| --- nirik has changed the topic to: FESCo meeting -- Meeting rules at http://www.fedoraproject.org/wiki/Development/Schedule/MeetingGuidelines (except the wiki is down) -- Init process | ||
| nirik | FESCo meeting ping -- bpepple, caillon, c4chris, dgilmore, | |
|---|---|---|
| nirik | dwmw2, f13, jeremy, jwb, notting, spot, nirik, tibbs, warren | |
| who's around? | ||
| * jeremy | ||
| tibbs here | ||
| notting is here | ||
| nirik | bpepple might not be around for the full meeting, so asked me to run things... | |
| notting | i, for one, welcome our new meeting overlords. | |
| * nirik will wait a few for more folks to show up. | ||
| * dgilmore is here | ||
| jwb is here | ||
| nirik | ok, thats more than half at least. ;) | |
| --- nirik has changed the topic to: FESCo-Meeting -- sponsor nominations -- Remi Collet | ||
| nirik | shall we go on with the sponsor nominations? | |
| nirik | bpepple: did you hear back that these people were willing to be sponsors? | |
| tibbs | I don't recall seeing anything public about it. | |
| jeremy | me neither | |
| tibbs | Well, we could get it right now, it seems. | |
| RemiFedora: Would you like to be made a sponsor? | ||
| nirik | yeah, I thought there was something, but now I can't find it. | |
| RemiFedora | hello everyone. | |
| Yes i'd like to | ||
| nirik | RemiFedora: excellent. | |
| tibbs | +1 | |
| nirik | +1 from me. | |
| notting | +1 | |
| f13 | sorry I'm here now. | |
| tibbs | Note that many people are probably preoccupied with the outage. | |
| f13 | +1 | |
| nirik | yeah. :( | |
| jwb | +1 | |
| jeremy | +1 | |
| nirik | dgilmore: care to vote? | |
| On Axel and Gérard, has anyone heard that they wish to become sponsors? | ||
| dgilmore | i dont know anough about Remi to chime in | |
| * bpepple arrives late. | ||
| tibbs | I recall that gemi is not particularly interested in doing sponsorship-related stuff. | |
| bpepple | tibbs: I received a message from Patrice saying that he got an ack from the people he nominated. | |
| nirik | dgilmore: fair enough. | |
| nirik | bpepple: any vote on the current sponsor nomination (see topic) | |
| tibbs | I think if we documented this a bit better we could avoid most of this confusion. | |
| I'll try to write something up. | ||
| bpepple | tibbs: Agreed. | |
| nirik: +1 | ||
| * nirik nods at tibbs | ||
| nirik | ok, thats 7 +1's so, RemiFedora will be made a sponsor... | |
| RemiFedora | great. Thanks for this big responsability and for trusting me. | |
| nirik | Congrats RemiFedora | |
| bpepple | RemiFedora: np. | |
| --- nirik has changed the topic to: FESCo-Meeting -- sponsor nominations -- Axel Thimm | ||
| dgilmore | -1 from me | |
| largely because ive not seen him active since epel started | ||
| nirik | He does still maintain/work on package in fedora, just nothing in epel. | |
| tibbs | I'm conflicted about Axel. | |
| dgilmore | nirik: yes but he was active in fedora, before epel, since epel he has just updated packages | |
| bpepple | +1 to Axel since he knows the packaging guidelines well, and maybe this will increase his participation. | |
| dgilmore | which i guess is not such a negative | |
| tibbs | On one hand, he can obviously package stuff well enough. | |
| * nirik is also conflicted. He really knows his stuff, but he can be very stubborn about things that are to me very trivial. | ||
| tibbs | On the other hand, there's the whole issue with keeping his packages closed, and the fact that he basically runs his own distro. | |
| jwb | why does that matter? | |
| tibbs | Which isn't really a horrible thing except that we still get users with broken systems because of it. | |
| jwb | again, why does that matter? | |
| tibbs | jwb: It matters to me. Is that not sufficiently important, or do I not get to voice my comments? | |
| nirik | I'd be somewhat inclinced to table this, and ask him if he would use his sponsor powers, or wouldn't bother... no point in making him a sponsor if he's not going to increase his contributions. | |
| jwb | tibbs, i'm asking _why_ it matters | |
