16:00:16 <sesivany> #startmeeting FAmSCo 2014-09-02
16:00:16 <zodbot> Meeting started Tue Sep  2 16:00:16 2014 UTC.  The chair is sesivany. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.
16:00:16 <zodbot> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #halp #info #idea #link #topic.
16:00:18 <sesivany> #meetingname famsco
16:00:18 <zodbot> The meeting name has been set to 'famsco'
16:00:21 <sesivany> #topic Roll Call
16:00:26 <sesivany> .fas eischmann
16:00:28 <zodbot> sesivany: eischmann 'Jiri Eischmann' <eischmann@redhat.com>
16:00:28 <yn1v> .fas yn1v
16:00:30 <zodbot> yn1v: yn1v 'Neville A. Cross' <yn1v@taygon.com>
16:00:35 <sesivany> robyduck: ping
16:01:56 <sesivany> masta: ping
16:02:16 <cwickert> .fac cwickert
16:02:19 <cwickert> .fas cwickert
16:02:20 <sesivany> #info Tuanta sent regrets
16:02:20 <zodbot> cwickert: cwickert 'Christoph Wickert' <christoph.wickert@gmail.com>
16:03:31 <sesivany> let's wait for a few more minutes...
16:04:45 <robyduck> .fas robyduck
16:04:46 <zodbot> robyduck: robyduck 'Robert Mayr' <robyduck@gmail.com>
16:04:57 <sesivany> great, we have a quorum.
16:05:10 <sesivany> #topic Inactive Ambassadors
16:05:25 <sesivany> this is a topic you started last week.
16:05:41 <sesivany> cwickert: did you get in touch with kital? AFAIK he's on holidays.
16:05:59 <cwickert> sesivany: yes, I think he is
16:06:55 <sesivany> cwickert: ok
16:07:08 <robyduck> so we should postpone this topic
16:07:22 <sesivany> IMHO that paragraph is not aligned with what we agreed on and promised to the community.
16:07:32 <cwickert> sesivany: big +1
16:07:42 <robyduck> sesivany: which paragraph
16:07:43 <cwickert> this was done with a different usecase in mind
16:07:47 <sesivany> we said no one would be removed completely after being flagged inactive.
16:07:55 <cwickert> robyduck: revoking group membeship etc
16:07:56 <robyduck> aha, yes
16:08:48 <sesivany> so using this paragraph to remove people who've been flagged inactive looks like a mean trick.
16:09:01 <sesivany> but let's wait for kital's clarification.
16:09:21 <robyduck> the usecase I put into the paragraph is what we promised, it's just hitting the paragraph before, right?
16:10:18 <cwickert> robyduck: do you have a link at hand again?
16:10:30 <robyduck> was just searching it right now...
16:10:48 <robyduck> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Ambassadors/MembershipService#Inactive_Ambassadors
16:10:55 <sesivany> robyduck: yeah, we just need to clarify that the process for removing ambassadors is not used after flagging them inactive.
16:11:16 <robyduck> ok, let's hear first kital then
16:11:37 <sesivany> this is a problem: FAS Account is inactive longer than 6 month
16:11:56 <robyduck> +1
16:11:57 <sesivany> this effectively means we automatically remove them after 24 months.
16:12:13 <sesivany> which is not what we promised.
16:12:51 <yn1v> I am no 100% but I remember that fas accounts are not deleted
16:13:04 <robyduck> not deleted
16:13:06 <sesivany> do you have an idea what "Mentor no longer supports his Mentee" means?
16:13:30 <sesivany> does it mean that if you ever mentor someone you can always take the membership from him/her?
16:13:34 <robyduck> yn1v: we can't delete FAS accounts. They would loose membership
16:14:02 <yn1v> in the other hand we are setting only ambassador status, not the whole account. Or I got this wrong?
16:14:03 <robyduck> sesivany: I don't get this point too
16:14:28 <sesivany> if it's been written by kital we really need to wait for him to clarify it.
16:15:20 <sesivany> #info FAmSCo will wait for kital to return from holidays to clarify Removal Process for Ambassador's Membership.
16:15:42 <sesivany> anything else to this topic?
16:15:57 <robyduck> from me not
16:16:33 <sesivany> ok, do you have any other topic to discuss before I start a topic which I think is important?
