18:00:09 #startmeeting Board (2014-11-17) 18:00:09 Meeting started Mon Nov 17 18:00:09 2014 UTC. The chair is mattdm. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. 18:00:09 Useful Commands: #action #agreed #halp #info #idea #link #topic. 18:00:13 #meetingname board 18:00:13 The meeting name has been set to 'board' 18:00:39 #topic Informal chat with fedora council candidates 18:00:45 if anyone is around.... 18:01:02 we didn't, particularly, go out of our way to advertise this 18:01:08 :( 18:01:38 I'm working on getting the election interviews on the magazine now -- they came out really well 18:02:38 * randomuser is around, using phone IRC, looking for wifi 18:02:58 #chair gholms 18:02:58 Current chairs: gholms mattdm 18:03:00 hi randomuser! 18:03:16 * jreznik is here too :) hey all 18:03:24 hi jreznik! 18:03:58 my mini birthday party is over, so back to serious work :) 18:04:00 heya 18:04:14 jreznik: your b-day ? 18:04:44 #chair number80 18:04:44 Current chairs: gholms mattdm number80 18:05:08 jreznik does voting open at 00:00 UTC (eg in about 6 hours?) 18:05:12 number80: next Monday but the only day eveyrone had a free time 18:05:24 ok :) 18:05:37 mattdm: yep, in 6 hours 18:05:39 also happy birthday :) 18:05:45 thanks :) 18:06:16 jreznik's birthday is a national holiday in cz - happy birthday! 18:06:40 jreznik: what's the link to vote? 18:07:32 * jwb is here 18:07:44 #chair jwb 18:07:44 Current chairs: gholms jwb mattdm number80 18:08:11 misc: I know you're here 18:08:21 https://admin.fedoraproject.org/voting is the normal link to vote 18:08:22 #link https://admin.fedoraproject.org/voting 18:08:32 jreznik thanks. 18:09:09 so, is it just current board members and prospective council members here? 18:09:19 or do we have an audience? 18:09:37 any fedoristas could speak up :) 18:09:46 there's almost always an audience, they just don't speak up :P 18:09:59 advertise it on the other channels? 18:10:04 jreznik: sure 18:12:32 in absense of other questions I'm going to continue with a bit of administrivia 18:12:44 cla_done is accomplished by checking a box in FAS, right? 18:13:42 mattdm, been a while... at least, if you log in to FAS, it is in your TODO 18:14:02 I'm writing the header for the interviews. Wondering how much detail to put there. 18:14:05 Probably not very much. 18:14:17 So, anyway. :) 18:14:24 * jreznik copied anycla from other elections 18:14:25 Anyone want to talk about Firefox? :) 18:14:29 Certainly not if you're space-constrained 18:14:37 well, if someone is just now getting a FAS account and doing the CLA, they probably don't have time to get a +1 group for eligibility anyway 18:14:38 Ahhh, firefox. 18:14:42 gholms more... attention-span constrained 18:14:54 randomuser: we are not cla+1 18:14:55 randomuser this election is just cla_done, not +1, I think 18:15:00 ahhh. ok 18:16:02 we already set the default homepage; setting the default newtab to the same or to previous tabs would be trivial 18:16:21 ...not that anyone thinks it is a technical problem 18:16:45 Is there precedence for this already? 18:18:07 Does stuff like gnome-software already request things from non-fedora destinations when they first run, for instance? 18:18:15 heh 18:18:21 * gholms is honestly wondering, has no idea 18:18:36 oh - I wasn't going to bring it up, but yes 18:18:50 randomuser: the default homepage in f21 was changed to newtab -- based on our discussion I asked for it to be put back but it hasn't been yet 18:18:53 https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1157682 18:18:56 gnome-software has webapps for a handful of third party things 18:19:19 yeah, but those webapps are actually bundled into a package we ship 18:19:35 gholms, and iirc, all of the screenshots in appdata files are loaded from external resources 18:20:03 not exactly apropos, but there is *potential*, i suppose 18:20:15 Yeah, it's specifically requesting stuff from third parties that I'm wondering about. 18:20:45 the gnome-software website selection is, as I understand it, not actually advertising. package maintainers simply selected some sites that they think desktop users will like to see as easily accessible 18:21:15 That's awfully close to the definition of advertising. 