15:00:52 <robyduck> #startmeeting FAmSCo 2017-05-03
15:00:52 <zodbot> Meeting started Wed May  3 15:00:52 2017 UTC.  The chair is robyduck. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.
15:00:52 <zodbot> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #halp #info #idea #link #topic.
15:00:52 <zodbot> The meeting name has been set to 'famsco_2017-05-03'
15:00:57 <robyduck> #meetingname famsco
15:00:57 <zodbot> The meeting name has been set to 'famsco'
15:01:00 <robyduck> #topic Roll Call
15:01:04 <robyduck> .hello robyduck
15:01:06 <zodbot> robyduck: robyduck 'Robert Mayr' <robyduck@gmail.com>
15:01:27 <itamarjp> .hello itamarjp
15:01:27 <robyduck> #chair mailga jonatoni giannisk fredlima itamarjp
15:01:27 <zodbot> Current chairs: fredlima giannisk itamarjp jonatoni mailga robyduck
15:01:27 <zodbot> itamarjp: itamarjp 'Itamar Reis Peixoto' <itamar@ispbrasil.com.br>
15:01:38 <mailga> .hello mailga
15:01:39 <zodbot> mailga: mailga 'Gabriele Trombini' <g.trombini@gmail.com>
15:01:40 <fredlima> .fas fredlima
15:01:42 <zodbot> fredlima: fredlima 'Frederico Henrique Gonçalves Lima' <fred@fredericolima.com.br>
15:02:16 <giannisk> .fas giannisk
15:02:16 <zodbot> giannisk: giannisk 'Giannis Konstantinidis' <giannis@konstantinidis.cc>
15:02:19 <robyduck> welcome all
15:02:59 <robyduck> #info lailah sent regrets
15:03:27 <robyduck> seems jonatoni is not aroud, so let's start
15:03:44 <robyduck> #topic Mentor availability
15:04:02 <robyduck> giannisk: this is your topic ;)
15:04:43 <robyduck> I am not sure what the response was, but we need to update the wiki page and then lock it
15:05:32 <robyduck> the process would then be, if mentors get unavailable we will update the wiki page asking for unlocking (nb volunteered to handle that as wikiadmin)
15:06:12 <robyduck> giannisk: can you resume a bit?
15:06:34 <giannisk> I wanted to say that the last weeks have been very time-demanding for me.
15:06:50 <giannisk> And will probably remain the same until the end of June.
15:07:34 <robyduck> ok
15:07:42 <giannisk> Which is why I have been less focused on those assignments. Apologies for the inconvenience, but it seems I would appreciate If someone else can step up and undertake those activities.
15:08:20 <robyduck> giannisk: only you have the outcome of the emails
15:09:08 <robyduck> maybe you can make a list of those who replied that they are still active and of those who want to step back.
15:09:21 <giannisk> I will generally be available during the meetings and will participate in all votings whenever needed, I just won't be able to take any more tasks until the end of June.
15:09:22 <robyduck> the others should be all unavailable, right?
15:09:54 <giannisk> robyduck: Yes, I will definitely make a list of people who replied. And will pass it to the person(s) who can continue with this task.
15:09:59 <robyduck> giannisk: that's fine. In this case you did most of the work, we just need to finish it now
15:10:59 <robyduck> anyone volunteering?
15:11:20 <robyduck> otherwise I can do that, will update the wiki page.
15:11:58 <robyduck> oh, so many volunteers? :D
15:12:08 <giannisk> It's not just about updating the wiki page, inactive mentors should be notified as well.
15:12:19 <fredlima> Unfortunately now I'm very busy with my job and personal things these days
15:12:23 <robyduck> #action robyduck will update the mentors page and get in contact with nb to lock it
15:12:33 <fredlima> sry
15:12:39 <giannisk> Also there would be extra steps.
15:12:57 * mailga thinks mentors should talk with a mentor.
15:12:57 <robyduck> giannisk: btw, I added you to the fama mail alias too (speaking about tasks)
15:12:59 <giannisk> Like how we handle those inactive mentors.
15:13:43 <robyduck> giannisk: we list them as unavailable for now, the process says that if they are unavailable for 12 months they will be removed by FAmA
15:14:38 <giannisk> robyduck: Aha, right.
15:14:52 <robyduck> I would not take any action on them for now
15:16:05 <robyduck> is this ok for you all? any objections?
15:16:39 <giannisk> +1
15:16:42 <fredlima> no
15:16:45 <fredlima> +1
15:16:53 <itamarjp> +1
15:17:16 <robyduck> ok cool
15:17:45 <robyduck> #topic update the wiki with the new mentor nomination and removal process
15:18:00 <robyduck> so this would close the circle
15:18:45 <robyduck> we asked all mentors about their availability, made a new process after some discussion, asked for community feedback 2 weeks ago and didn't get any important objections
15:19:06 <robyduck> we can now write it down to the wiki as our new policy
15:19:27 <robyduck> I also made sure all regions discussed/mentioned this
15:20:30 <robyduck> Regions probably need to make their own process on how they want to handle nomination proposals
15:21:31 <robyduck> mailga: I bet you didn't have time to write a draft, or?