16:16:48 * cwickert is a bit busy, so please go ahead
16:17:02 <robyduck> we have the ticket for moodoo
16:17:25 <robyduck> and also mentoring process
16:18:01 <cwickert> robyduck: which one is the one from moodoo?
16:18:02 <sesivany> robyduck: that's Paul Mellors?
16:18:09 <robyduck> yep sesivany
16:18:21 <cwickert> I don't see it at https://fedorahosted.org/famsco/report/9
16:18:31 <sesivany> #topic Paul Mellor to become a mentor again
16:18:32 <robyduck> .famsco 367
16:18:32 <zodbot> https://fedorahosted.org/famsco/ticket/367
16:19:03 <robyduck> cwickert: I also went out this ticket to the mentors list
16:19:20 <cwickert> then please document the feedback in the ticket
16:19:21 <robyduck> but nobody, except Zoltan, replied
16:19:30 <sesivany> robyduck: yeah, it didn't get a lot of attention there.
16:19:35 <robyduck> so I'd say: no feedback
16:20:14 <cwickert> is the list dead? https://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/mentors/ doesn't list anything in the last 4 months
16:20:27 <robyduck> it's fama-mentors IIRC
16:20:29 <sesivany> this is why I think FAmSCo should vote about new mentors because we meet on a regular basis and we can actually make a decision.
16:20:48 <robyduck> https://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/fama-mentors/2014-September/000055.html
16:21:00 <robyduck> sesivany: +1
16:21:35 <cwickert> robyduck: I think you should not have written "if you don't reply"
16:21:40 <robyduck> staying on the actual attention/votes between mentors, the ticket should be rejected, so I'm in favour of what you're saying sesivany
16:21:58 <cwickert> because we don't know who wants to reject or who is just lazy
16:22:10 <cwickert> I think we really should record the votes somehow
16:22:57 <cwickert> please have a look at https://fedorahosted.org/packager-sponsors/ticket/144
16:23:13 <cwickert> this is how we do it with sponsors: nice and clean and quick
16:23:22 <robyduck> cwickert: well, I wrote that because we need votes there, and a non-vote is a -1 IMHO
16:23:52 * robyduck looks
16:24:05 <cwickert> so, the lack of responses can mean two things
16:24:07 <cwickert> actually 3
16:24:11 <cwickert> 1. people are lazy
16:24:20 <cwickert> 2. people don't want him as mentor
16:24:30 <cwickert> 3. our process does not work
16:24:41 <robyduck> cwickert: +1
16:24:50 <yn1v> 4 = 1+3
16:24:52 <cwickert> so is it our process or is it the mentors being inactive?
16:25:22 <cwickert> maybe we should ask the mentors what they need? what process fits them best?
16:26:11 <sesivany> cwickert: I haven't voted because I haven't gotten to that. But even if I'm busy I kick myself to attend the meeting which is why it's better to vote about it at meetings. It's quicker and cleaner.
16:26:48 <cwickert> sesivany: do the mentors meet regularly?
16:27:04 <robyduck> we also need to describe this much better and get it out clear to all mentors what the process of new mentors is.
16:27:07 <yn1v> not that I am aware of any meeting
16:27:17 <sesivany> cwickert: no, my opinion is that FamSCo should vote about that because FAmSCo meets regularly.
16:27:18 <cwickert> sesivany: so what meeting are you talking about?
16:27:22 <robyduck> no there arenìt any meetings
16:27:48 <sesivany> mentors don't and votings will IMHO tend to end up like this one.
16:28:08 <cwickert> I am a bit clueless here
16:28:32 <cwickert> I mean, how did the mentors previously handle the process?
16:28:56 <cwickert> I recall we appointed some new mentors at FUDCon Paris with a ticket in famsco trac
16:29:12 <sesivany> cwickert: so do I.
16:29:21 <cwickert> we had some mentors and some famsco people there, so we could just raise hands
16:29:35 <cwickert> the ticket was only for documentation
16:29:54 <cwickert> and this is what we really need. we need to make sure we know who became a mentor when
16:30:05 <robyduck> cwickert: yes, you did so, and you did it as FAmSCo member. So the process was that mentors (or a FAmSCo member) can propose new mentors, these need to be appointed by FAmSCo voting.
16:30:31 <sesivany> cwickert: that's why my proposal for the formal process was: 1. nomination by a mentor, 2. voted and appointed by FAmSCo, that's it, clear and quick.
