[council] #17: Objective proposal: Fedora Flavors Phase 2
by fedora-badges
#17: Objective proposal: Fedora Flavors Phase 2
------------------------+-------------------
Reporter: mattdm | Owner:
Status: new | Priority: normal
Component: Objectives | Keywords:
------------------------+-------------------
I posted this on [https://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/council-
discuss/2014-December/013066.html council-discuss] a few weeks ago and
there was a little discussion. Because this is really a continuation of
something we've previously agreed to, I think this is straightforward.
Since objectives are non-trivial, we should go for the "full +3 with no
-1s" consensus, but also, since this has technical components which impact
F22 planning -- which is starting now! -- I'd like to have the final
decision as soon as possible.
= Objective: Fedora Flavors, Second Phase. =
Overview:
* Take the initial Server/Workstation/Cloud split from Fedora 21 from an
experiment into solid production. Increase autonomy from FESCo and
improve targetted outreach.
Expected Impact:
* Increased user base and user satisfaction in targetted areas. Increased
contributor community around the targets. Increased ability to adapt to
future or expanded targets as needed.
Timeframe:
* Although we expect the "Fedora flavors" concept to be ongoing, this
"second phase" is targetted for the F22 and F23 releases, making it
an approximately 12-month objective. That way, this council objective
lead slot will be open shortly after Flock 2015.
Aspects:
- Coordinate Working Groups' development of updated PRDs and changes and
features for each release.
- Work with FESCo and Fedora Program Manager to develop process whereby
flavor-specific Changes are handled primarily at the WG level.
- Work with Outreach (marketing, ambassadors, etc.) to identify and plan
representation at new conferences specific to the various target
audiences.
- Plan, coordinate, and schedule release engineering and infrastructure
changes in advance of the F22 and F23 alpha releases.
- Lay groundwork for possible different release cycles and lifespans.
- Tooling and infrastructure for spins and remixes to increase
differentiation. # _Note: perhaps this is big enough to be an
independent
objective of its own, along with better promotion for spins._
- Work with Council and community to develop concrete process for
expansion
(or possible contraction) of Fedora flavors as identified needs change,
working from the product definition previously approved by the Board
Metrics:
- PRDs updated. Changes filed, changes accepted, changes completed.
- Conference reports; user data from those conferences.
- User and contributor surveys, and other user and contributor measures
- Usability is increased as measured by user testing specific to each
target group
----
(My only regret here is that we are not up to Phase Four, for full-on
Fedora alliteration.)
----
Additionally, I would like to nominate Stephen Gallagher for the role of
Objective Lead. Stephen brought the "three products" idea to Fedora.next,
was instrumental in its realization in the F21 release, and, also, tells
me that he will have significant time to dedicate to this over the next
year.
(Please vote on this nomination as a separate +1/-1 along with any +1
votes to the proposal overall.)
--
Ticket URL: <https://fedorahosted.org/council/ticket/17>
council <https://fedorahosted.org/council>
Fedora Council Public Tickets
8 years
[council] #18: decision on reverting start.fpo change
by fedora-badges
#18: decision on reverting start.fpo change
---------------------+-------------------
Reporter: mattdm | Owner:
Status: new | Priority: normal
Component: General | Keywords:
---------------------+-------------------
See https://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/council-
discuss/2014-November/013049.html
We don't have complete project consensus, which is why the Firefox
maintainer asked for a council decision. I think, though, that we _do_
have council consensus, at least based on everyone I've heard from.
So, the proposal is:
> Please revert the Firefox start page to http://start.fedoraproject.org/.
Future improvements for usability or other enhancements can be made for
the F22 timeframe or beyond, taking both user experience design and other
Fedora stakeholders like marketing and outreach into account.
Since F21 has already shipped, the urgency has decreased, but assuming
this passes, let's get it reset for the next update for for F22 by default
in absence of another plan. I'm proposing this as a lazy approval decision
(see [http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Council#Making_Decisions Making
Decisions], and since the holidays are upon us, let's make the timeframe
for votes be the rest of December.
--
Ticket URL: <https://fedorahosted.org/council/ticket/18>
council <https://fedorahosted.org/council>
Fedora Council Public Tickets
8 years, 1 month
[council] #19: new terminology for cloud/server/workstation
by fedora-badges
#19: new terminology for cloud/server/workstation
-------------------------+-------------------
Reporter: mattdm | Owner:
Status: new | Priority: normal
Component: Fedora.next | Keywords:
-------------------------+-------------------
We've been using the term "product" to refer to the different Fedora
variants produced and marketed as part of the new (or by now, not so new)
Fedora.next plan. This has a number of problems -- we're not actually
selling anything, and we don't want to give that impression. And some
spins users have expressed that it doesn't carry the meaning that we did
intend very well. So, we're looking for something new.
