Creating a "Fedora Incubator" brand
by Matthew Miller
Bikeshedding on the name welcome, but here's the concept:
Right now, we have the main Fedora brand, which as the guidelines stand
generally applies to the main Fedora operating system distribution and
to our core activities. And we have the Fedora Remix brand, which is
very clearly for work _outside_ of Fedora Proper.
I think we might benefit from having an official branding for
initiatives somewhere in between — work done *in* the project, but not
necessarily yet accepted into our "mainline". This would encourage
innovation _within_ Fedora without causing confusion over whether
something is "official".
What do you think?
--
Matthew Miller
<mattdm(a)fedoraproject.org>
Fedora Project Leader
7 years, 12 months
Re: Cloud WG FAD
by Josh Berkus
On 04/28/2016 05:52 AM, Matthew Miller wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 27, 2016 at 03:19:01PM -0700, Josh Berkus wrote:
>>> We've been asking people to put project-wide impact front-and-center. I
>>> think this is a good, practical FAD with concrete deliverables. It'd be
>>> nice, though, to have those deliverables connected up to higher-level
>>> objectives and benefit for Fedora overall.
>> Are there objectives in addition to the four Fs we can draw on?
>
> Yes - see https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Objectives. Additionally,
> although
> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Objectives/Fedora_Editions,_Phase_2 is
> marked as completed, in many ways this is a continuation of that.
>
Added an Objectives section.
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/FAD_Cloud_WG_2016#Objectives
--
Josh Berkus
Project Atomic
7 years, 12 months
Re: Cloud WG FAD
by Josh Berkus
On 04/27/2016 02:41 PM, Matthew Miller wrote:
> On Wed, Apr 27, 2016 at 02:34:33PM -0700, Josh Berkus wrote:
>> The wiki page is here: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/FAD_Cloud_WG_2016
>> What other information do you need to evaluate this FAD?
>
> We've been asking people to put project-wide impact front-and-center. I
> think this is a good, practical FAD with concrete deliverables. It'd be
> nice, though, to have those deliverables connected up to higher-level
> objectives and benefit for Fedora overall.
Are there objectives in addition to the four Fs we can draw on?
--
Josh Berkus
Project Atomic
7 years, 12 months
Cloud WG FAD
by Josh Berkus
Council,
The Cloud WG would like to host our first Fedora Activity Day. This was
raised at Flock 2015, and has been discussed since then. We have
arranged a date and venue which work for the main contributors to the
WG. This FAD would be held June 7-8.
The wiki page is here: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/FAD_Cloud_WG_2016
What other information do you need to evaluate this FAD?
--
Josh Berkus
Project Atomic
7 years, 12 months
Unable to attend the meeting today; my take on the budget
by Christoph Wickert
Hi,
I'll be on a train in the middle of nowhere tonight, so I won't be
able to make it to the council meeting.
Regarding the budget: For me, fF/hDI scenario sounds best, but frankly
speaking I'm not happy with it either. It's not that I don't like the
scenario, but the overall process. It's hard to vote on abstract
scenarios without knowing what they actually mean for the people. We
want to support some outreachy stuff, but do we actually have ideas
how to spend 5k? What events do we attend? Who will attend these
events?
Ultimately, we want Fedora to be a flat hierarchy. Decisions-making
should happen bottom-up and on the lowest possible level. Scenarios on
the other hand seem very top-down.
FAmSCo has been working hard to delegate as much responsibility down
to the regions. This process has been working well and inspired people
to participate. Therefor I suggest we first look at what they request,
make some adjustments and once we know how much we need for regional
support, we know how much is left for FADs and Outreachy.
Best regards,
Christoph
7 years, 12 months
Proposed Adjusted Budget Scenarios for FY17
by Remy DeCausemaker
Councils,
Attached is a text file (and spreadsheet) with the scenarios we discussed
during our meeting.
tl;dr - "Best Case Scenario" (lowest amount of Council/Events Budget) it's
a roughly 23% cut in budget for each region (except for APAC, but more on
that later)
If you'd like to edit/adjust/append any info to these documents, they can
be found in the fedora-budget repo in FY17/adjustedannualbudget/council:
https://pagure.io/fedora-budget
Thanks mattdm for helping to hunt down this info, and I'll add more
historical information as it comes from Ambassadors.
Looking Forward,
--RemyD.
