2010-09-02 MEETING PROPOSAL: discussion on Annual User Survey
mmcgrath at redhat.com
Thu Sep 2 03:23:22 UTC 2010
On Wed, 1 Sep 2010, Jon Masters wrote:
> On Wed, 2010-09-01 at 19:47 -0400, Jon Stanley wrote:
> > On Wed, Sep 1, 2010 at 7:34 PM, inode0 <inode0 at gmail.com> wrote:
> > > What is preventing you from just going off and doing it now? I hope
> > > you find encouragement but I also hope the board doesn't get in the
> > > business of issuing mandates.
> > Correct me if I'm wrong, but I read what Jon was looking for as more
> > of permission than a mandate of "you SHALL do this" - obviously he
> > already wants to. I think we should give encouragement to this,
> > because I think the data is extraordinarily valuable. Also, he
> > mentioned that there are outside companies that could be contracted to
> > do this - implying a financial cost. While the board has no finances
> > as such to direct, we can certainly say to CommArch or more directly
> > Fedora Engineering (as anyone else can) that we think this is a
> > valuable use of money.
> > Feel free to correct me if I'm wrong :)
> You are exactly right Jon. What I want from the Board is:
> 1). "We would like this done". That says I'm not acting alone and that
> they agree with doing this. That makes it easier to get others to help
> because they will see that this is helpful to the project as a whole.
> 2). The financial cost exists if the Board prefer to have it done
> independently of the project, which should be considered, and is another
> reason why I have asked that they discuss it.
> I gather this discussion will actually happen on Friday, not tomorrow.
> The Board wiki page has had an incorrect meeting time for some time, but
> (other) Jon just corrected it at my request. I am unable to attend on
> Friday, even if there were a public IRC, since I will be driving to
> upstate NY for a weddding. But don't let me gate the discussion. Have at
> it, and let me know what is decided.
I'm all for this, I'd like to get someone that knows how to do these
things, I suspect we don't have the inhouse expertise to create this sort
More information about the advisory-board