FDSCo Meeting 2007-10-25 IRC log

[Paul W. Frields]

12:09 < stickster> <meeting>
12:09 < stickster> We have two agenda items, then on to AOB.
12:09 < stickster> http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/DocsProject/Meetings
12:09 < stickster> (shorter URL link, redirects to canonical page)
12:10 < stickster> The first thing up is a Docs status report for F8, let's let couf and jmbuser elaborate
12:10 < EvilBob> BobJensen
12:10 < stickster> Hi BobJensen!
12:10 < couf> AG is shaping up to become something decent
12:10 < couf> it's come a long way
12:11 < jmbuser> +1
12:11 < stickster> There's quite a bit of new material there, kudos!
12:11 < couf> we were going to convert to cvs yesterday but due to some bad schedules we missed that
12:12 < couf> I'm going to let it in the wiki for 1 more week before doing the conversion
12:12 < stickster> Did you guys arrive at a consensus for doing CVS conversion? Is that going to hamper contribution at all?
12:12 < couf> we're going to try and keep it in cvs then
12:12 < couf> it's a testcase
12:12 < couf> if it doesn't work out, well then it's back to the wiki
12:13 < stickster> I note that there's very little in the AG about the standard GUI toolset (System > Administration > [...])
12:13 < couf> right, good point
12:14 < couf> I'm writing up something for the list to digest, points to consider, ...
12:14 < stickster> Sure... People can add comments to the list traffic then
12:15 < stickster> I would like to see the Guide do more along the lines of solving the simple use cases before it goes into tremendous detail about the ins and outs of config files.
12:16 < couf> the thing is, people tend to find administration complicated and want to read more then they can really use
12:16 < stickster> For instance, Users:  1. Adding a User; 2. Deleting a User; 3. Adding a Group; 4. Deleting a Group; 5. Modifying a User's Group Membership; 6. User Private Groups; 7. ....
12:16 < couf> I feel that's reflected in the current state
12:17 < stickster> Right, so to me *de-emphasizing* the complicated stuff, or pushing it later in a chapter, makes more sense
12:17 < stickster> Start small, build the skill as the chapter goes along
12:17 < couf> right
12:17 < jmbuser> Agree
12:17 < EvilBob> IMO for every "Guide" there is also room for a "Quick Start"
12:18 < stickster> EvilBob: Sure, I feel that each chapter/topic is really best served up as a quick start, then a slightly less-quick start, then a slow deep dive
12:18 < EvilBob> yup
12:18 < couf> so that's an important part of my to-the-list message
12:18 < stickster> If you look at the goal of any document as a skill-building tool, then you have to start with the most fundamental, elementary skills, then build on them
12:19 < stickster> couf: Great, we can delve into this more on-lis then
12:19 < stickster> *on-list
12:20 < stickster> couf: As the leader for that doc, you should feel free to encourage the writers to follow your blueprint ideas
12:20 < couf> yeah, just noting: I probably won't be around for the rest off the week so if someone could help and follow-up in my place, that would be great
12:20 < stickster> Let's also not forget that our deadline here is self-imposed -- so if we need an extra week or two, it's there.
12:21 < stickster> jmbuser: Want to talk about the DUG?  I know we had a few contributors pop up to help.
12:21 < jmbuser> Yes, great to have the help...thanks to Marc and, just recently, Dan
12:22 < jmbuser> Even had a few edits today
12:22 < stickster> jmbuser: There was a John Wess on the list too, who seemed keen on helping
12:23 < stickster> Looks like he's got edit rights now, too
12:23 < jmbuser> yes, I need to see if I made contact with him yet
12:23 < stickster> Side note to all:
12:23 < jmbuser> I got generous with the approvals recently :-)
12:23 < stickster> This is always the most fertile time for getting contributors -- right after a new release
12:24 < stickster> The quicker we can grab onto those contributors and get them started, the more likely they'll stick around and make lasting contributions
12:24 < jmbuser> especially a good release like fedora 8
12:25 < stickster> jmbuser: And don't worry about the CVS thing, like I said, it's not a big worry
12:26 < stickster> Mainly I wanted people to be aware that translators don't need to have cvsdocs access, one less hoop through which to jump ;-)
12:26 < couf> do we need to talk about that some more?