18:21:20 yeah, I really wasn't going to bring it up 18:21:36 gholms well, except, there's no money from those sites. or agreement, even, I don't think 18:21:58 If that's where we want to draw the line then I'd be okay with that. 18:22:21 no; it's a reduced chrome epiphany session with a dedicated user profile 18:22:24 This is just something that we have to be very consistent with if we're going to make a ruling. 18:22:53 Remember when there was the big deal with Banshee and amazon affiliate links? Some other distributions changed those links to point to their own 18:22:54 number80: oops, yes 18:23:02 I think that we just left it 18:23:32 it seems most people don't especially object to advertising, it's the targeted nature of the advertising 18:23:46 yeah, banshee folks wanted that to be given to the GNOME foundation 18:23:55 That is, I don't think we removed that at all, so there are apps with profit-making advertisements in fedora and no one has to my knowledge raised it as an issue 18:23:56 we respected their choice 18:24:07 so this is similar; links which make money for mozilla 18:24:47 * gholms nods 18:24:54 well, the other issue is that some people do dislike the dependence on google for mozilla, so they try to do something about that, to divrsify their income 18:25:16 ( and they add already their share of heated discussion internally, i discussed with a guy there last week ) 18:25:33 Right. So this leaves the contact-mozilla-for-what-to-show issue 18:26:37 to me, this seems basically indistinguishable from whether they had left https://start.mozilla.org/ as the default for new tabs and started running the ads there 18:26:40 The fact that it's on the default new tab page, which is nearly impossible to avoid, worries me somewhat. IIRC, banshee doesn't send info anywhere like that without explicit action. 18:26:55 Oh yeah, that's true. 18:27:51 I'm mostly comfortable about this, as long as the type of data collected and the way it is used is unambiguous 18:28:12 i think this is just going to be another trend we have to deal with as upstream mozilla tries to fund itself and branch out to other platforms. they're going to do things that make them money and get them userbase on those platforms (and linux, but that seems to be a minor platform at the moment) 18:28:27 "minimal user data sanitized of personal information" is not an adequate elaboration for our users 18:28:29 I think we should just disable this by default 18:29:05 so i guess someone should contact them for clarification 18:29:07 mandatory advertisement is not something we should allow 18:29:33 number80, RFE: prompt for opt-in ? 18:29:51 I think it would be good to have relatively clear guidance here so we're not continually moving the goalposts 18:30:01 randomuser: as it currently is, it prompts for opt-out 18:30:03 prompt for opt-in is gonna be a bit ridiculous, like iphone activation with 20 screens :/ 18:30:08 randomuser: could be an option, I'd like to fund Mozilla but we ought to respect end-users privacy 18:30:39 from https://www.mozilla.org/en-US/privacy/firefox/, firefox already does a number of things that are not much different 18:30:41 for example: 18:30:46 To help display relevant snippets, Firefox sends Mozilla a monthly request to look up your location at a country level using your IP address. We then send that country level information back to Firefox, where it's stored locally. Firefox will then choose snippets to show you based on the locally stored country information. 18:30:48 * gholms hasn't seen that prompt before 18:30:52 Besides, disabling this option is a better choice than putting icecat by default as we keep promoting the firefox brand 18:31:03 gholms try a new profile with the new version 18:31:18 misc, nah, one sentence on top of the previously visited sites grid, "Do you want to help fund Mozilla by allowing curated links to appear on the new tabs page?" 18:31:36 randomuser: wikipedia still :) ? 