| nirik | I guess patrice already asked if he wanted it and he said yes tho... | |
| tibbs | Well, rewarding someone who occasionally seems to actively working against Fedora? | |
| tibbs | I mean, that's what it looks like to me. | |
| notting | our very own double agent? | |
| * rdieter thinks Axel has the qualities to make an excellent sponsor, personal issues and outside-of-fedora work should be mostly irrelavant. | ||
| jwb | rdieter, exactly | |
| tibbs | Well, then vote for him. We don't have to be unanimous. | |
| bpepple | rdieter: agreed. | |
| jwb | tibbs, true. we don't | |
| though i wouldn't call sponsorship a reward | ||
| anyway, that's a tangent | ||
| bpepple | bpepple: ok, can we get a show of hands on Axel? | |
| nirik | I guess I would say +1, but that makes me wonder if we shouldn't cull sponsors list and remove those who never use the powers. ;) | |
| bpepple | +1 | |
| nirik | +1 | |
| f13 | Reluctant +1 | |
| jwb | nirik, or ask them to start (again) | |
| dgilmore | reluctant +1 also | |
| nirik | jwb: yeah. | |
| tibbs | +0. | |
| jwb | 0 | |
| nirik | anyone else ? | |
| jeremy | +1 | |
| notting | +1 | |
| nirik | current: +6, need +7 to approve... | |
| bpepple | so it looks we didn't approve Axel. | |
| nirik | yeah. | |
| notting | what present members aren't here to vote? | |
| * bpepple scrolls back. | ||
| tibbs | I would welcome a reconsideration of this at a later date. | |
| nirik | warren, dwmw2, caillion, c4chris, spot | |
| tibbs | I suggest pinging them on the list. | |
| bpepple | I belive spot mentioned he wouldn't be around today. | |
| nirik | sounds good to me. bpepple: can you do that? | |
| nirik | moving on... | |
| tibbs | spot's still on vacation as far as I know. | |
| --- nirik has changed the topic to: FESCo-Meeting -- sponsor nominations -- Gérard Milmeister | ||
| bpepple | nirik: yeah, I'll do that later today. | |
| nirik | any votes/discussion on gemi? | |
| tibbs | gemi always did good packaging work but he seems to have been mostly idle these days. | |
| * dwmw2 arrives | ||
| dwmw2 | sorry | |
| I'll give another +1 to Axel. | ||
| nirik | dwmw2: ok, great. Thats +7 and Axel is approved. | |
| bpepple | +1 to gemi. Based on reviews I looked at of his, I'm satisfied with his knowledge of the package guidelines. | |
| tibbs | dwmw2: Any opinion on Remi you'd like to get in the record? | |
| nirik | +1 to gemi. I hope it makes him more active. ;) | |
| notting | +1 | |
| dwmw2 | tibbs: that's Remi Collet? | |
| tibbs | dwmw2: Yes. | |
| dwmw2 | +1 to Remi and Gemi both :) | |
| tibbs | +1 to gemi. | |
| nirik | currently +5 to gemi | |
| jeremy | +1 | |
| f13 | +1 | |
| nirik | ok, thats +7, gemi is approved. | |
| nirik | bpepple: can you do the account system magic after the meeting? | |
| bpepple | yup. | |
| nirik | moving on... | |
| --- nirik has changed the topic to: FESCO-Meeting -- FESCo Responsibilities/Role -- all | ||
| nirik | what shall we do here? run with the things we came up with at the last meeting? | |
| as far as I know we didn't really manage to sit down and discuss things at Fudcon. ;( | ||
| notting | well, <board hat on> | |
| notting | the board said the mission statement was fine, etc. but would like it placed somewhere on the fesco pages more prominent than the last meeting's minutes | |
| nirik | well, sure, but I don't know that we all agreed that the misson statement from the last meeting was fine. | |
| * nirik digs up his logs... | ||
| notting | <head -> desk> | |
| nirik | ;) Yeah, I just can't recall... perhaps we did | |
| bpepple | nirik: I believe we did. | |
| * poelcat notes that we need to reconfirm the feature process (which is stalled) and move forward... it has been 6 weeks since GA of F9 | ||
| nirik | <spot> Features, Sponsors, Packagaing and SIG Oversight, Handling/Enforc | |
| ement of Maintainer Issues, and other technical matters related to the distribution and it | ||
| s construction. | ||
| tibbs | I see a lot of +1's to that in my log. | |
| f13 | and the board just said go with it | |
| nirik | yeah, I think it was passed, but the votes were all mixed in with discussion. | |