12:26 < stickster> This is one reason that we went to using a "po/LINGUAS" file in CVS instead of editing the Makefile -- now translators can simply add themselves in if they're translating a new locale
12:26 < stickster> couf: I'm not sure
12:26 < stickster> The key points are:
12:27 < stickster> (1) we don't have any problems giving people CVS access
12:27 < stickster> (2) translators don't need 'cvsdocs' group membership to do their work
12:27 < stickster> (3) most CVS administrators feel better using least privilege
12:27 < couf> right
12:27 < stickster> (4) since there are other people involved in CVS admin duties than just me and quaid, we'll err on the side of not giving the others heartburn :-)
12:28 < stickster> Having said that, people can author docs in our CVS in a non-"en_US" locale
12:28 < couf> so do we want to flesh out the cvsdocs group?
12:28 < stickster> We don't want to prevent anyone from doing that
12:28 < stickster> couf: You mean, do we want to add new contributors to that group?
12:29 < couf> no, I think a new contributor on docs should have cvsdocs access
12:29 < stickster> sure
12:29 < couf> but there are a lot of translators in cvsdocs, which don't need anything than cvsl10n
12:30 < stickster> couf: Good point that
12:30 < stickster> It might be a good reason to cull that list a little
12:30 < stickster> couf: Are you able to maybe raise this topic in fedora-trans-list?
12:30 < couf> sure
12:30 < stickster> With the main reason being that 'cvsl10n' gives them everything they need, and not because we don't love them
12:31 < couf> yep
12:31 < stickster> L10N ROXXX!
12:31 < stickster> \m/_  _\m/
12:32 < couf> all righty, next?
12:32 < stickster> OK, I'll look for that thread, thanks couf 
12:33 < stickster> I know quaid might have some input too, he can pop in here to let us know if there's something (new) dumb that I've done
12:33 < stickster> Well, roundup on Release Notes is probably in order
12:33 < couf> sure
12:34 < stickster> At least to note that we should be pressing a package update in about a week or so
12:34 < stickster> That's 'nuff said, I think
12:35 -!- stickster changed the topic of #fedora-meeting to: Documentation Meeting: election planning
12:35 < couf> elections yay
12:36 < stickster> http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/DocsProject/Policy/FDSCoElections
12:36 < stickster> I thought we had something out there, cool..
12:36 < stickster> This has some interesting implications with culling the 'cvsdocs' group
12:36 < stickster> But I think it makes sense
12:37 < stickster> Opinions?
12:37 < couf> it does, but I'm not sure translators need to vote on dsco, they have lsco (or something like that)
12:38 < stickster> Right
12:38 < jmbuser> Should we cull the cvsdocs group before the election?
12:38 < couf> imo, ys
12:38 < couf> yes
12:39 < jmbuser> yes to culling
12:39 < stickster> jmbuser: Right, that's where I was pointing... I would hate people to look at that and think we were trying to "disenfranchise" voters :-D
12:39 < stickster> OTOH, as couf said, l10n voters have their own committee
12:40 < stickster> Their work definitely dovetails with ours, certainly
12:40 < stickster> I guess I would lean toward culling the list before we put up nominations
12:40 < EvilBob> If they are interested in Voting why not let them
12:40 < EvilBob> if they are not interested in our election they will not vote
12:41 < couf> true
12:41 < jmbuser> true
12:41 < EvilBob> I don't see why having someone that primarily does translation vote in our election is a problem, our work here does effect them
12:41 < stickster> EvilBob: The only "why not" reason I could give would be the same reason that, for instance, FESCo elections aren't open to people who don't do any maintenance
12:41 < jmbuser> too many voters usually isn't the problem with our election
12:42 < stickster> But I don't see that as a good reason, so... ;-)
12:42 < stickster> I think the funny thing is, this is a good reason not to give out CVS access willy-nilly
12:42 < EvilBob> I would say no culling until after the election
12:42 < stickster> But in a volunteer project where so many people work together closely, it seems silly not to let people have a say
12:43 < stickster> Let's put it this way -- I coordinated a lot of POT work with release notes for the last cycle.
12:43 < stickster> That impacted a lot of L10N resources.
