reinvent things from scratch, lets pull together what we can find and see what works
<@jbrooks:matrix.org>
15:49:25
I'm trolling through the wayback machine, and I can't find them
<@mattdm:fedora.im>
15:49:28
I think the policy is just a matter of drafting and getting feedback.
<@amoloney:fedora.im>
15:49:51
So, my previous statement is NOT TRUE (phew)
<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>
15:49:57
oof
<@mattdm:fedora.im>
15:50:17
Aoife I can help after my otherwise homework :)
<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>
15:50:20
I think the only place it's currently written is actually copr 😅
<@jflory7:fedora.im>
15:50:24
Yeah, I mean, we can find the details as we move forward
<@conan_kudo:matrix.org>
15:50:30
everywhere else seems to be gone
<@jflory7:fedora.im>
15:50:33
It is not urgent to discuss it now
<@amoloney:fedora.im>
15:50:39
We, council, have some work to do on making sure we have project hosting guidelines in place for when Forgejo becomes a 'big deal'
<@jflory7:fedora.im>
15:50:42
But good to take inventory of this topic and register it as an important detail
<@jflory7:fedora.im>
15:50:53
+1, #agreed
<@amoloney:fedora.im>
15:51:28
mattdm: @amoloney and Jason Brooks will cobble together an initial draft of guidelines we feel could be suitable, and publish them for rounds of feedback on discourse
<@amoloney:fedora.im>
15:51:45
We expect this wont happen until mid-March or April realistically
<@amoloney:fedora.im>
15:52:09
does that sound ok? sorry Jason Brooks I pulled you in as you had some practical approaches :)
<@amoloney:fedora.im>
15:52:31
anyone else would like to have a hand in this, please let me know
<@amoloney:fedora.im>
15:53:09
Im going to make an agreed statement in a minute, so if anyone has any last minute objections please type them now
<@jflory7:fedora.im>
15:54:07
🌊
<@amoloney:fedora.im>
15:57:14
!agreed The Fedora Council will draft a guidance policy on project hosting in Fedoras new git platform. mattdm @amoloney and Jason Brooks will take existing policies from other project hosting sites such as gitlab, pagure, etc and publish something for feedback from the wider Fedora Community by April 2025. We are aiming for early April.
<@amoloney:fedora.im>
15:57:27
!topic Open Floor
<@amoloney:fedora.im>
15:57:45
I actually had another git forge thing, but thats enough excitement for one day :D
<@jflory7:fedora.im>
15:58:13
I would really like votes on this PR: https://pagure.io/Fedora-Council/council-docs/pull-request/244
<@jflory7:fedora.im>
15:58:27
I have been addressing community feedback all week, and I think it is a really good principle/philosophy doc
<@jflory7:fedora.im>
15:58:33
I hoped to get your votes on it today
<@mattdm:fedora.im>
15:58:47
Did we announce that the Flock cfp is extended? I saw the 23rd somewhere this morning still.
<@jflory7:fedora.im>
15:58:56
Aoife is helping me with this
<@amoloney:fedora.im>
15:59:15
Announcement coming later today 👍️
<@amoloney:fedora.im>
15:59:24
Closing date is now Monday March 3rd
<@amoloney:fedora.im>
15:59:36
and I will add my +1 vote to that ticket now JWW (@jflory7) [away until 2025-02-25]
<@jflory7:fedora.im>
15:59:45
TY TY
<@jbrooks:matrix.org>
15:59:54
I still need to read it -- is it just in screenshot format?
<@jflory7:fedora.im>
16:00:06
I can make a new screenshot if it helps
<@jflory7:fedora.im>
16:00:09
The changes are in AsciiDoc
<@jflory7:fedora.im>
16:00:21
https://pagure.io/fork/jflory7/Fedora-Council/council-docs/blob/b2bf857e2e481feae8818a960a7052351bead406/f/project/modules/ROOT/pages/upstream-first.adoc
<@mattdm:fedora.im>
16:01:14
Sheesh we need some kind of useful preview functionality. Screenshots are not a good way!
<@jflory7:fedora.im>
16:01:39
GitLab has this with CI 🌚
<@jflory7:fedora.im>
16:01:43
Pagure was always a pain
<@jflory7:fedora.im>
16:01:57
And I did ask about moving the Council docs to GitLab three years ago 😛
<@jflory7:fedora.im>
16:02:06
But I hope we can do this in Forgejo
<@jflory7:fedora.im>
16:02:09
🤞
<@salimma:fedora.im>
16:03:46
mattdm: JWW (@jflory7) [away until 2025-02-25] hi folks, are you going to be on much longer? I think Hyperscale has the meeting room now
<@salimma:fedora.im>
16:03:50
(we might want to relocate ours)
<@amoloney:fedora.im>
16:03:58
oops were done
<@amoloney:fedora.im>
16:04:00
!endmeeting