Re: Fedora Elections for FAmSCo
by Truong Anh Tuan
On November 19, 2015 8:52:28 PM GMT+07:00, Josh Boyer <jwboyer(a)fedoraproject.org> wrote:
>On Thu, Nov 19, 2015 at 3:26 AM, Truong Anh Tuan
><tuanta(a)iwayvietnam.com> wrote:
>>
>> The fact is FAmSCo in elected form would have more *power* than in
>> volunteered form.
>
>I think that's a dangerous message to send. We do not want people to
>believe they have more power to do something just because they are
>elected to a committee. The committees exist for a reason, but POWER
>is not one of them.
I just want to compare the effects of elected persons to volunteered ones, NOT any other meanings :)
--
Regards,
Tuan
8 years, 4 months
Fedora Elections for FAmSCo
by Jan Kurik
Hi Council and Ambassadors,
I was pointed by several people to the fact that FAmSCo is (or should
be) an inactive committee and I was questioned why we are organizing
elections for this committee.
As I understand the situation, there is an aim to replace FAmSCo by
FOSCo & Council. However the current FAmSCo is securing some "level of
service" for Ambassadors, which is not yet covered by any other
group/team/governance body within the Fedora community. As such, I was
explicitly ask by Ambassadors to organize the elections for FAmSCo
team as well, to make sure FAmSCo will operate till the time we have a
full replacement for it.
However, it seems like we do not have a full agreement on this topic
[1]. I would like to have a discussion here, to come up with a common
agreement whether we support the idea of having FAmSCo operational for
now or we have other solution.
[1] https://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/fedora-meeting-2/2015-11-17/fedora-meet...
- 17:23:27
Regards,
Jan
--
Jan Kuřík
Platform & Fedora Program Manager
Red Hat Czech s.r.o., Purkynova 99/71, 612 45 Brno, Czech Republic
8 years, 4 months
Re: Fedora Elections for FAmSCo
by Truong Anh Tuan
----- On Nov 19, 2015, at 2:57 AM, Josh Boyer jwboyer(a)fedoraproject.org wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 18, 2015 at 11:05 AM, Robert Mayr
> <robyduck(a)fedoraproject.org> wrote:
>> 2015-11-18 16:26 GMT+01:00 Jan Kurik <jkurik(a)redhat.com>:
>>>
>>> Hi Council and Ambassadors,
>>>
>>> I was pointed by several people to the fact that FAmSCo is (or should
>>> be) an inactive committee and I was questioned why we are organizing
>>> elections for this committee.
>>>
>>> As I understand the situation, there is an aim to replace FAmSCo by
>>> FOSCo & Council. However the current FAmSCo is securing some "level of
>>> service" for Ambassadors, which is not yet covered by any other
>>> group/team/governance body within the Fedora community. As such, I was
>>> explicitly ask by Ambassadors to organize the elections for FAmSCo
>>> team as well, to make sure FAmSCo will operate till the time we have a
>>> full replacement for it.
>>>
>>> However, it seems like we do not have a full agreement on this topic
>>> [1]. I would like to have a discussion here, to come up with a common
>>> agreement whether we support the idea of having FAmSCo operational for
>>> now or we have other solution.
>>>
>>> [1]
>>> https://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/fedora-meeting-2/2015-11-17/fedora-meet...
>>> - 17:23:27
>> Thank you Jan for this open discussion, I'm adding here some more
>> informations.
>> First of all FAmSCo is not dead and never has been officially dismissed, but
>> FAmSCo decided months ago to hand all its repsonibilities over to FOSCo,
>> which was planned as an even bigger committee, and which should have
>> included also the Ambassador's activities. Therefor we reduced the activity
>> and after some meetings without reaching a quorum FAmSCo decided to act only
>> through the Trac until new elections would happen or FOSCo will start its
>> activity.
>> Many thing happened in the meanwhile and we are going towards a new and
>> hopefully better budgeting process (thanks to all who worked on it and who
>> are discussing it), but as you said this is not the only responsibility
>> FAmSCo actually has. Unfortunately FAmSCo missed some of its deadlines,
>> there is for example the EMEA FAD planning, release parties, F23 media and
>> other stuff (which in the end happened partially but not in a coordinated
>> way as before).