| bpepple | IMO, the mission statement still doesn't give candidates a good idea of what FESCo's time will be spent doing. For the last six months or so fesco has been pretty much exclusively the features committee. | |
| nirik | well, Features is listed first. ;) | |
| tibbs | Well, actually we haven't done features for several meetings now. | |
| dwmw2 | that's because we've been too busy navel-gazing :) | |
| tibbs | Perhaps we could agree to at least attempt to limit time spent on features if there are other issues pending. | |
| poelcat | tibbs: it can all go really quickly if people prepare in advance | |
| tibbs | I don't diagree with that. | |
| poelcat | last release we agreed i would always finalize the dashboard by tuesday EOD | |
| tibbs | But you can never know what objections someone else might have and might still have to think. | |
| poelcat | those could be sent to the list or added to the feature page in advance | |
| nirik | how about a reminder email sent to the fesco list after EOD tuesday to review the pending features on the wiki... then hopefully the meeting thursday would be faster. | |
| dgilmore | we need to do our election now | |
| * nirik sometimes forgets to look at it | ||
| poelcat | nirik: i can do that | |
| bpepple | dgilmore: we needed to do it a month back. :( | |
| dgilmore | bpepple: yes. but know we have said what our role and purpose is we need to fast track it | |
| * nirik nods at dgilmore | ||
| nirik | we should allow a bit of time for people to nominate, then do the election. | |
| * bpepple questions if we really decided anything by this discussion, since as far as I can tell nothing has changed. | ||
| tibbs | Doesn't look like it, honestly. | |
| We need to get the mission statement written up somewhere. | ||
| We need to advertise that we're collecting nominations and pick an election date. | ||
| Do we need to vote on a final mission statement? | ||
| notting | didn't we do that two weeks ago? | |
| bpepple | notting: I thought we had. | |
| tibbs | Was that the final form? Unfortuantely it's not written down except in our meeting logs so it's really tough to tell. | |
| Lack of wiki makes things a bit difficult, I'll admit. | ||
| bpepple | We didn't move it to the wiki, since people mentioned that they wanted to work on the details. | |
| jwb | who? | |
| bpepple | spot | |
| nirik | wiki should be back | |
| jwb | spot, did you work on it? | |
| bpepple | spot said he wouldn't be around today. | |
| nirik | spot is on vacation this week | |
| tibbs | spot's on vacation and not around today. | |
| jwb | imho, we can't wait another week | |
| nirik | FYI, we have 61 cvsextras sponsors, and 14 of them have never sponsored anyone. | |
| jwb | we can put what we have now up, call for nominations again, and spot can revise when he gets back | |
| tibbs | jwb +1 | |
| nirik | jwb: +1 | |
| bpepple | I'm fine with that, but I've think we've seriously been wasting our time the last few weeks on this for no apparent change. | |
| dwmw2 | +1. what jwb said. | |
| tibbs | bpepple: Perhaps, but at least we'll have it formalized. Sometimes that matters. | |
| jwb | bpepple, agreed. and that's really unfortunate | |
| dwmw2 | bpepple: perhaps so, but that doesn't disqualify it as a conclusion | |
| nirik | bpepple: were we seeking change? or definition of what we do/did? | |
| notting | jwb: +1 | |
| tibbs | I think it's just that this type of discussion just naturally goes badly over IRC. | |
| nirik | ok, so who will update the wiki and announce nominations/election? | |
| bpepple | nirik: I know some of us were, since we felt FESCo has been pretty ineffective for awhile now. | |
| jwb | tibbs, it didn't go entirely well on the phone either :) | |
| tibbs | jwb: I suspect there were different issues at work there. | |
| jwb | could be | |
| bpepple | jwb: I would probably have worked best at FUDCon, but unfortunately not all of us could be there | |
| stickster | Are there additional roles that FESCo wants that you don't think you have now? | |