12:43 < EvilBob> after the election we can clean up the list and those that want to be part of our process can get added back in
12:43 < couf> okay, I'm starting to turn into a cull after elections
12:43 < stickster> If people there hate how I handle things, why shouldn't they be allowed to express it?
12:43 < jmbuser> no culling then
12:43 < stickster> Yeah, I think I'm having a mind-changing experience :-)
12:43 < couf> :-)
12:43 < EvilBob> I win!
12:44 < stickster> haha
12:44 < couf> lol
12:44 < couf> so dates?
12:44 < stickster> Let's back-burner this until post-election, but it will be the responsibility of the new FDSCo to make sure it gets done within, say, two weeks after elections.
12:44 < stickster> Should be a fairly easy job..
12:44 < EvilBob> stickster: +1
12:44 < couf> okay +1
12:45 < jmbuser> +1
12:45 < EvilBob> thanks guys
12:45 < stickster> Well, our charter says we should try to coincide with the FESCo elections
12:45 < stickster> I'll make sure abadger_afk knows we would like to do that
12:46 < stickster> for instance, by shouting abadger_afk 
12:46 < EvilBob> stickster: yes and make sure he can handle two elections at one time
12:46 < abadger_afk> stickster: yo!
12:46 -!- abadger is now known as abadger1999
12:46 < stickster> See, it's like magic! He's like our guardian democratic angel
12:47 < couf> when's the FESCo election? I thought that happend some time ago?
12:47 < stickster> couf: Already for post-F8?
12:47 < stickster> I couldn't have missed that news, could I? :-\
12:47  * stickster knows quite well he very well could have
12:47  * couf could be wrong
12:47 < abadger1999> FESCo has annual elections.  So they were post-F7
12:47 < couf> aha
12:47 < stickster> Ah, not per release?
12:48 < abadger1999> Correct
12:48 < stickster> OK. Our charter has them per release, which I believe we confirmed last cycle.
12:48 < couf> so we could maybe tie into the FAMSCo elections then?
12:48 < stickster> Sure.
12:48 < stickster> abadger1999: We just want to make sure we're not giving people election fatigue
12:48  * EvilBob is listening to some local guys down on San Andres Island working a morse code contest.
12:49 < couf> https://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-ambassadors-list/2007-November/msg00078.html
12:49 < stickster> Once we come up with dates, abadger1999, can I just get in touch with you?
12:49 < abadger1999> Okay.  We still don't have a way to hold multiple elections at the same time :-(
12:49 < stickster> Oh, gotcha.
12:49 < EvilBob> OK
12:49 < abadger1999> No one's had time to rewrite the app.
12:50 < abadger1999> stickster: Yep.  Go ahead and send me the details and I'll set it up.
12:50 < stickster> That reminds me, I may have entered that issue in your trac db, but I'm not sure.
12:50 < stickster> It was probably a "we'll get to this post-apocalypse" issue :-D
12:50 < stickster> Thanks abadger1999, will do.
12:50 < stickster> All right, gang, we should probably figure out who's up this time -- that should be easy to find out from looking at the post-F7 ML archives.
12:51 < stickster> Let's do that on-list, eh?
12:51 < EvilBob> I am not up this time, but I would like to offer up my seat as I have not been that active.
12:51 < jmbuser> ok
12:52 < couf> euh, that would be post f6
12:52 < couf> we didn't have an election last time, due to lack of time
12:52 < stickster> Oh, is that right?
12:52 < stickster> whoops.
12:52 < EvilBob> couf: right
12:52 < couf> we were going to have one, but it just didn't happen
12:53 < couf> in that case, actually all seats should be up for election
12:53 < stickster> couf: Are you sure? I see updates on the Elections page back around February 2007
12:53 < couf> unless we decide differently
12:53 < couf> we were going to have one in August too
12:53 < EvilBob> couf: no I think we simply pushed out the schedule
12:54 < stickster> Ah yes, I see where you're pointing couf 
12:54 < couf> ah yeah, maybe we should reallign it with the more formal release schedule
12:54 < stickster> Right.  So this will be our mid-cycle election -- perhaps doing this at some point significantly before Alpha, so that we don't end up doing this in the middle of the release pushes
12:55 < couf> +1
12:55 < stickster> That would mean around three weeks from now -- maybe coinciding somewhat with Christmas, although that shouldn't be a big problem with a two-week vote period
12:56 < EvilBob> +1
12:56 < jmbuser> +1
12:56 < couf> yeah, alpha is scheduled for 15 Jan, so that would be okay
12:56 < EvilBob> stickster: so just after the ambassadors election?