>>
>> That's why I would welcome, unless we will not reach the minimum number of 7
>> candidates, new elections. These new memebers could give continuity to
>> FAmSCo's activities and the big ambassadors group, on the other hand they
>> could actively help the integration of the actual FAmSCo responsibilities
>> into the Council, FOSCo or whatever.
>> Canceling the Ambassadors Steering Committee without replacing *all* its
>> activities is not the best way if we don't want to loose some parts of the
>> community, so IMO let's do elections and find the best solution to pass over
>> all the stuff and try to represent _all_ regions in the body who will take
>> over in the future the FAmSCo job.
>
> Forgive me, but I have not followed the ambassador side of things for
> a while. If FAmSCo isn't actually meeting (per the IRC conversation)
> and isn't technically a thing any longer, what is the elected body to
> do? Start meeting again?
I totally agree with Jiri and Robert, just add more information:
FAmSCo has Mission, Goals [1] and specific Tasks [2] to do.
In fact, while waiting for the new body FOSCo formed up, except doing
regular IRC meetings, we have been done others tasks normally.
> I do not disagree with you at all that we need people performing the
> tasks you highlight, but I'm not sure having an elected body to do
> them is necessary. Once they are elected, are we to restart FAmSCo,
> or would they only serve until FOSCo actually exists? Perhaps
> volunteers would be better than elected members of a zombie
> organization?
The fact is FAmSCo in elected form would have more *power* than in
volunteered form.
Ambassadors expect their committee to do assigned tasks well and they
elect for the most potential candidates.
I personally think FAmSCo election should be continued.
Rgds,
Tuan
[1] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_Ambassadors_Steering_Committee
[2] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/FAmSCo_tasks
8 years, 4 months
Re: Fedora Elections for FAmSCo
by Robert Mayr
2015-11-18 20:57 GMT+01:00 Josh Boyer <jwboyer(a)fedoraproject.org>:
> On Wed, Nov 18, 2015 at 11:05 AM, Robert Mayr
> <robyduck(a)fedoraproject.org> wrote:
> > 2015-11-18 16:26 GMT+01:00 Jan Kurik <jkurik(a)redhat.com>:
> >>
> >> Hi Council and Ambassadors,
> >>
> >> I was pointed by several people to the fact that FAmSCo is (or should
> >> be) an inactive committee and I was questioned why we are organizing
> >> elections for this committee.
> >>
> >> As I understand the situation, there is an aim to replace FAmSCo by
> >> FOSCo & Council. However the current FAmSCo is securing some "level of
> >> service" for Ambassadors, which is not yet covered by any other
> >> group/team/governance body within the Fedora community. As such, I was
> >> explicitly ask by Ambassadors to organize the elections for FAmSCo
> >> team as well, to make sure FAmSCo will operate till the time we have a
> >> full replacement for it.
> >>
> >> However, it seems like we do not have a full agreement on this topic
> >> [1]. I would like to have a discussion here, to come up with a common
> >> agreement whether we support the idea of having FAmSCo operational for
> >> now or we have other solution.
> >>
> >> [1]
> >>
> https://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/fedora-meeting-2/2015-11-17/fedora-meet...
> >> - 17:23:27
> > Thank you Jan for this open discussion, I'm adding here some more
> > informations.
> > First of all FAmSCo is not dead and never has been officially dismissed,
> but
> > FAmSCo decided months ago to hand all its repsonibilities over to FOSCo,
> > which was planned as an even bigger committee, and which should have
> > included also the Ambassador's activities. Therefor we reduced the
> activity
> > and after some meetings without reaching a quorum FAmSCo decided to act
> only
> > through the Trac until new elections would happen or FOSCo will start its
> > activity.
> > Many thing happened in the meanwhile and we are going towards a new and
> > hopefully better budgeting process (thanks to all who worked on it and
> who
> > are discussing it), but as you said this is not the only responsibility
> > FAmSCo actually has. Unfortunately FAmSCo missed some of its deadlines,
> > there is for example the EMEA FAD planning, release parties, F23 media
> and
> > other stuff (which in the end happened partially but not in a coordinated
> > way as before).
