19:30:18 #startmeeting Fedora Board 19:30:18 Meeting started Wed Nov 21 19:30:18 2012 UTC. The chair is rbergeron. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot. 19:30:18 Useful Commands: #action #agreed #halp #info #idea #link #topic. 19:30:22 #meetingname Fedora Board 19:30:22 The meeting name has been set to 'fedora_board' 19:30:29 #topic Who's here? 19:30:41 * abadger1999 here 19:30:45 * inode0 glances in 19:30:53 #chair abadger1999 inode0 19:30:53 Current chairs: abadger1999 inode0 rbergeron 19:31:13 Hai 19:31:50 ke4qqq, nb, cwickert, jreznik, meety time 19:31:55 * quaid chilling 19:32:03 * jreznik is here 19:32:05 * pingou lurks around 19:32:08 #info pbrobinson, sparks out for today 19:32:19 #chair gholms jreznik 19:32:19 Current chairs: abadger1999 gholms inode0 jreznik rbergeron 19:33:03 any other board peeps? not yet it looks like 19:33:07 * rbergeron will move on to agenda-ish things 19:33:11 #topic Agenda for today! 19:33:11 rbergeron: rackerhacker? 19:33:18 * gholms isn't sure when he starts 19:33:31 gholms: everyone gets seated after the whole election thing 19:33:36 Thanks 19:33:54 otherwise toshio wouldn't be here ;) 19:34:00 he'd be, like, partying or something. 19:34:01 ;) 19:34:14 Mm... pnot such a bad idea ;-) 19:34:22 like it was 1999? 19:34:30 You know it ;-) 19:34:52 #info Today's agenda: Announcements, Open Q&A (bring us your questions/comments/flammable items!), FUDConny things, EOF. 19:35:01 * rbergeron has a hard stop in 1hr 19:35:21 coolio? 19:35:27 #topic Announcements 19:35:42 jreznik: do you want to handle any schedule/release related notes here :) 19:36:25 orrr... alternately.. inode0: are you interested in giving an election update? 19:36:36 rbergeron: for release related notes - the Go/No-Go is still scheduled for tmrw (even we have a big conflict with Thanksgiving) 19:37:07 one concern is secure boot - see https://fedorahosted.org/fesco/ticket/975 19:37:47 #info Go/No-go is still scheduled for tomorrow (despite thanksgiving) - secure boot may still be an issue - pending voting on fesco ticket #975 19:37:52 otherwise we have one potential blocker bug (under testing right now) and of course, more teste coverage for fedup is still needed 19:38:20 #info currently one potential blocker bug atm (in testing) and more coverage for fedup still needed 19:38:31 #info Fedora 18 Beta RC1 already available 19:39:14 that's the current status 19:39:18 not much to report about elections - we have candidates, candidates have returned questionnaires, negotiating townhalls is in progress now 19:39:28 seems to be on schedule as far as I can tell 19:39:28 * rbergeron nods 19:40:02 #info Election stuff is on schedule per https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Elections#Committee_Elections_Schedule - town halls will start approx. 26th so keep your eyes out for announcements 19:40:31 for SB - seems it could be Board bussines again for the worst case scenario in case we would not have signed shim for final... 19:40:47 It could? 19:40:58 That sounds more like a fesco thing to me. 19:41:05 okee dokee. any other announcements? if not we'll move on 19:41:11 #topic Open Q&A 19:41:43 #info This is the fun part of the meeting where we take questions (and other things, comments, etc) from anyone in the meeting - feel free to raise your virtual hand and ask questions! 19:41:56 !/? 19:41:57 * rbergeron officially opens the open floor 19:42:08 * rbergeron hands the microphone to one karsten wade 19:42:27 go for it :) 19:42:34 so I'm not sure what the question is here exactly, but it's in the form of "mother may I?" 19:42:40 quick background is: 19:43:10 my team at Red Hat was approached by a GNOME developer (Marina Z.) to see if we wanted to sponsor internships through GNOME's Outreach Program for Women 19:43:35 we got some funds together with a few other groups at Red Hat (more on that eventually, when they want to decloak) 19:44:00 for us, the ideal part is we open a PO to GNOME Foundation (already a vendor) and pay them, and GNOME Foundation handles all the hard part of the internships 19:44:28 GNOME Foundation asked us to fund internships for Fedora, JBoss, DeltaCloud, and GNOME itself (iirc, off the top of my head) 19:44:39 we said yes and pushed ahead 19:44:56 and forgot that for Fedora involvement as a sponsor we should be bringing it to the Board first/early 19:46:11 * rbergeron tries to stick that into an info line somehow mentally 19:46:21 tl:dnr for me about OPW: studies show that targetting groups specifically that are underrepresented helps them get involved, and we're at a state with women in FOSS where they are very underrepresented. This program has had good success in the last few years in greatly increasing short-term and ongoing participation by women in GNOME and FOSS in general 19:46:30 rbergeron: totally! 