[council] #22: Objective Proposal: University Involvement
by fedora-badges
#22: Objective Proposal: University Involvement
----------------------+-------------------
Reporter: sgallagh | Owner:
Status: new | Priority: normal
Component: General | Keywords:
----------------------+-------------------
I alluded to this during the Council meeting on Monday, so I'm going to
attempt to turn this into a formal proposal.
== Objective: University Involvement ==
=== Overview ===
Increase Fedora's exposure in university environments, particularly
engineering universities.
=== Expected Impact ===
Increased user base with a specific focus on future contributors.
=== Timeframe ===
For maximum effect, if we elect to work towards this Objective, we should
kick it into gear at the beginning of the summer with the intent of having
events planned during the 2015-2016 school year.
=== Aspects ===
* Coordinate marketing, ambassador and outreach groups to focus on
university needs
* Work with universities to provide install-fests during student
orientation periods
* Work with universities to regularly run Fedora-focused hackfests
* Work with university IT departments to co-maintain one or more Fedora
computer labs (and help them upgrade them during breaks)
* Establish work-study, co-op and for-credit programs at universities
=== Metrics ===
* Increased contributions from university programs
* Increased bug reports and feature requests
* Increased mind-share among potential contributors (not easily measured)
=== Additional Notes ===
Some prototypes of this have been performed at Brno universities over the
last few years, with very positive results. We should coordinate with the
contributors involved in those efforts and learn from their successes and
failures.
There is also a University Outreach program run by Red Hat's "Open Source
and Standards" department which was involved in the RIT partnership from
which we eventually acquired Remy DeCausemaker. I assume he will have
plenty to add to this discussion as well as contacts in the university
world.
--
Ticket URL: <https://fedorahosted.org/council/ticket/22>
council <https://fedorahosted.org/council>
Fedora Council Public Tickets
8 years, 1 month
[council] #21: Permission for using Fedora trademarks for "Bantuan Fedora Indonesia"
by fedora-badges
#21: Permission for using Fedora trademarks for "Bantuan Fedora Indonesia"
---------------------+-------------------
Reporter: salimma | Owner:
Status: new | Priority: normal
Component: General | Keywords:
---------------------+-------------------
Some Indonesian contributors are working on utilizing [https://github.com
/fedora-id/asknot-ng asknot-ng] for providing a landing page for users
(and potential users) to get a clear picture of localized Fedora resources
and potential ways of contributing .
The main Fedora instance of asknot-ng powers
[http://whatcanidoforfedora.org/ What Can I Do For Fedora]; for ours we
have not decided yet what domain we will use.
To generate the static site from the code on GitHub, the original
instructions apply, but use this invocation instead:
````
./asknot-ng.py templates/index.html questions/bantuan.yml --theme fedora
````
We will probably create a substitute theme if permission to use Fedora
branding is not obtained; we plan on contributing translations for the
main site as well.
If this requires a discussion at an upcoming meeting, let me know and I'll
notify the others to attend as well. Thanks!
--
Ticket URL: <https://fedorahosted.org/council/ticket/21>
council <https://fedorahosted.org/council>
Fedora Council Public Tickets
8 years, 3 months
[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, 6 months
[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, 7 months
[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, 7 months
I'm not planning on a meeting monday...
by Matthew Miller
I had a meetingful week and don't have anything super-new to add to
where we were last week.
--
Matthew Miller
<mattdm(a)fedoraproject.org>
Fedora Project Leader
8 years, 8 months
Meeting Again! Monday March 23rd at 17:00 UTC, #fedora-meeting
by Matthew Miller
Still thinking on specifics for alternating between ongoing work items
and presentations on subtopics and specific issues. For this Monday,
though, I think we have enough left from the last two weeks that we
didn't get to, including an update on Outreach, and the proposed
University objective.
I'll send an agenda Monday morning — let me know before then if there's
anything you want on it.
Again, that's March 23rd, at 17:00 UTC (1pm US/Eastern), in the
#fedora-meeting channel on the Freenode IRC network.
--
Matthew Miller
<mattdm(a)fedoraproject.org>
Fedora Project Leader
8 years, 8 months
user base wiki page
by Matthew Miller
So, https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User_base, from 2009, speaks mostly
about the previous default offering. We should update this. Stephen
Gallagher, I know you're full of free time :) -- do you want to take
that on as part of the Fedora.next Editions change?
--
Matthew Miller
<mattdm(a)fedoraproject.org>
Fedora Project Leader
8 years, 8 months
Summary of previous discussions around FOSCo
by Christoph Wickert
Hi,
the idea of FOSCo, the Fedora Outreach Steering Committee has been
brought up before, but as there were different assumptions and ideas,
the council asked to summarize the previous discussion.
The general idea behind FOSCo is to strengthen our outreach by
bundling the efforts of the ambassadors, marketing, and the design
team.
You can break down the previous discussion into two groups:
1. Discussion within FAmSCo, see https://fedorahosted.org/famsco/ticket/373
FAmSCo agreed we want FOSCo and we want it to replace FAmSCo, and
extend its scope to other outreach teams such as the design and
marketing teams. I suggest we do not fall back behind this consensus.
2. Discussion started by Matthew, who sent out a message to various
mailing lists, see
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/ambassadors/2014-October/022896...
There was no feedback whatsoever on the ambassadors and design team
lists. On the marketing list, the question of eligible voters was
raised. FAmSCo elections were opened to CLA+1 two years ago and as the
new body represents different FAS groups, we certainly want to keep it
this way. The question however is if we elections at all. Having a
more meritocratic approach was one of the ideas behind recent Fedora
governance changes, so just like in the council, we could also have
appointed seats.
This brings us to the question of FOSCo's composition. At this point,
we need to keep two things in mind:
1. The ambassadors are the by far biggest group. This not only means
we need to represent a lot of people but also that they have a big
impact on elections.
2. Unlike the other groups, the ambassadors project is set up in a
very regional manner. The different regions (NA, LATAM, EMEA, APAC)
take care of their own business in terms of event organization, budget
etc. FAmSco only acts as an umbrella.
I think preserving the regional approach is a must. Each region should
appoint one representative. Marketing and design also need to have
representatives to make sure communication and collaboration with the
other teams works. This will give us 6 appointed (or indirectly
elected) seats.
The question is if we also want / need to have some elected seats and
if, how many of them. The council has two, but I think having an
uneven number is always a good idea. Personally I think three is best
but also the maximum because everything > 9 people in total will be
hard to manage.
I take all appointed candidates are eligible to make decisions and
each have one vote. What about the elected ones? Do we need something
like auxiliary seats as we have in the council?
There are still a lot of open questions here, e.g. the objectives,
scope, and policies of the new body. We can borrow a lot from the
council, e.g. the lazy consensus for decision making.
For everything else, I suggest we discuss the questions as they arise,
so unless people disagree, let's first discuss the composition.
Comments, feedback?
Best regards,
Christoph
8 years, 8 months