18:31:38 style 18:32:17 yeah, that as a guideline leaves a lot of room to be distasteful 18:32:36 number80, there's the question of how much we can disable and still use the firefox brand though 18:32:54 I guess also any kind of popup should be discusse with mozilla, they did think about it, and they have designers thinking about that 18:32:56 jwb: yes 18:33:17 * randomuser starts a new firefox profile to see the opt-out firsthand 18:33:18 misc: they don't have the same constraint as us 18:33:50 when you install fedora workstation, you get firefox as default browser, you don't have a choice 18:33:51 number80: ie, they do not have the constraint of keeping the trust of their users ? 18:33:53 number80: Is it something one can explain to them, at least? 18:34:01 tried to screenshot the popup but the dialog goes away for me :) 18:34:15 oh, it's on with my normal profile, the suggests just aren't important enough to show up 18:34:17 misc: I trust Mozilla but some of our users don't want to see any advertisements 18:34:31 mattdm, `firefox -p --no-remote` 18:34:32 if Firefox was not the default browser, I wouldn't care 18:34:48 randomuser: no i mean while i'm trying to take the screenshot 18:34:53 oh, gotcha 18:35:03 but in any case, it is exactly what you see when you click the "what is this page" link 18:35:27 So, my main concern here is a blend of branding 18:35:41 I don't have a big issue with Firefox having sponsored links 18:35:49 But, they just say "Sponsored" 18:36:17 Since this is our default web browser, and probably most people's main interaction with Fedora... 18:36:50 it isn't so clear that "Sponsored" means something other than "Sponsored by Fedora" 18:37:03 (Hmmm let alone "sponsor_ing_ Fedora") 18:37:19 This is also my concern with the websites selected for gnome-software 18:37:31 These things both look strongly like Fedora endorsements 18:37:33 the "What is this page" dialog says 'sponsored by mozilla partners' - but who's going to remember that 18:38:22 For people who download Firefox as a separate application, this is a non-issue, of course. 18:38:39 I'm really not sure what the right answer is. 18:38:41 mattdm, well, the webapps more strongly appear as endorsements, IMO. Fedora is offering them $thing 18:39:01 firefox has a well established identity of it's own 18:39:09 * inode0 agrees with randomuser on this point 18:39:20 randomuser: have you seen the new wording? it seems to imply that less. but yes, I agree still. 18:39:30 * rdieter waves 18:39:37 I guess since that's a issue of how the user perceive the design, maybe we could ask to do a user survey ? 18:39:47 hi rdieter! 18:39:53 we don't have time for a user survey 18:40:13 not for f21, certainly 18:40:18 so we can be conservative and do a survey/studiy and then revisit ? 18:40:27 #topic Firefox's new tab page 18:40:34 there's plenty of signal on user perception; they have privacy concerns 18:40:39 (Better late than never) 18:40:41 #info this has been the topic for the last half hour :) 18:40:52 i don't think late is better than never on this one 18:41:02 misc: study is better than survey 18:41:10 I think we should strive to a private-by-default as much as secure-by-default 18:41:12 jwb: On the topic, not the survey 18:41:20 if we aren't going to change it for f21, changing it for f22 is fine but f21 is already getting a lot of extra press, etc. perceptions will already be set 18:41:25 mattdm: yeah, english is failling me to express the difference 18:41:46 first, check with Mozilla if disabling the feature will keep allowing us to use the brand, if yes, then discuss with them, if no, we should consider switching to another browser 18:42:06 ngh 18:42:07 for F21, it's too late 18:42:08 randomuser: I think there are two separate issues: the privacy concern, and the appearance of sponsorship/advocacy of things outside of our control 18:42:28 * randomuser nods 18:44:48 These things are going to appear in software that doesn't have as high of a profile as this over time. We may not notice immediately. Is this case special or are we addressing the broader question? 