19:46:49 #info notes from quaid on the Fedora sponsorship of the gnome women's outreach program 19:47:08 so at this point it's a done deal, Red Hat has agreed to do the internship and have the interns in the specificed projects 19:47:17 s/specificed/specified/ 19:47:50 I'm pretty sure it's fine for us to troll around for mentors and projects, akin to GSOC and Google Code-In 19:48:08 (and other get-new-people-involved Fedora initiatives) 19:48:11 +1 to quaid's mother, may I :-) 19:48:13 * inode0 thinks it is better to act in good faith and worry about the fallout (if there is any later) 19:48:54 question: Will the Board approve Fedora as a named 'sponsor' of GNOME OPW 2013, which includes use of the trademarked logo etc.? 19:49:03 * rbergeron nods - the one thing that concerns me with these situations sometimes is whether or not there are people actually available to do the mentoring and whatnot 19:49:06 and also accept my aplogies for doing this backwards :( 19:49:33 so we don't set people up for failure 19:49:51 I think it was already announced Fedora is part of the program, or not? /me saw such announcement 19:49:54 Could we have a ticket opened for this? 19:49:54 rbergeron: I'm not recalling specifically, but I think Marina has been doing some work in that regards; I can get back to you all to let you know how that works; don't want to cannibalize other efforts, etc. 19:50:10 jreznik: yes, see all of quaid's above statements 19:50:24 Mainly so folks can be on the record about anything they want to be on the record about. 19:50:40 inode0: +1 will do 19:50:53 #action quaid to file a ticket formally requesting the sponsorship of GNOME OPW 2013 19:51:01 #chair quaid 19:51:01 Current chairs: abadger1999 gholms inode0 jreznik quaid rbergeron 19:51:15 * rbergeron isn't sure if actions work without chairings but gholms will answer that at any second 19:51:16 rbergeron: You don't need to be a chair to use #action. ;) 19:51:23 rbergeron: Good guess. 19:51:23 #info Robyn is psychic 19:51:25 #undo 19:51:25 Removing item from minutes: 19:51:28 jreznik: and I'm sorry about that, those of us involved who knew better never remembered to bring this to the Board 19:51:28 Haha 19:51:40 rbergeron: it was hard to decrypt - well I don't see it would be good to our community to step back, so yeah - I think I'm +1 but next time it would be really great to know about it before it happens 19:51:41 the fact that two of us are former Board members is even sillier 19:52:24 * abadger1999 decides not holding former-Board members' memories to higher standards is in his best interest ;-) 19:52:34 * rbergeron lols 19:52:34 Heh 19:52:35 * jreznik heard very different feedback about the results of outreach program from different people, from positive to very negative... 19:52:51 jreznik: I'll make a point that our team gets the "talk/ask Fedora Board" in to the proper slots in our process; we have some holes there still 19:52:55 I think that mizmo asked if there were any infra coders that would be willing to mentor and had at least two who said they had time. 19:53:14 * rbergeron will go on the record to say that serving on the board is not necessarily the cause of memory issues 19:53:17 So I think we have people on that front. 19:53:33 I don't really want to make a strong point about talk/ask the board before acting - that pretty much goes against they way I think we should work. 19:54:13 19:54:23 inode0: thanks, we needed to get the $ lined up anyway, but there's a reason somethings should be checked in - big announcements with our name being one. 19:54:41 Do we want to vote now on: Will the Board approve Fedora as a named 'sponsor' of GNOME OPW 2013, which includes use of the trademarked logo etc.? 19:55:15 sure, I agree this one talking with the board is a good way to proceed because of the advertising/trademark issues if not some political issues. 