16:31:26 <yn1v> so, the mentor get the feedback from region when he/she ask for a new mentor
16:31:58 <cwickert> yn1v: but that would be the ambassadors, not the mentors
16:32:33 <yn1v> I mean in #1 nomination by mentor ...
16:32:58 <yn1v> the mentor has to build the case, with the request from ambassadors and the feedback from region
16:33:14 <cwickert> sesivany: I generally think that we should try to make decisions on the lowest level. The mentors are a sub-group of the ambassadors and famsco is the head. so for me it is clear that first the mentors need to agree, and if an individual mentor can nominate someone, we cannot be sure the others are find with this
16:34:34 <sesivany> cwickert: yeah, but I'm not sure that mentors is a group that is used to making decisions. Looks like most of them just don't care or don't have a time for it.
16:34:47 <robyduck> cwickert: how would you let mentors agree? In a ticket? Or would it end up as now with moodoo?
16:34:57 <sesivany> moreover FAmSCo usually consists of mentors and representatives of regions.
16:35:30 <yn1v> there is no formal process, it end up by famsco validating what a region request
16:35:50 <cwickert> robyduck: I don't care about the tool, it can be a meeting with meeting minutes, a mailing list, a ticket, whatever, as long as it is documented
16:36:14 <robyduck> and as long people vote there :/
16:36:28 <cwickert> yn1v: can you please elaborate your proposal? or better: document it in the ticket, step by step?
16:36:49 <yn1v> sure
16:36:53 <cwickert> I made a proposal in the ticket and we have discussed it, but have not come to a conclusion
16:37:12 <cwickert> it seems that my proposal does not work, as the case of moodoo illustrates
16:37:41 <cwickert> I think the logical step is to collect proposals in the ticket instead of discussing this over and over again here in the meetings
16:38:02 <sesivany> cwickert: do you have a link to it?
16:38:15 <robyduck> cwickert: or perhaps we need just to describe your proposal clearly and make sure it will get out to all mentors?
16:38:25 <sesivany> but I think I've already written mine there.
16:38:27 <cwickert> https://fedorahosted.org/famsco/ticket/366
16:39:29 <cwickert> robyduck: I'm sorry, I cannot follow. my proposal is in the ticket and I have explained it several times. what else can I do?
16:39:52 <cwickert> please note I am not a mentor and therefor not on the mentors list
16:39:59 <robyduck> cwickert: no, I'm not saying that.
16:40:03 <cwickert> therefor I cannot bring up the topic there
16:40:39 <cwickert> so someone from famsco needs to reach out to the mentors and explain them what we are doing and why we are doing it
16:40:54 <robyduck> If we agree on that maybe we need to write it clearly in a wiki page and comunicate this new process to all mentors. Maybe they will be more active when asked for votes?
16:40:55 <sesivany> have we even gathered any feedback on the proposal from mentors? I think we tried, but no response :/
16:41:11 <robyduck> sesivany: indeed
16:41:38 <sesivany> robyduck: we haven't even voted about, so we can't really put it on the wiki.
16:41:39 <cwickert> big +1
16:41:49 <cwickert> rgh
16:41:56 <cwickert> are we running in circles?
16:41:59 <robyduck> yep
16:42:02 <robyduck> :)
16:42:11 <cwickert> so who wanted to bring this up? tuanta?
16:42:15 <sesivany> vicious circles :)
16:42:21 <robyduck> yes tuanta
16:42:42 <cwickert> https://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/fama-mentors/2014-July/000046.html
16:42:53 <cwickert> he actually did, but with little feedback
16:42:58 <cwickert> I will give it another try
16:43:17 <cwickert> #action cwickert to reach out to the mentors list again with our propsal
16:43:43 <yn1v> I have to said that I have been not active lately as a mentor. But I see the process to become a mentor a very informal and without structure
16:43:43 <cwickert> the question is: what suggestions should I make?
16:44:12 <yn1v> every time is a case by case scenario, not taking into account previous processes
16:45:05 <sesivany> we should clearly ask mentors if they even want to make such decisions. If not, and are ok with delegating it to famsco I'd rather make the voting in famsco.
16:45:28 <yn1v> i suggest to bring attention from mentor by direct email
16:45:40 <sesivany> because I still think that mentors is not a group designed and used to making decisions.