18:45:24 gholms: and, probably, already appears in software in Fedora in various places that just haven't gotten attention 18:45:45 I don't want to be so absolutist that we have to patch out the iccf donation thing in vi 18:45:46 * gholms nods 18:46:16 Opt-in things are a different story, IMO. 18:46:44 gholms the vim message comes up every time 18:47:03 gholms: or some of the times at random, more accurately 18:47:25 that's the product advertising itself, though 18:47:29 on the other hand, it is basically on an "about vim" page 18:47:54 yeah. If this were on an "about firefox" page, I wouldn't be concerned about the brand confusion issue 18:48:20 so this being the, uh, Boucilard, i'd rather focus on the broader question 18:48:32 one side effect of firefox is that it would give us number of users 18:48:39 fesco can deal with firefox once we decide what's acceptable 18:48:56 *nods* 18:48:56 not sure how we want that, but I feel this might matter 18:49:25 i mean... can i add a kernel patch that advertises the benefits of a RHEL subscription in terms of support that gets printed for every kernel crash? 18:49:36 or could ABRT do that? 18:49:36 jwb++ 18:50:01 * misc need to leave the building 18:50:22 best way to encourage people disabling it :) 18:50:41 but is it allowed? 18:51:08 Does it send data to third parties by default? 18:51:22 proposal: referral based revenue generators SHOULD be off by default. Package maintainers MUST work with upstream to attempt to accommodate this. Any Fedora user MAY raise the issue of a package's advertising to the council for selective review. 18:51:42 gholms: no, but to be honest, the whole "asking to user" is a bit misleading, because most will happyly send information without reviews 18:51:49 like env vars with aws keys 18:51:54 randomuser: by default is too restrictive 18:51:54 gholms, is that the deciding factor? "ads are OK as long as they don't send data to 3rd parties"? 18:52:04 core dump with password ( I never upload evolution crash due to that ) 18:52:27 jwb: It is if your only concern is privacy. But this is convolved with anti-ad concerns, too. 18:52:34 I was mostly trying to get the 'referral' designation in there 18:52:35 default packages should *not*, but we should be less restrictive for other packages installed by users 18:52:43 randomuser: does that include the firefox tiles? 18:52:47 referral marketing is as much about user data as exposure 18:52:53 gholms, then i guess we need to figure out if we're talking about ads, "no call home" policy, or both 18:53:13 jwb: Indeed. 18:53:20 which, afaik, there is NO "no call home" policy 18:53:26 jwb: I think we need to talk about both, but draw them separately 18:53:27 mattdm, it's a sponsored link; mozilla gets paid because they referred you 18:53:37 there are probably more correct SEO terms 18:53:42 mattdm, sure, i'm asking what we're trying to talk about righ tnow 18:54:02 * gholms needs to depart in five minutes 18:54:19 jwb: the abrt question seems like the sponsorship one, not the privacy one 18:54:36 hm. people are dropping 18:55:02 jwb yeah. there's still a big devel-list thread 18:55:19 when does the council vote conclue? 18:55:22 er, conclude? 18:55:43 jwb: Nov 26 18:55:46 So, with the new council forming next week I just want to be clear that we aren't looking for a decision before then on any of this are we? Seems to me they should decide it. 18:55:49 at 00:00 18:56:11 inode0, yeah, that's why i was asking 18:56:22 and i'd agree. this should probably wait for a council decision 18:56:29 which leads us to "do nothing immediately for firefox" 18:56:34 inode0: mostly. however, if we feel like we need a change in Firefox before the ship date, the 26th is too late 18:56:44 mattdm, it's already too late 18:57:03 final freeze is tomorrow 18:57:18 * randomuser balks 18:57:19 i don't think we're going to come to conclusion by tomorrow, and get a package built and tested by then 18:57:24 jwb: yes, although presumably a freeze exception _could_ be made. 18:57:29 true 18:57:29 I agree that it's basically too late 18:57:34 If we ask for it, sure. 18:57:48 I don't think there's enough clarity to make a rush decision 18:58:18 +1 18:59:12 * randomuser has an autoconfig deployment setup and will test if off-by-default with a new profile still shows the explanation balloon 18:59:27 because I'm curious 18:59:50 randomuser okay :) 19:00:02 and, I guess... let's close this for now and continue discussion on the mailing lists 19:00:10 worksforme 19:00:18 I have to go now. Thanks, all. 19:00:48 bye everyone! 19:03:13 bye 19:09:39 alright, I'm getting back on the road now 19:09:46 * randomuser & 19:14:29 #endmeeting