> >
> > That's why I would welcome, unless we will not reach the minimum number
> of 7
> > candidates, new elections. These new memebers could give continuity to
> > FAmSCo's activities and the big ambassadors group, on the other hand they
> > could actively help the integration of the actual FAmSCo responsibilities
> > into the Council, FOSCo or whatever.
> > Canceling the Ambassadors Steering Committee without replacing *all* its
> > activities is not the best way if we don't want to loose some parts of
> the
> > community, so IMO let's do elections and find the best solution to pass
> over
> > all the stuff and try to represent _all_ regions in the body who will
> take
> > over in the future the FAmSCo job.
>
> Forgive me, but I have not followed the ambassador side of things for
> a while. If FAmSCo isn't actually meeting (per the IRC conversation)
> and isn't technically a thing any longer, what is the elected body to
> do? Start meeting again?
>
Not only starting with meetings again, but with the whole FAmSCo activity.
>
> I do not disagree with you at all that we need people performing the
> tasks you highlight, but I'm not sure having an elected body to do
> them is necessary. Once they are elected, are we to restart FAmSCo,
> or would they only serve until FOSCo actually exists? Perhaps
> volunteers would be better than elected members of a zombie
> organization?
>
> josh
>
>
Well, in my opinion there is no alternative body we have actually to
perform the tasks FAmSCo was doing since now.
Ambassadors are used to have their Steering Committee, and regions,
although they took many responsibilities, are still relying on FAmSCo
inputs and guidelines.
I'm not saying we absolutely need FAmSCo and the rest is nonsense, I was
and still am convinced FOSCo would be much better; it would have a larger
contributor base, it would reach out more people and we probably would get
more new contributors, just because we involve more teams. So, your
question is exactly pointing to the core of the topic, but actually we have
only one answer (my personal opinion): we need to give continuity to all
the activities FAmSCo did, it's not important how long the elected body
will serve, if for two full release cycles or not. It' much more important
to work together with those people to make FOSCo happen soon, or if it has
become an outdated project, then help the Council to be able to take over
the tasks.
Actually Council has prevalent NA members, no one from LATAM, no one from
APAC, I don't think this is an ideal composition when speaking about
ambassador's activities. I'm not saying Council's composition is wrong, the
Council has a very good composition for the tasks it is working on, but
that's one of the points FAmSCo worked on when we decided to hand all the
tasks over to the upcoming FOSCo. Sorry, I'm not able right now to link you
to the discussion with the proposals, but we agreed having 7 members, 4
nominated (one per region) and 3 elected, because we wanted to cover the
whole Fedora world.
Oh, and I wouldn't call FAmSCo a zombie organization, we spent much time to
make all the things happen in the last years and so I think new people
would do, even if they know they are going to hand over all the stuff to
another body.
Your concept with volunteers sounds good, but is not doable IMHO. People
running for FAmSCo normally are all volunteers, and giving them an official
role in a Fedora body creates much more motivation than just asking them to
work as volunteers.
--
Robert Mayr
(robyduck)
8 years, 4 months
Re: [Ambassadors] Fedora Budget.next - https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Budget.next
by inode0
On Fri, Nov 6, 2015 at 7:32 AM, Josh Boyer <jwboyer(a)fedoraproject.org> wrote:
> A few comments/questions.
>
> - I would almost prefer to see premier events not be split out
> separately, and instead force the Council to transparently allocate
> them from their budget. This would lead to a very large budget for
> the Council on paper, but it allows us 1) provide transparency around
> what we view as important enough to spend money on, b) gives us
> greater flexibility overall to cover events which are going to vary in
> cost.
It isn't quite clear to me if the Fedora Premier Events are still
intended to be the responsibility of OSAS or of the Council. I think
moving them to the Council, whether lumped with Discretionary Council
Budget or not would be good for transparency and Council flexibility.
> - How are the three regional budget delegates going to be chosen?