8 years
[council] #55: Fedora Documentation FAD
by fedora-badges
#55: Fedora Documentation FAD
---------------------+-------------------
Reporter: shaunm | Owner:
Status: new | Priority: normal
Component: General | Keywords:
---------------------+-------------------
This ticket is to request funding for a Fedora documentation FAD,
including downstream partners from RHEL and CentOS. See the wiki planning
page:
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/FAD_Documentation_2016
The current travel+lodging estimate is $2425. There is one potential
attendee I haven't heard back from who may need up to $1600. Note that
some attendees are able to use their own Red Hat travel budget and don't
need FAD funding.
Ruth Suehle indicated FAD funding often includes funding for one evening
social event. If so, I would request $400. If not, don't worry about it.
This is the first time I've gone through the FAD funding process. Please
let me know if there's anything I've missed.
--
Ticket URL: <https://fedorahosted.org/council/ticket/55>
council <https://fedorahosted.org/council>
Fedora Council Public Tickets
8 years
Today at 18:00 UTC: Fedora Council first FY17 budget review meeting
by Matthew Miller
Sorry for not posting this specific meeting invite earlier - it was
mentioned in the general schedule but I didn't send out this notice Friday
like I intended to, mostly because it's been crazy around my house (sorry
about that).
As you probably all know, this is the first year we're trying something new
with the budget — having the Council discuss and allocate it in the open.
Okay, so: we have the big community budget number from our sponsor (Red Hat,
managed by the Open Source and Standards group, through Remy). The total
amount is the same as FY14, FY15, and FY16 — but that's not as
straighforward as it sounds.
The FY14 budget allocated $91600 to regional support [1], channeled through
the four regional ambassadors' groups. $15000 was set aside for FADS. The
rest — $88400 — was left for Flock, FUDCons, and everything else.
In FY15 [2], the total is the same, but the amount allocated to regions
increased to $100k, with nothing pre-allocated for FADs. That's because for
some reason there was a dry spell of FADs in 2012 and 2013. [3]. But, it
turned out that FY15 was actually quite busy with FADs, as FY16 has been as
well. (The FAD history page at [3] isn't complete — some are still at [4].)
This year is already looking active for FADs again, so we should budget a
good chunk for that — I'm thinking $30k, or _more_ if we want to make sure
each region has its own planning FAD (although I want to put that amount in
the budgets for each region, rather than the central budget — that's a
detail, though, and doesn't change the overall total). Since Flock is in
Europe and we've traditionally had trouble getting significant non-RH
sponsorship there, we need to keep around $80k for that. The LATAM FUDCon is
already planning on $15k — actually, almost $16k, and if we assume another
$15k FUDCon in APAC, that leaves $54000 for regional spending, rather than
the $100000 previously budgeted.
And, to complicate that further, when I look at the FY15 EMEA budget [5] for
example, I see that the _event_ spending aligns roughly with the number from
the allocation email [2], but _swag_ is over that, so that, I think, came
from central funding after all.
And that's not even considering keeping an additional centralized budget
pool for non-ambassador community spending, for example on marketing or
design — or even to meet an engineering need not sponsored otherwise. And I
know Remy wanted some to sponsor internship programs.
So, overall, this is looking like a drastic on-paper reduction of
regional budgets. The "good news" is that from what I have heard, we've
actually signficantly underspent our allocation most years, so it may
just be a matter of keeping better track of things. But, I think we are
going to have to be more careful with spending, and to really think
about the impact of each dollar.
If we don't have enough to get done what we want to, showing that
impact will allow us to put together a strong justification for
increased funding next year.
Remy has put together a Fedora Budget website [6] where the results of all
of this will go, and a git repo [7] to collect all of the information we
have.
Soooooo. Today, we'll have an initial meeting to discuss all of this. I
expect we'll also use next week's meeting primarily for this topic, and the
intervening week for mailing list discussion.
See you in #fedora-meeting in about three hours!
1. https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/FY14_Budget
2. https://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/famsco/2014-April/001525.html
3. https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_Activity_Day_-_FAD
4. https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Fedora_Project_Events
5. http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Ambassadors/EMEA/Budget:2015
6. https://budget.fedoraproject.org/
7. https://pagure.io/fedora-budget
--
Matthew Miller
<mattdm(a)fedoraproject.org>
Fedora Project Leader
8 years