19:55:19 yes, but i tihnk there's a fine line between "fedora is participating" (by virtue of the fact that someone is willing to do tihngs) and "fedora is a sponsoring organization of a wider effort" which implies a bit more organizationally - and if nothing else the logo is being used and whtanot 19:56:06 inode0: do I read this correctly, I file a ticket by emailing advisor-board@? i.e. one of you with perms will make the actual Trac ticket? 19:56:24 abadger1999: I think inode0 wanted to have it more on the record in a ticket - i could have misinterpreted that though 19:56:26 you can open a trac ticket I believe 19:56:36 https://fedorahosted.org/board/ ? 19:56:44 quaid: yep 19:56:48 * gholms nods 19:56:48 I don't have a [New Ticket] link 19:56:53 quaid: login ? 19:57:01 yep 19:57:14 * ke4qqq shows up late 19:57:42 #chair ke4qqq 19:57:42 Current chairs: abadger1999 gholms inode0 jreznik ke4qqq quaid rbergeron 19:57:50 hey there meeting secretary 19:58:01 quaid: I'll create one and CC you on it. 19:58:38 alrighty, shall we move on to other questions if we have any? 19:58:53 #info thanks to quaid for bringing some questions/commentary :) 19:59:00 did I say I was here out loud? 19:59:06 * rbergeron saw pingou pop in at the beginning 19:59:13 thx abadger1999 19:59:18 * pingou lurks has no real questions 19:59:21 +but 19:59:22 * rbergeron dangles the bus keys in front of ke4qqq 19:59:31 Quick followup 19:59:38 The board is fine with fesco delaying F18 for Secure Boot? 19:59:38 #chair mjg59 19:59:38 Current chairs: abadger1999 gholms inode0 jreznik ke4qqq mjg59 quaid rbergeron 19:59:46 (Should that become necessary) 20:00:06 #info Question: is the board fine with fesco delaying F18 for secure boot (should that become necessary)? 20:00:14 mjg59: I assume you mean "all of it" and not just the beta 20:00:26 Right 20:00:36 Obviously hoping that it won't be necessary 20:00:49 And we're now working on an alternative plan if RH legal continues to be a blocker 20:00:51 * jreznik would say beta and final are two different cases 20:00:52 thankfully legal hell isn't a bureaucracy or anything 20:00:54 * ke4qqq thought that was why we had things like feature freeze so that delayed features wouldn't delay the release. 20:01:05 I'm fine with that. It isn't like the landscape has really changed since we last talked about it. 20:01:07 * abadger1999 is fine with fesco deciding to block or not block on Secure Boot getting its final pieces. 20:01:26 jreznik: How so? 20:01:44 jreznik: isn't delaying beta also delaying final? 20:01:59 ke4qqq: Well, we can certainly release an OS that won't install on any new computers, but it doesn't seem like a useful thing to do 20:02:19 mjg59: I'm fine with fesco making that decision 20:02:33 ke4qqq: that's what I want to say - we can release beta without signed shim and in case we will get shim in time between beta/final, we can spin a new compose for testing 20:02:42 mjg59: eh... that's still useful for all the non-new computers... and for people who fiddle things before trying to install. 20:02:48 so it does not automatically leads to final slip 20:03:01 jreznik: ahh I understand now. 20:03:07 but final is different case - I'd say, we really need SB 20:03:08 so it seems like weighing the pros and cons of finishing feature vs slip more at that point. 20:03:12 abadger1999: If that's the board's idea of our target audience, we can do that 20:03:30 * jreznik has to admit there are so many W8 laptops around... expected slower start for @8 20:04:23 as I said - we can make it with unsigned beta... we can't with unsigned final 20:04:39 * inode0 doesn't want to define the board's target audience again - the project's target audience is defined 20:04:45 * rbergeron is okay with fesco dealing with it - i just hope to not have it be the case that we are still blocked on legal in 6m. 20:05:00 I am fine with letting fesco decide as well - though I have to say that some of the problems we've seen this release have led me to question whether fesco is handling the (admittedly less than perfect) feature process rigidly enough to produce the time-based releases that fedora is supposed to be shipping. 20:05:18 mjg59: yeah, I'd rather have something that works on those computers, but I wouldn't slip F18 indefinitely for the subset of all the computers that F18 can be used on. 20:05:26 ke4qqq: seriously? 