12:56 < stickster> EvilBob: what are their dates
12:56 < stickster> ?
12:56 < couf> see above link
12:56 < EvilBob> Nominations:  11/21/2007 to 12/2/2007
12:56 < EvilBob> Voting Period:  12/4/2007 to 12/11/2007
12:57 < stickster> self.head.conk()
12:57 < stickster> Sure, that seems opportune, then.
12:57 < stickster> We could do voting for a week or so, that seems plenty for our-sized group.
12:57 < stickster> Say, 12/11 - 12/18, or 12/12 - 12/19
12:57 < couf> self nomination untill 12/20
12:58 < couf> wow, I meant 12/12
12:58 < EvilBob> so 18th - 25th or the 1st?
12:58 < stickster> I would go for noms 12/4 - 12/11, then voting somewhere around 12/12 - 12/19
12:58 < couf> right
12:58 < EvilBob> if we start voting a week after ambassadors I think it might be good
12:59 < stickster> I think the worry would be doing a week during the week of Christmas -- bad idea
12:59 < stickster> Plus, we need some time between the election close and the ramp-up of the Alpha release, to make sure we're getting our guides off the ground
13:00 < stickster> We can hit this more on list
13:00 < EvilBob> the holiday is the 25th, so the 18th start date would give a week before then and 4 voting days before people leave for a week+
13:01 < stickster> I don't see what the extra week gains us, other than white space on a calendar
13:02 < stickster> The priority I was looking at was moving back from the release schedule milestone dates
13:02 < EvilBob> abadger1999: how soon after the ambassadors election can youhave our's ready?
13:02 < stickster> We could always split the middle, do something like 12/15-12/22
13:03 < stickster> That has the added bonus of capturing all or part of two weekends
13:03 < EvilBob> stickster: yeah I was just looking at the 14th here
13:03 < abadger1999> EvilBob: The next day.  People usu. like to have two weekends, though.
13:03 < stickster> Maybe 15-22 Dec, or 15-23 Dec would be best.
13:03 < EvilBob> stickster: 14 -24?
13:04 < EvilBob> stickster: that gives us almost 2 weekend
13:04 < stickster> EvilBob: Sure. The length of the voting period seems excessive for as small a number of votes as we're likely to get, but meh
13:04 < stickster> Let's do that.
13:04 < stickster> +1
13:04 < couf> and he wins again :-)
13:04 < stickster> EvilBob is active when it comes to arguing :-D
13:04 < jmbuser> +1
13:04 < EvilBob> nominations in by the 12th, voting 14-24
13:04 < EvilBob> stickster: LOL
13:05 < stickster> EvilBob: disco
13:05 < stickster> All right, AOB?
13:05 < jmbuser> EvilBob shoots...and scores!
13:05 < stickster> 15 sec
13:05 < couf> just noting: sorry to not enter into the sig/project thread, I seemed to not have any pro/cons either way
13:05  * stickster clock resets
13:06 < stickster> Not a problem. I think we resolved it the right way
13:06 < stickster> cooler heads usually prevail.
13:06 < couf> yeah
13:06 < stickster> AOB?
13:06 < couf> anyway interesting discussion
13:06 < stickster> 15 sec
13:06 < EvilBob> none here
13:06 < stickster> 10
13:06 < couf> nope
13:06 < stickster> 5
13:06 < stickster> 4
13:06 < stickster> 3
13:06 < jmbuser> no
13:06 < stickster> 2
13:06 < stickster> 1
13:06 < stickster> </meeting>

-- 
Paul W. Frields, RHCE                          http://paul.frields.org/
  gpg fingerprint: 3DA6 A0AC 6D58 FEC4 0233  5906 ACDB C937 BD11 3717
           Fedora Project: http://pfrields.fedorapeople.org/
  irc.freenode.net: stickster @ #fedora-docs, #fedora-devel, #fredlug
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: not available
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 189 bytes
Desc: This is a digitally signed message part
Url : http://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/docs/attachments/20071125/8a2104bb/attachment.bin