15:22:31 <mailga> robyduck: I don't have, but it's a copy/past of your ticket more or less, right?
15:22:41 <robyduck> yes it is
15:22:50 <mailga> so I can make it.....
15:23:30 <fredlima> the process is well made, so I think nobody disagree of it
15:23:38 <robyduck> mailga: if you need help or anything just ping me
15:24:12 <robyduck> #action mailga will write down the new mentor nomination and removal policy to the wiki
15:24:31 <mailga> robyduck: no problem, it's a draft until FAmSCo approve it, isn't it? Where I can write it? In my personal wikipage?
15:25:22 <robyduck> I'd write it directly in the place where it has to go, adding a disclaimer for now on top
15:25:56 * robyduck is not sure if this needs a new page or can be added to an existing one
15:27:17 <mailga> robyduck: ok, I think that a link in the mentor's page and a new page with the policy, should be simple to handle.
15:27:20 <fredlima> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mentors/NewMentors
15:27:36 <fredlima> why not overwrite this?
15:27:39 * robyduck clicks
15:28:15 <fredlima> I found on this wiki: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mentors#Volunteer_to_be_a_Mentor
15:28:45 <fredlima> it have an "Old page" tag
15:28:50 <robyduck> fredlima: I think, yes
15:29:07 <robyduck> mailga: we could keep the requirements and then add the new stuff
15:30:19 <mailga> robyduck: hmmm I'd like to keep separated Policies from requirements and processes..
15:31:03 <robyduck> mailga: feel free to do that ;)
15:31:18 <robyduck> we don't have to decide this now
15:32:12 * robyduck moves on
15:32:15 <mailga> I just guessing to a long (very long) term when we'll need to get Policies easily.
15:32:23 <mailga> ok.
15:32:39 <robyduck> mailga: indeed
15:32:48 <robyduck> #topic Remove inactive ambassadors directly from the FAS group
15:32:54 <robyduck> this is ticket 424
15:32:56 <robyduck> https://pagure.io/famsco/issue/424
15:33:39 <robyduck> lailah and jonatoni already commented, I also don't recall any objections from the community
15:33:57 <robyduck> (the topic is on the ambassadors ML for feedback)
15:34:52 <robyduck> #action all FAmSCo members please add your vote to the proposal before next week
15:35:25 <mailga> Just voted.
15:35:35 <fredlima> me too
15:35:59 <itamarjp> done
15:36:06 <robyduck> :)
15:36:28 <linuxmodder> .fas linuxmodder-
15:36:29 <zodbot> linuxmodder: 'linuxmodder-' Not Found!
15:36:52 <robyduck> giannisk: what's your opinion on this proposal?
15:37:08 <giannisk> robyduck: voting as we speak :)
15:37:13 <robyduck> lol
15:37:21 <giannisk> robyduck: no objections from my side, thanks for the good work
15:38:15 <giannisk> There's plenty of time for non-active ambassadors to get back in track after a while, so we're not restrictive.
15:38:29 <robyduck> #agreed inactive ambassadors will be removed directly from the FAS group, not just set as inactive - see ticket 424 for details
15:38:40 <linuxmodder> only one question what determines 'active' not seeing mention of waht determines that in ticket
15:39:02 <robyduck> yes, and we track them to get them back easily to the FAS group if they want to come back at some point
15:39:30 <giannisk> linuxmodder: no fedmsg activities
15:39:31 <robyduck> linuxmodder: 18 months of any activity we can measure with fedmsg
15:39:34 <linuxmodder> activity is determined how tho by the script
15:39:56 <robyduck> correct
15:39:59 <linuxmodder> so blog posts, conferences, hackathons, FADS and the liek ?
15:40:32 <robyduck> linuxmodder: well blogposts are in fedmasg if you have your blog on the planet
15:40:45 <linuxmodder> well heck with my tangent work with respins and freemedia I doubt I'll ever have that worry :P
15:40:54 <linuxmodder> robyduck,  I do
15:41:05 <linuxmodder> and cross posts to FB page
15:41:06 <giannisk> linuxmodder: so, basically, an active ambassador would have done those activities without even logging into their FAS for so many months?
15:41:13 <linuxmodder> both personal and Fedora's
15:41:32 <robyduck> linuxmodder: we think ambassadors needs to keep themself up to date. To do that, they have to look into the project, and once in 18 months you will log in or anything else, right?
15:41:39 <linuxmodder> giannisk,  not following the question
15:42:29 <linuxmodder> robyduck,  tbh once in 180 months seems a bit TOO lenient for anyone with more than 6 months with the project but whom am I to make that judegement :P
15:42:38 <linuxmodder> 18 not 180 *
15:43:29 <robyduck> linuxmodder: you would make that shorter?