20:05:40 ke4qqq: Turns out that shipping without an installer isn't an option 20:05:46 mjg59: Do you happen to know whether legal is blocking for some specific concern vs "we just haven't looked at it hard enough" ? 20:05:56 mjg59: we had a perfectly functioning installer in f17 20:06:01 abadger1999: +1 to indefinite slip... 20:06:09 ke4qqq: read devel recently? 20:06:20 abadger1999: My understanding is that they have specific concerns which are entirely related to Red Hat rather than Fedora 20:06:28 ke4qqq: Yes, and it doesn't run on F18 20:06:34 ke4qqq: Yeah, and that installer doesn't work with F18. 20:06:35 abadger1999: contract negotiation 20:06:45 ke4qqq: So unless fesco's suddenly gained the ability to force people to do work that they don't want to do... 20:06:52 yes, but that's the point - massive change is theoretically controlled by fesco 20:06:54 mjg59: thanks. 20:07:00 gated rather 20:07:14 no, that's not actually true. 20:07:16 ke4qqq: We could have blocked newui landing in F18. And then we'd have had no installer. 20:07:20 Features are gated by fesco. Other changes are not. 20:07:44 (not that I think that's at all relevant.) 20:08:49 * rbergeron thinks that secure boot seems to be a bit different - i think the feature from a technical and everything else standpoint was reasonably okay for feature freeze - the legal dramz are new, afaik. 20:08:59 ke4qqq: Secure boot has not delayed any part of the process so far. Deciding not to slip for it is equivalent to the feature having been rejected. The outcome is the same in both cases - F18 doesn't install on new hardware. 20:09:00 well - let's back to the question - a) do we require SB enabled beta, b) do we require SB enabled final, if yes - are we willing to wait "forever" for the resolution? 20:09:00 mjg59: "entirely related to Red Hat rather than Fedora" why does that block fedora then? 20:09:23 drago01_: Because Fedora isn't a legal entity with the ability to sign the contract 20:09:25 drago01_: contract is sign by Red Hat 20:09:36 mjg59: ok 20:09:44 so I expect there would be one contract for both Fedora/RHEL 20:09:47 jreznik: I don't think either are board issues - both seem well in domain of fesco 20:10:29 ke4qqq: on the other hand - it's not only technical issue but also about impact on the whole project 20:10:55 * rbergeron does have concern about if we don't have it at beta if it will be well-tested for final but knows fesco is dealing with those topics in ticket 20:11:14 yes, but many technical issues have that same impact - despite my frustrations that I voiced, I don't think the board can make a better decision than fesco can. 20:12:01 * abadger1999 agrees that these sem to be fesco issues. 20:12:09 rbergeron: yep, this is more technical issue for fesco (spin a test compose etc.) - for Board the question is - do we stand behind the decision to slip the release? 20:12:11 * gholms agrees as well 20:12:26 The Board could get involved with helping to rewrite the Feature Process and how the Schedule matches up with the Feature process. 20:12:34 at this point I prefer leaving this stuff to fesco, there may come a time where the board might want to nudge things along but I'm not there 20:12:37 abadger1999: +1 20:13:13 but not the specifics of Feature X lagging behind in the schedule (IMHO) 20:13:20 abadger1999: agreed, hence the "fudcon" item on schedule for this meeting but we're not quite there yet :) 20:13:33 :-) 20:13:42 * pingou has some thoughts to write down 20:14:20 (on a blog post or so) 20:14:21 so are we all agreed that fesco has the ball here 20:14:24 * jreznik is ok to let fesco decide if the rest of Board is ok with that 20:14:36 but still... :) 20:14:46 rbergeron: +1 20:14:48 or is there a need for a disclaimer if we are a year out and we still don't have anything that we might nudge things along :) 20:15:09 we can always change our mind down the road :) 20:15:22 heh, if it takes a year and fesco hasn't said ship anyway, we might have a new feature process to apply ;-) 20:15:33 anyone -1? 20:16:03 rbergeron: well, we should communicate it to the community... 