16:45:43 <cwickert> ok, I will try
16:45:51 <yn1v> and there we can move the conversation to the mailing list
16:45:52 <cwickert> sesivany: fair enough,
16:46:04 <robyduck> sesivany: yes, good point
16:46:13 <cwickert> if they don't want to make this decision, we are not forcing them
16:46:22 <cwickert> ok, anything else on this?
16:46:31 <cwickert> or back to Paul?
16:46:38 <sesivany> yep
16:46:38 <cwickert> or continue with something different?
16:46:44 * lbazan here
16:47:03 <sesivany> cwickert: not sure if we can proceed with it now though :/
16:47:04 * cwickert is a bit under pressure and thinks we should hurry. sesivany has something important he says
16:47:33 * lbazan sorry for the delay!
16:47:44 <sesivany> should we postpone it to the next week?
16:47:49 <cwickert> sesivany: well, if we followed the old/current process, we can. A single mentor is enough to nominate somebody, so we just need to confirm him
16:47:50 <sesivany> robyduck: or is it urgent?
16:47:54 <robyduck> sesivany: we should or vote or postpone the ticket
16:47:59 <robyduck> not I don't think so
16:48:04 <sesivany> cwickert: ok then
16:48:05 <robyduck> no*
16:48:12 <robyduck> let's move on
16:48:15 <cwickert> ok
16:48:30 <sesivany> postponing to the next meeting then?
16:48:31 <cwickert> #agreed postpone #367 until we have more feedback from mentors
16:48:38 <sesivany> ok
16:48:58 <sesivany> I'd like us to discuss this:
16:49:06 <sesivany> #topic F21 media
16:49:27 <sesivany> we need to decide what kind of media we want to ship for F21.
16:49:43 <sesivany> because this is highly affected by Fedora.Next.
16:49:51 <sesivany> we now have the products.
16:50:22 <sesivany> we have historically produced Multidesktop Live DVD in most regions.
16:51:00 <sesivany> another question is if we want to try a different type of media, because DVDs are slowly dying.
16:51:17 <sesivany> any opinions on that?
16:51:40 <sesivany> I think it's clear that the cloud product is out of question for this kind of distribution.
16:52:04 <robyduck> I'm still +1 for DVDs (costs less, big storage)
16:52:15 <sesivany> Workstation is what we probably want to distribute for sure, and Server?
16:52:23 <cwickert> sesivany: did you attend my talk at FLOCK?
16:52:50 <sesivany> cwickert: which one?
16:52:54 * robyduck needs to watch the video...
16:52:58 <cwickert> sesivany: "Fate of spins"
16:53:10 <cwickert> we discussed exactly this question
16:53:15 <sesivany> cwickert: I had to leave both of them earlier because of organizational stuff :-/
16:53:32 <cwickert> ok, I think we want the multi-desktop DVD
16:53:52 <cwickert> only that Fedora Live is replaced with the Fedora Workstation
16:54:02 <cwickert> we need to check if there is still sufficient space
16:54:07 <robyduck> cwickert: +1
16:54:20 <cwickert> and if not, I am happy to drop sugar or so
16:54:35 <cwickert> or maybe even LXDE
16:54:42 * cwickert will make some tests
16:55:01 <sesivany> cwickert: but it kinda contradicts the whole idea because you pretty much lose a clear product if you mix it with all kinds of others spins.
16:55:26 <cwickert> sesivany: the alternative is to only ship workstation and server
16:55:37 <sesivany> cwickert: I'm by no means against other flavors of Fedora, just saying the whole product message gets lost with the multidesktop DVD.
16:55:39 <cwickert> and both are too big for a CD I think
16:55:52 <cwickert> so in the end, we are wasting a lot of space
16:56:09 <cwickert> or we would have one server + workstation DVD
16:56:31 <robyduck> maybe better together
16:56:35 <yn1v> I agree with both ... it dilute the product messaage and it is a waste of space
16:56:42 <robyduck> but CLoud?
16:56:48 <cwickert> robyduck: that's what I wanted to say
16:56:55 <sesivany> cwickert: I understand that from a technical point of view multidesktop DVD is the most economical solution, but it is also about branding and marketing.
16:56:55 <lbazan> yn1v: +1
16:56:55 <cwickert> robyduck: no cloud.
16:56:59 <robyduck> I mean, we need to be equal
16:57:23 <cwickert> robyduck: there is no usecase for a cloud image on an iso. it will not even work I'm afraid
16:57:26 <robyduck> if we exclude cloud we are saying cloud is less important, don't we?
