Fedora Board Recap 2010-09-27

Robyn Bergeron robyn.bergeron at gmail.com
Tue Sep 28 06:37:36 UTC 2010

On Mon, Sep 27, 2010 at 7:01 PM, Chris Tyler <chris at tylers.info> wrote:
> Wiki URL:
> http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Meeting:Board_meeting_2010-09-27
> == Roll Call ==
> * Present: Matt Domsch, Jared Smith, Jon Stanley, Rex Dieter, Máirín
> Duffy, Christopher Aillon, Tom Callaway, Chris Tyler
> * Absent: Colin Walters (may be out on PTO)
> * Regards: Stephen Smoogen
> * Assigned meeting secretary: Chris Tyler, with gobby notes by everyone
> == Agenda ==
> * Updates
> * Didn't meet last week due to FUDCon Zurich
> * Work on Open Tickets
> === Updates ===
> * FUDCon Zurich

Can someone who was (a) in this meeting and (b) also at FUDCon:Zurich
perhaps type up a bit more detail on this and pass it off to the
FUDCon planning list (fudcon-planning @fp.o)? I'd like to make sure we
can repeat the successes (well-organized barcamp) and know more about
what we did RIGHT; I'd also, of course, like to avoid the
"unsuccesses." Some of that is straightforward (Barcamp on a better
day); some other parts might need some more light (e.g., we need more
non-RH folks - how many people actually came? Did it really seem out
of balance?)

Basically, if there is anything that needs to be handed off from the
board to the fudcon planning group, I'd like that info to go to that
list so that we can start taking action on those things accordingly.
These minutes sounded like action items, so please send us some

> ** mizmo: A lot of people not happy with Fedora EMEA situation
> ** Many people seemed disappointed that there weren't more non-RH folks
> there
> ** Not as many talks as previous FUDCons
> ** BarCamp worked well, very well organized
> ** Spot: Many folks disappointed that the barcamp was on the last day,
> and they were unable to participate
> *** Some folks went sightseeing the first day, and missed the first day
> of hackfests
> *** Defintely don't put barcamp on the last day in Tempe (this has not
> historically been done in NA)
> ** mizmo: Dave Crossland gave a great talk on open source typography
> *** would be great to reach out to more subject-matter experts in the
> wider FLOSS community and invite them to FUDcons (anyone in mind for
> FUDcon Tempe?)
> * Fedora 14 Beta tomorrow
> ** Go/no-go last Wed - No beta blockers identified, release bits flipped
> tomorrow morning.
> === Open Tickets ===
> * Ticket 78: Vision statement *
> ** Proposals **
> *** Proposed VS from Spot: ''To encourage adoption of new and casual
> users, to provide a platform for expansion and development for power
> users, and to create a community of thriving contributions within a free
> software ideaology.'' (done in the order of the pyramid, maybe flip
> order) - Edited: ''To create a community of thriving contributions
> within a free software ideaology, to provide a platform for expansion
> and development for power users, and to encourage adoption
> (participation? collaboration?) of (by?) new and casual users''
> *** Existing proposal from Mairin: ''The Fedora Project envisions a
> widely-adopted and thriving free & open source software ecosystem
> improving users' lives worldwide." (30-Aug)''
> *** Existing proposal from Jared: ''The Fedora Project works to create a
> world in which (the culture of) free/open-source software is pervasive,
> collaboration is the norm, and people are empowered to control their own
> data and devices.''
> *** on-the-fly proposal based on spot's - '' A thriving, diverse,
> collaborative free culture community; a healthy free culture ecosystem
> for expansion and development for power users; and to encourage free
> culture collaboration with new and casual users.''
> *** on-the-fly proposal based on Jared's - '''''The Fedora Project
> creates a world in which free and open culture is both welcoming and
> pervasive, collaboration  and outreach is the norm, and people are
> empowered to control their own content and devices.'''''
> **** Agreed: Consider this the "Final Draft for Comments", jsmith to
> send to advisory-board, consider comments, and vote for final approval
> in one week.
> **** IRC meeting at 2 pm EDT on Friday Oct 1 for community discussion.
> Comments close EOD UTC Friday.
> ** Discussion
> *** mdomsch: People don't join communities to join a commnunity, they
> join because they have matching goals/ideals
> *** spot: jared's doesn't answer as many questions as i'd like when
> considering new features/etc
> **** caillon: we could have a vision statement for the project as a
> whole, and a separate one or separate mission statement for the distro
> itself
> **** spot: if someone wants to do free music around that statement, can
> they? it specifically says software
> **** jsmith: change it to not refer specifically to software
> **** spot: can it answer the question: "does this have a broader benefit
> to help us grow our community or not?" i called out new & casual users
> because it can be mapped against specific propsals as being in line with
> it or not - if Fedora the OS had a separate statement that specifically
> mentions these users, that would do the same thing, but will we actually
> have one?
> **** caillon: new & casual users is implied: if the majority of ppl in
> the world look at fedora and think it's unusable then we won't ever
> achieve our goal
> *** after we select the vision statement, come up with a set of tangible
> goals, focus on specific SIGs/teams and outline how they can help
> achieve it (guidance for fesco, guidance for sigs, etc)
> *** everyone should be thinking about short-medium term, next 1-3 fedora
> releases, goals we'd like to set, not too technically-specific, to meet
> vision. for example, encourage more people making backgrounds => instead
> of saying we want 100 new backgrounds for the next 3 releases, rather
> say we want an improved focus on free art, and allow fesco/sigs to
> figure out what that means to them and have them set the specific
> tangible goals on their own.
> *** jstanley: barcamp session at next fudcon to discuss implementation
> possibly. People are much less likely to be hostile to each other when
> they're in the same room, and the discussion can be more focused.
> * Ticket 82: Charter for Community Working Group (if time permits)
> ** Tabled for next week
> === Any Other Business? ===
> * (None)
> === Next meeting(s) ===
> * IRC Fri Oct 1: 2 PM EDT (and every other Friday after that for Office
> Hours)
> ** Rotating duty so at least one board member is present