15:43:44 <linuxmodder> once every 90 days seems more logical to me but regardless once in 18 months is surely a seemingly disengaged ambassadors ( barring medical or family isues -- when known)
15:44:07 <linuxmodder> Personally wiht the pace of change I'd recommend onec quarterly
15:44:33 <robyduck> oh you mean how often to run the script
15:44:44 <linuxmodder> regardless if that's an event, talk blog post, or logging into something fas connected
15:44:49 <robyduck> yes, we want to run it every 6 months
15:45:31 <linuxmodder> NO I'd say run every 6 months with a cutoff of <1 in last 90 days == inactive and marked for removal
15:45:34 <robyduck> you know, the work of ambassadors is not measurable that easy, as it is for packagers for example. Thats why we keep this period rather long for now
15:46:18 <linuxmodder> robyduck,  not sure why you seem to think that ALL regions have been active of late from where I'm looking
15:46:31 <mailga> linuxmodder: each user using Fedora is an ambassador since he talks with someone else on which s.o. he installed. We would like that Ambassadors will report their efforts to the project; we need to get feedback from them, the Project should know what their Ambassadors are doing and what they think the Project needs by speaking with users. IMO.
15:46:44 <linuxmodder> robyduck,  also that would be another issue I'd say  we tangentially tackle why can't we better measure that
15:47:13 <robyduck> yes I agree, 90 days is very short though
15:47:58 <linuxmodder> okay I'd say look at the longest gap of any region from FADs / hackathons / events liuke installfests and use that as the cutoff then
15:48:20 <linuxmodder> 6 months running checking the preceeding 6 months agreeable?
15:48:43 <linuxmodder> 18 months seems a bit loose when cycles are 6 months
15:49:05 <robyduck> linuxmodder: we probably have 50% of all ambassadors inactive (out of 700). Let's start wth removing those who really left, and then eventually shorten it.
15:49:16 <linuxmodder> my personal thoughts are that if you were not active in some measuable way in the present or previous release cycle you are diengaged
15:49:46 <robyduck> that's the basical thought we have behind this process, yes
15:50:03 <giannisk> This is the first time ever we implement a measure such as this, I say we could start with being a bit flexible.
15:50:14 <linuxmodder> first 2 runs at 18 months then 6 months cutoffs afterward?  that would show folks we care about 'fresh blood' in project and then make it more responsive
15:50:18 <giannisk> And then revise the process, if needed.
15:50:38 <linuxmodder> any objections to last proposal ^
15:50:58 <linuxmodder> so starting say f28 release start making the checks last 6 months
15:51:31 <linuxmodder> ??
15:51:48 <giannisk> linuxmodder: +0
15:51:58 <linuxmodder> that would hopefully also give campus ambassador reboot a chance to revive itself
15:52:01 <robyduck> linuxmodder: we could move it to 12 months, which is reasonable. 6 months? Then we will have less than 150 ambassadors probably.
15:52:36 <robyduck> and we risk to remove people who in some way are "active" for Fedora
15:52:50 <linuxmodder> robyduck,  I share the sentiment BUT inactive ( barring family or medical) is getting stale no?  and stale is what we want to remove no?
15:53:00 <linuxmodder> giannisk,  +0  ?
15:54:07 <giannisk> linuxmodder: 18-months works fine. I'm afraid 12-months would be too little.
15:54:07 <robyduck> linuxmodder: yes, correct. I said, I agree with your thought, but we should start with a soft deadline and then shorten it.
15:54:09 <linuxmodder> okay then first run 18 months second 12 months by then revamp the metrics we use then active in last cycle  y/n   as active/inactive ( if you are inactive for 2 consecutive checks you get removed
15:55:10 <robyduck> we already do 2 checks before taking action (2 weeks)
15:55:22 <linuxmodder> more reasonable ? and still gives the regions and council time to work on reviving sub projects like WIF and Campus Ambass to better get traction
15:55:33 <giannisk> Do I get a feeling that we start to over-complicate things?
15:55:41 <linuxmodder> thought you all said 6 months between checks
15:55:59 <robyduck> let's start as communicated to the community, with 18 months. We can see how many are inactive next time and how a 12 months deadline would impact on the ambassadors group.
15:56:06 <robyduck> linuxmodder: does this sound reasonable?
15:56:18 <giannisk> robyduck: +1
15:56:19 <linuxmodder> giannisk,  maybe OR we lacked a comphrensive method to begin with which is sadly where I lean
15:57:05 <giannisk> linuxmodder: Let's be agile :)
15:57:23 <linuxmodder> is that not what I mentioned liek 5 mins ago robyduck  that would be reasonable I'd think that gives 3 cycles 2 cycles then per cycle to let people get butts in gear
15:57:50 <linuxmodder> giannisk,  agile sure just not sure we are in agrrement on what agile would be :P
15:58:19 <robyduck> agile would be active every week indeed :D
15:58:51 <linuxmodder> robyduck,  that would be what many of us call nuts ( guilty as charged on that  myself)
15:59:08 <robyduck> ha
15:59:30 <robyduck> ok, anything else for today?
16:00:06 <mailga> nope
16:00:16 <robyduck> thank you all for coming, see you next week
16:00:24 <linuxmodder> nothing coming to mind here
16:00:24 <robyduck> #endmeeting