| jwb | stickster, i think it was the opposite really | |
| stickster | Are there roles you have that you don't want? | |
| jwb | Features have been a debate for a while | |
| nirik | stickster: I think the question is, does fesco serve much purpose that couldn't be offloaded elsewhere... | |
| stickster | If so, at what point is someone going to enumerate those? | |
| f13 | tibbs: it didn't really go better over the phone either. | |
| tibbs | I think we need to start with a written list of what we're supposed to be doing, and then we can address it. Can we please just get that written down? | |
| notting | nirik: and i could have sworn we met two weeks ago, and discussed this, and thought we had a purpose | |
| tibbs | Nobody's volunteering, and I'm terrible at that kind of thing, but I'll do it if nobody else is going to step forward. | |
| notting | and it's exactly this sort of wishy-washy "wait, we didn't decide that, I don't know" bullshit that causes spoleeba to threaten to disband fesco | |
| stickster | I'm not trying to reboot this discussion but we keep asking for the same thing and no one that I know of has provided it. | |
| f13 | bpepple: my issue with that is, as an oversight group, how does one become ineffective? Unless we're not answering the thigns brought to us, which I think we have been. | |
| jwb | f13, that's the issue. some of FESCo doesn't feel it's an oversight group | |
| f13 | then wtf do those people thing FESCo should be doing? | |
| nirik | notting: yeah. | |
| f13 | think. | |
| and by doing, I mean actually doing, not just pie in the skying "wouldn't it be nice if somebody did $foo" | ||
| jwb | focusing on contributor issues and solving those | |
| f13 | and further more, somebody has to explain to me why one would have to be /in/ FESCo to /do/ those things | |
| notting | stickster: too many pronouns. which we/thing/i? | |
| jwb | f13, you dont | |
| stickster | notting: Sorry | |
| * nirik notes that he wanted to have another meeting around nowish. Can we figure out a conclusion for today? | ||
| * bpepple gets back. | ||
| stickster | notting: The Board keeps asking for FESCo to tell us what they will do and won't do, and no one has provided that. | |
| f13 | conclusion, tibbs agreed to put what we decided two weeks ago in the wiki. | |
| notting | stickster: wait, we just did that on tuesday re: from the meeting minutes | |
| nirik | ok, and bpepple can you ask for nominations and announce the election then? | |
| stickster | notting: And I've seen that. I agree with it. But the fact that people are dissembling about it now, makes me doubt its veracity. | |
| tibbs | Can we let me at least try to write something down so that we actually have something to dissemble about? | |
| stickster | In my role as FPL, I want to make sure this has been cleanly decided and that people have had a fair chance to set these parameters for FESCo. | |
| stickster | tibbs: +1. | |
| * stickster shuts up | ||
| notting | what about the previous meeting that's in the minutes wasn't written down? | |
| f13 | notting: the mandate of FESCo isn't listed on FESCo's page, from what I gather | |
| f13 | we're just getting it written down there and calling for the election | |
| bpepple | f13: that's only because we were supposed to work on the details, which people don't want to do now it seems. | |
| I would have put it on the wiki, if I knew the discussion was finished. | ||
| poelcat | this is the last I see: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/SteeringCommittee/Meeting-20080612 | |
| f13 | I'm not sure what 'details' there are, unless we enumerate every possible thing that could come our way | |
| nirik | http://www.scrye.com/pastebin/71 | |
| tibbs | OK, https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Development/SteeringCommittee updated with basically a pasting of spot's statement that was agreed to at the Jun 12 meeting. | |
| * nirik can paste the entire log if people want. | ||
| tibbs | Now, do we need an additional page listing that in more detail? | |