16:57:32 <sesivany> does anyone install a server OS from a DVD?
16:57:33 <robyduck> ok
16:57:40 <cwickert> it's not like there is a live version of the cloud, this is for deployments only
16:57:43 <robyduck> cwickert: then it's fine
16:58:02 * masta looks in
16:58:04 <sesivany> robyduck: I don't think anyone ever installs an OS in the cloud from a DVD.
16:58:08 <masta> hello, sry I'm late
16:58:12 <robyduck> so a multi-DVD workstation+server
16:58:21 <yn1v> it was said so in flock, cloud product is no deliverable by media
16:58:26 <cwickert> sesivany: I think so, but I don't know how frequent this is
16:58:55 <lbazan> sesivany: I use images in my case ...
16:58:56 <yn1v> In regions with bad internet, servers are installed from DVD
16:58:57 <cwickert> robyduck: I can give that a try
16:59:01 <sesivany> yn1v: +1
16:59:02 <lbazan> yn1v: +1
16:59:08 <robyduck> cwickert: cool
16:59:20 <sesivany> ok, server then makes sense.
16:59:41 <cwickert> ok, I will make test composes for one multi with server and workstation and one for workstation + desktop spins. lets see where we end up space-wise
16:59:50 <robyduck> cwickert: actually both images are about 3.2-3.3 GB
16:59:56 <cwickert> uh
17:00:00 * cwickert looks
17:00:09 <sesivany> I also think this is not a discussion only for us, we should reach to the particular working groups. I think they may know better how their products are used.
17:00:18 <robyduck> I know it because I upadted stg website with the image sizes
17:00:55 <cwickert> robyduck: where is that page?
17:01:00 <yn1v> I think that also we should reach marketing to see what they think about the products
17:01:07 <sesivany> if the server working group says: neh, we don't need the server product on a DVD, then I think we should consider it.
17:01:33 <sesivany> yn1v: yes, marketing group and working groups was what I had in mind.
17:02:09 <cwickert> right, let's get back to marketing for a moment
17:02:23 <cwickert> I think we should look at this from a marketing perspective
17:02:38 <cwickert> and I think sesivany brought up an important point
17:03:00 <cwickert> Fedora.next is something new and we should underline that message with the media we distribure
17:03:05 <cwickert> distribute*
17:03:07 <yn1v> the question to server working group is to know what the see as deliverable for their product
17:03:23 <cwickert> yn1v: I can ask Steven
17:03:24 <yn1v> *they see
17:03:33 <sesivany> cwickert: +1
17:03:44 <masta> I'm pretty sure they asked releng to produce a dvd
17:03:53 <masta> server-wg
17:04:08 <masta> the workstation group wanted only usb stick, which really means a dvd also
17:04:23 <cwickert> ok, dowloading the images
17:04:43 <cwickert> robyduck: where was the website with the image sizes?
17:04:43 <robyduck> :)
17:04:49 <sesivany> masta: I spoke with Christian and they would prefer usb sticks to DVDs, but the question is if it's economically viable.
17:05:01 <cwickert> sesivany: nope, it is not
17:05:04 <robyduck> https://stg.fedoraproject.org/en/get-prerelease
17:05:29 <masta> sesivany: usb-stick actually entails a DVD image, which is all the usb actually is... so it's silly.
17:05:30 <robyduck> Image sizes are just under the download button for server and workstation
17:05:30 <sesivany> cwickert: I'm checking the prices and unfortunately usb sticks are still 10x more expensive than DVDs :-/
17:05:31 <cwickert> sesivany: as I am part of the WG, I can bring this topic up. This will allow me at least to do something positive ;)
17:05:55 <masta> sesivany: producing DVD is much cheaper than usb, but the usb is better swag.
17:07:01 <yn1v> there is any metric about how many 32bit computers have more that the minimal ram requirement?
17:07:15 <sesivany> the problem with DVDs I see is that I have a feeling that most people in EMEA take them just to have something memorable, or add it to their collection. How many of you have installed Fedora from a DVD recently? Most new laptops don't even have the DVD drive.
17:07:42 <sesivany> cwickert: please bring it up there.
17:07:59 <masta> sesivany: agree, DVD media is on a gradual decline.