>
> - Is there an education and review plan to make sure they are
> successful in these roles?
>
> - What happens if there is difficulty getting 3 people to volunteer
> for these roles?
I suspect this will be a problem after the excitement of something new
wears off.
> - Reimbursement after an Event Report doesn't work very well for
> premier events. The attendee has already traveled to the event and
> had their accommodations covered for the most part. That is typically
> because they have submitted an accepted talk or some other valuable
> contribution to the event itself. You might wish to rephrase this a
> bit.
Event reports being required for reimbursement doesn't work that well
for lots of situations. And expecting reports with any sort of
useful/valid impact analysis to be presented within two weeks of an
event is unreasonable. I'm not sure the people we send to an event to
promote Fedora are necessarily the best people to do impact analysis
anyway, but that is way too short of a window to do much that is
meaningful.
I think we would maybe get better reports if we asked for one report
per event rather than one report per funded person per event and if we
involved marketing/magazine writers to help present the activities at
the event rather than relying solely on exhausted ambassadors to do
this immediately after an event.
> - With only one guaranteed travel accommodation included as a benefit,
> I fear we're going to run into difficulties deciding who gets that
> benefit out of the three.
Yeah, potentially three people do something and one based on some
unknown factors gets a big benefit - recipe for unhappy campers.
John
8 years, 4 months
LISA quick report
by Matthew Miller
Just some notes while it's fresh in my mind. :)
We had 200-some scanned visitors to the booth (which was combined
CentOS/oVirt and Fedora).
- I did a demo of Fedora Workstation running three VMs with Fedora
Server, with Cockpit. Cockpit demoed very well -- the monitoring
graph drew in attention and people were quite curious about it.
- I'd say a third of people I talked to used Fedora in a mixed
environment with CentOS and RHEL servers. This seems like it's up
from last time I was at LISA (two years ago), but that's subjective.
Another third were just CentOS/RHEL shops, and those people at least
listened patiently to my spiel about why mixing in Fedora both gives
awareness of the future and the ability to participate and influence.
- As always at LISA, very, very positive and Fedora friendly. Lots of
people commented on how solid the last few releases have been, both
as desktop and server OS.
- No one I spoke to using Fedora Cloud in EC2 or OpenStack. Quite a few
people _interested_ in Project Atomic -- there were hats with the
logo, and when people heard "container optimized", they were _very_
interested, but very few people had heard of it before.
- Ben Cotton suggested a Birds-of-a-Feather, so I wrote that on the
whiteboard last minute. Something like 16 people attended, mostly
users new to Fedora
- Several people commented on yum->dnf switch (why not just make it the
next version of yum?) Got this both at the booth and the bof.
Comments mostly along the lines of "what are you going to do *next*
that's like that?"
- Only one _really_ complainy person, who wasn't a Fedora user and had
no interest in being one, but was very, very concerned that we know
that his friend had left for Ubuntu because KDE crashed. Came to both
the booth and the BoF to tell us this.
- Thanks to Fedora Ambassador Corey Sheldon for helping run the booth,
and for dealing with tricky hardware problems like "opening the
pelican case" and "folding up banner stands". I'm a software person.
--
Matthew Miller
<mattdm(a)fedoraproject.org>
Fedora Project Leader
8 years, 4 months
Re: [Ambassadors] CD / DVD stickers needed
by Vali Cobelea
Hi,
Thank you for this info, I'm planning several short presentations about
Fedora Project at the University of Galati, Romania, and I did not know from
where / how to get Fedora 11 CDs / DVDs.
Valente
8 years, 4 months
Some FUDCon Pune reimbursements pending
by Amit Shah
Hi Ruth,
To reduce your load a bit, we had assigned a few tickets to Izhar for
reimbursement. However, Izhar's tickets haven't been reimbursed yet.
Is it fine if I re-assign them all to you, so that you can do the
reimbursements?
On a related note, we'd also like to request an additional community
card in APAC so that such reimbursements don't wait indefinitely. If
that's fine, we can nominate one of us for such a card. Please let us
know.
Thanks,
Amit
--
http://log.amitshah.net/
8 years, 4 months