20:16:04 #agreed FESCo has the ball on calling ship/block wrt secure boot in F18 for beta/final 20:16:20 Thanks 20:16:23 mjg59: thanks for bringing it up. 20:16:36 No problem 20:16:40 Thanks for the feedback 20:17:15 jreznik: did ou want to elaborate on that point for a moment before we move on 20:17:21 * rbergeron has to bail in 13m 20:17:41 (though y'all are welcome to go on sans robyn, of course) 20:17:46 rbergeron: go on 20:18:02 * jreznik will think about it more :) and let you knwo 20:18:04 * gholms returns, apologizes for poor wireless connectivity 20:18:06 Any other questions? :) 20:18:14 going once, going twice... 20:18:33 #topic FUDCon 20:18:49 #info Hopefully everyone is signed up and has their hotel room booked for FUDCon Jan. 18-20 20:19:11 * pingou gloups 20:19:16 #link http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/FUDCon:Lawrence_2013 20:19:35 as abadger1999 mentioned: the whole "feature process revamp" ... well, it could use a nudge. 20:20:10 And I think that FUDCon is a good place to do that wrangling, or at least put toether a reasonable option to bring to the community. 20:20:47 So I guess the question is: Is anyone willing to spearhead that effort right now? 20:20:55 gathering some steam around it, doing some pre-work, etc. 20:21:05 Becaues I suspect there will be plenty of people around who are interested. 20:21:08 :) 20:21:56 * rbergeron coughs and looks around 20:22:03 * ke4qqq would volunteer - but not sure I'll make fudcon 20:22:22 * jreznik is trying to do the pre-work 20:22:23 * gholms may not make it to fudcon in time 20:22:24 * rbergeron will be super jealous if it is becaues you are at devopsdays but... anyway 20:23:08 jreznik: perhaps a blog post might move that along or gather some additional help? 20:23:09 well, I'm ok with taking care of it (suicide but) as feature wrangler 20:23:19 lol 20:23:28 Does that make you the feature wrangling wrangler? 20:23:47 * gholms apologizes for the horrible joke 20:24:01 rbergeron: yep, that's the plan - to blog about it, after the crazy beta sprint 20:24:44 * jreznik got fudcon budget ack today, wooohooo 20:24:48 * rbergeron nods 20:24:52 jreznik: good ;) 20:25:41 okay, so aside from that - i think people rae starting to do some self-organization as far as planning, so i hope to just see more :) 20:25:47 * rbergeron grins 20:26:30 #topic Other business? 20:26:50 #action jreznik to be pushing the feature process revamp post-beta time 20:27:39 going once, going twice 20:27:54 * rbergeron wishes everyone a happy turkey day in teh US and a happy... thursday to everyone else :) 20:28:08 happy thanksgiving to you 20:30:09 Have a great Thursday either way! :) 20:30:16 okay folks - next board irc meeting is on.... dun dun dun.... 20:30:17 * rbergeron looks 20:30:38 #info Next board IRC meeting on 2012-12-05 20:30:58 thanks to everyone for coming today :) 20:31:15 thanks for running the meeting! 20:31:24 darn, I had other business - see you next week 20:31:35 meeting's not ended yet. 20:31:39 I don't think it's ended yet. 20:31:46 inode0: if you want to bring it up - go ahead 20:31:49 people need to leave though, so it can wait 20:32:01 sponsoring cobbler was the topic 20:32:08 I'm the only one who has the urgent need to bail - you guys can handle the rest of it 20:32:19 * rbergeron is totally kosher with doing so for hte record 20:32:42 but i need to be out the door right now so... if someone else can shut this down if you guys decide to discuss :) 20:33:27 does anyone object to Fedora sponsoring Cobbler (a one time contribution for needed infrastructure) if there are no legal blockers? 20:34:20 cost? 20:34:33 * ke4qqq thinks it odd - one RHT-funded project sponsoring another RHT-funded project 20:34:37 up to us - I was going to suggest $500 20:34:44 RHT doesn't sponsor Cobbler any more 20:35:21 they are working on raising $4000 for equipment, Euca is matching up to $2000 20:35:30 ahhh then by all means - we should sponsor - cobbler is awesome 20:37:47 * gholms nods 20:38:42 So, do we vote on this / open a ticket / discuss this on the list / etc? 20:39:07 don't we still have a quorum here? if so lets decide here 20:39:27 I'll open a ticket I guess so we can get legal feedback since there was a hint there might be some issue there. 20:40:09 #action inode0 will open a ticket about funding Cobbler 20:41:05 Anyone have anything else? 20:44:50 I guess not. 20:44:59 * gholms will close in 1 minute 20:46:10 Thanks for coming, everyone! 20:46:13 #endmeeting