17:08:11 <yn1v> If I install at home I use a DVD, but use net install at the office ... it is a network based decision
17:08:24 <cwickert> even if DVDs are on the decline, I consider it the only option
17:08:27 <sesivany> so DVDs are still much much cheaper, but the question is if they still serve the fuction: being an installation media.
17:08:42 <masta> actual DVD media, the iso9660 format is still very strong, and we still have to produce the ISO files.... but we can choose to not produce a mutli-desktop or whatever
17:09:02 <cwickert> I mean, if we are complaining that people just take the DVDs to have something in their hands, even if they don't need it, they will take the USB keys for sure.
17:09:13 <cwickert> and probably wipe and reuse them
17:09:15 <cwickert> :(
17:09:25 <masta> cwickert: that is a negative, yes.
17:10:05 <sesivany> cwickert: there is one more option: to have usb-stick creator machines. You bring your own stick and leave with Fedora on it.
17:10:11 <masta> or is that really negative, the Fedroa branding is still there... and if the USB is soooo small that it is not useful except as Fedora install medium... say 4 GiB
17:10:34 <sesivany> cwickert: was it openSUSE who had such a machine?
17:11:15 <masta> sesivany: we have such a machine in NA, expensive. Such a machine could be setup as a kiosk and made from a cheap laptop.
17:11:35 <masta> great idea
17:11:38 <yn1v> I see having a machine as a good option for Europe or USA, but dealing with customs for a temporary import will be a pain
17:11:55 <cwickert> sesivany: well, they have studio, which is where you can build your own distro and burn it do disk
17:12:02 <cwickert> yn1v: +1
17:12:07 <sesivany> yn1v: I think in LATAM and APAC DVDs are still important and relevant.
17:12:20 <masta> but people are not into the idea of bring a keychain of usb sticks and walk away with Linux distro. Better to provide them until we reach the day people know to bring their own.
17:12:21 <robyduck> sesivany: +1
17:12:21 <cwickert> we did have image burning stations and the feedback was not very positive
17:12:39 <cwickert> people did not want to wait 3 minutes for their stick to be ready
17:12:50 <robyduck> indeed, that's true
17:12:58 <yn1v> sesivany, and Africa
17:13:03 <sesivany> cwickert: ok, it was just an idea, let's drop it.
17:13:47 <sesivany> so what's the conclusion? We should ask the server working group if they want the product on DVD
17:13:52 <cwickert> right
17:14:05 <sesivany> anyone in the server working group?
17:14:09 <masta> we should still investigate regional suppliers of cheap 4 GiB usb sticks in each of the regions.
17:14:16 <yn1v> and ask marketing their view on multi desktop
17:14:19 <masta> prices only go down.
17:14:25 <cwickert> sesivany: we can still try it, but we need some kind of cool hardware to attract people ;)
17:14:33 <cwickert> sesivany: I will ask server as well
17:14:45 <sesivany> cwickert: thanks a lot!
17:14:58 <cwickert> #action cwickert to ask both Server and Workstation WG for their input on media for distribution
17:15:22 <yn1v> who is active in marketing?
17:15:34 <sesivany> yn1v: me, I can bring it up there.
17:15:41 <cwickert> ok, I need to run now. I'll leave my laptop in the office downloading F21 alpha TC5 all night
17:16:03 <robyduck> thanks cwickert
17:16:14 <sesivany> #action sesivany to ask the marketing group about their opinion on F21 media
17:16:22 <cwickert> thanks sesivany
17:16:38 <sesivany> ok, I think we're done today anyway.
17:16:53 <cwickert> btw: I really want to look at this from a marketing perspective. maybe we can still make an "alternative DVD" for the desktops, but I want the strong message out
17:17:04 <cwickert> and focus on the products
17:17:56 <cwickert> disclaimer: some contributors and users might be pissed, but I think we have to do it, at least for F21. if it turns out to be a disaster, we can go back for F22
17:18:05 <sesivany> cwickert: that's exactly my opinion. We need to have clear product media, but if there is enough interest and demand we can produce "Other flavors of Fedora" kind of media.
17:18:15 <cwickert> +1
17:18:38 <yn1v> +1
17:18:46 <sesivany> it will be more expensive than producing one media, but IMHO worth it.
17:19:28 <sesivany> ok, I think everything has been said, we're over time.
17:19:55 <sesivany> thank you for coming today and meet you next week!
17:20:01 <sesivany> #endmeeting