I realize that an hour a week of either being bombarded with
questions, or alternately, blocking off an hour with few to no
questions, can, well, take an hour a week of time, and we all know
that, sadly, there is no "Magic Time Generator" feature in F14. :)

However, a commitment of having "at least one board member" present to
answer community questions seems a bit puzzling.  I hardly see that as
enough board representation to do anything other than have one person
say, "I have to go talk to the rest of the board to get an answer."

I think it is important, and valuable, for the community to be able to
interact with the Board as a whole (or at least as a majority) when
there are questions, particularly those concerning the direction of
the project as a whole. I also think it is important for the community
to be able to see Board interaction, how decisions are being made, and
so forth.  (Sort of like watching CSPAN, but much less puzzling, I
think. :D)  As usual, I don't mean to be Negative Nancy or anything
(though I may be getting a reputation!), but ensuring the presence of
"at least one board member," who will likely have to take questions in
many cases back to a private board meeting, doesn't really give the
community visibility into much of anything, particularly when there
are no "public, but board-only IRC meetings," or meeting logs, etc. to

I would personally like to see a higher level of commitment as far as
the number of board members present goes.  As I said, I realize it is
a serious investment of time; however, I believe the returns from
open, transparent interaction with the community will go a long ways
as far as making sure that the Community and Board are on the same
page when it comes to both developing and meeting Fedora's short- and
long-term goals as well as vision.

That said, your current efforts and time spent are much appreciated by
the community; I'm glad to see that we are moving forward with the
Vision statement stuff, and that we're thinking about next steps in
terms of developing goals to go along with the Vision.  I do hope that
we get some time at FUDCon to talk about implementation, as Jon noted,
as well as perhaps developing an ongoing strategic life cycle (I know,
marketing speak) where we can look at our goals every set number of
months, see if they're making progress or have been attained, and
develop new ones as needed, as part of progressing towards a long-term

And I hope you're all signed up for that FUDCon:Tempe thing, by the
way. I hear it's going to be *awesome.* :)


> * Phone Mon Oct 4: 2 PM EDT (and every Monday after that)
> _______________________________________________
> advisory-board mailing list
> advisory-board at lists.fedoraproject.org
> https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/advisory-board

More information about the advisory-board mailing list