| * nirik should have known better than to schedule a meeting right after Fesco, especially given this was on the topic list. ;) | ||
| stickster waits here for nirik's meeting | ||
| f13 | tibbs: I personally don't think it's necessary to do before inviting election nominations | |
| f13 | in fact, we could even leave it up to the to be newly formed FESCo how they want to go about enacting that mandate. | |
| (which might give some flavor to those wanting to run for FESCo, something they can actually pitch as a platform for election) | ||
| tibbs | So does anyone here want me to start a page with details on the mission statement? Or is the one-sentence statment on the main FESCo page sufficient? | |
| tibbs | And is that sufficient for what the board is looking for, or does it want more info? | |
| f13 | tibbs: I'm fine with you doing it, so long as we don't make that a blocker for moving on with election stuff. | |
| tibbs: the board seemed fine with what we gave them. | ||
| jwb | f13, we can't. i said the same and was told that people can hardly know what they are running for | |
| tibbs | FESCo handles the process of accepting new features, the acceptance of new packaging sponsors, SIGs and SIG Oversight, the packaging process, handling and enforcement of maintainer issues and other technical matters related to the distribution and its construction. | |
| f13 | Can I get off this silly train? | |
| tibbs | Please tell me what more is needed and I'll try to write something down. | |
| rdieter | if you don't know what FESCo is and what it does by now, methinks you shouldn't be running. | |
| f13 | rdieter: +1 | |
| bpepple | tibbs: the wording looks good to me. | |
| f13 | or if you want it to do something different, run for gods sakes and make it happen | |
| nirik | so, where are we? | |
| tibbs | Pick an election date. | |
| f13 | Proposal: Call for elections, using tibbs statement as "what you would be doing" | |
| +1 | ||
| tibbs | +1 | |
| jwb | +1 | |
| nirik | +1 | |
| bpepple | +1, and wonders why we even bothered delaying the election in the first place. | |
| notting | +1 | |
| f13 | dwmw2: jeremy: dgilmore: wake up (: | |
| * nirik looks for just one more +1. | ||
| nirik | well, failing that we wait another week I guess. | |
| * jeremy thought that was just a mission for a rubber stamp committee two weeks ago and that opinion hasn't changed | ||
| jeremy | I mean, if we want to elect the fedora rubber stamp committee, then I guess I can give a +1, but not very enthusiastically. which maybe underlines exactly the discussions we had about fesco's mission as well as the one about the board on f-a-b right now | |
| dgilmore | sorry very distracted today | |
| +1 i really did not get why we delayed | ||
| notting | jeremy: if you feel that way, then you have no one to blame but yourself for rubber stamping | |
| bpepple | dgilmore: Agreed, I think we delayed it for absolutely no reason. | |
| nirik | ok, so we have enough votes to pass the proposal... lets do it. | |
| --- nirik has changed the topic to: FESCo meeting -- Free discussion around Fedora | ||
| nirik | anything else before we close? | |
| dgilmore | jeremy: i think we can make it clear that we are starting from tis place. you get to make it better :) | |
| bpepple | nirik: have we decided on a date for the election? | |
| I'll need some info to send out an announcement. | ||
| nirik | bpepple: no... when sounds good? 2 weeks for nominations then 1 week of election? | |
| bpepple | I'm fine with that. Does that work for everyone? | |
| warren | sounds ok | |
| nirik | bpepple: be sure to note in the announcement that we are going to have fewer seats... | |
| tibbs_ | Comcastic! | |
| Sorry, I lagged out. | ||
| bpepple | So I'll have the nomination period start on Monday. | |
| s/Monday/Sunday/ | ||
| nirik | ok, sounds good. | |
| * nirik will close the meeting in 30 unless someone has something further. | ||
| f13 notes that he will not be running again. | ||
| nirik | ok, meeting ended. | |
Generated by irclog2html.py 2.5 by Marius Gedminas - find it at mg.pov.lt!