I had suggested "flavors", but that has its own problems: it's idiomatic,
doesn't translate well, and apparently I'm the only one that likes it. :)
So let's find something else.
--
Ticket URL: <https://fedorahosted.org/council/ticket/19>
council <https://fedorahosted.org/council>
Fedora Council Public Tickets
8 years, 1 month
no irc meeting today... (pre-release chaos day instead)
by Matthew Miller
This would have been the regularly scheduled board meeting. As noted in
the charter, the intention is for the Council to _not_ be meeting
driven, but I think at least in the beginning, we _do_ want to have
regular meetings in order to keep things active and moving. After the
f21 release, we'll coordinate to find the best meeting time for the new
council members.
--
Matthew Miller
<mattdm(a)fedoraproject.org>
Fedora Project Leader
8 years, 5 months
Re: [council] #1: Periodic user/contributor survey
by fedora-badges
#1: Periodic user/contributor survey
---------------------+-----------------------
Reporter: mattdm | Owner: somebody
Status: new | Priority: major
Component: General | Resolution:
Keywords: |
---------------------+-----------------------
Comment (by misc):
One way to do that would be to make surveys during free software events.
We have a worldwide ambassadors, so we could ask them to reach out to
people they know that do not use Fedora to fill a survey ( and not "people
from their family", more "people in LUG" ).
--
Ticket URL: <https://fedorahosted.org/council/ticket/1#comment:20>
council <https://fedorahosted.org/council>
Fedora Council Public Tickets
8 years, 5 months
Re: [council] #1: Periodic user/contributor survey
by fedora-badges
#1: Periodic user/contributor survey
---------------------+-----------------------
Reporter: mattdm | Owner: somebody
Status: new | Priority: major
Component: General | Resolution:
Keywords: |
---------------------+-----------------------
Comment (by jwboyer):
I have no problems polling our own users with various questions, but I'm
not sure it's going to prove to be massively useful. From a high level,
it will tell us they use Fedora, they use (maybe) one of the DEs, they
install some applications. Great. That tells us they use Fedora. Job
done? Now if you get at the root of all these questions with "why do
you..." then cool, that might be more useful. It's difficult to do that
without having free form answers, and it tends to reduce the number of
people willing to actually do the survey because it takes more time.
Likely worth doing still, but call me skeptical I guess.
Now, probably even more difficult to accomplish, I would love to know why
people _don't_ use Fedora. What are we lacking, why are their needs met
by $other_distro but not Fedora, etc. But to do that, we need to be
asking people that aren't our users and contributors. I think the results
would be more useful, but the execution of actually getting the survey to
people and having them willing to respond would be more difficult.
--
Ticket URL: <https://fedorahosted.org/council/ticket/1#comment:19>
council <https://fedorahosted.org/council>
Fedora Council Public Tickets
8 years, 5 months
Re: [council] #1: Periodic user/contributor survey
by fedora-badges
#1: Periodic user/contributor survey
---------------------+-----------------------
Reporter: mattdm | Owner: somebody
Status: new | Priority: major
Component: General | Resolution:
Keywords: |
---------------------+-----------------------
Comment (by mattdm):
Hmmmm. I can seem some of that argument, but there are also some universal
things it'd be nice to follow, and perhaps some other things
(demographics, for example) which would be nice to be able to compare
_across_ the products. Additionally, if we go with the idea of collecting
a sample pool from which we draw randomly, doing that at the top level
makes sense to me, and then lower-level surveys could periodically draw
from that.
This is distinct from other types of feedback, like user interviews, which
I absolutely agree should be done at the WG level.
--
Ticket URL: <https://fedorahosted.org/council/ticket/1#comment:18>
council <https://fedorahosted.org/council>
Fedora Council Public Tickets
8 years, 5 months
Re: [council] #1: Periodic user/contributor survey
by fedora-badges
#1: Periodic user/contributor survey
---------------------+-----------------------
Reporter: mattdm | Owner: somebody
Status: new | Priority: major
Component: General | Resolution:
Keywords: |
---------------------+-----------------------
Comment (by rdieter):
I have several problems with driving this here (from the council). The
primary one being with the advent of Products, I feel doing a top-level
survey would not be very productive. Such a thing (particularly user
surveys) would ideally be done per-Product, driven by their respective
working groups.
--
Ticket URL: <https://fedorahosted.org/council/ticket/1#comment:17>
council <https://fedorahosted.org/council>
Fedora Council Public Tickets
8 years, 5 months
