council December 2015

council-discuss@lists.fedoraproject.org

9 participants
21 discussions

[council] #40: Enforcing the code of conduct
by fedora-badges 10 Nov '16

10 Nov '16

#40: Enforcing the code of conduct -------------------+--------------------------------- Reporter: duffy | Owner: Status: new | Priority: normal Component: Legal | Keywords: coc, code of conduct -------------------+--------------------------------- See this post from the outreach-list regarding the actual enforcement of the code of conduct as currently written: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/outreach/2015-July/000067.html Langdon asked that this be made a ticket for council discussion, with the concern that an unenforceable / consequence without an SOP is a threat and isn't the right way to go: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/outreach/2015-August/000073.html For reference, the actual text is: "FUDCon brings together contributors and users from all over the world and this diversity is one of our greatest strengths. This diversity however can also lead to communication issues and unhappiness. Attendees are required to be considerate and respectful of each other. This includes, but is not limited to: - "Refraining from rude behaviour - "Refraining from any sort of harassment or discrimination (based on ethnic background, religion, gender, sexuality, body shape, disability, geographic location, sports team, preferred operating system or anything else) - "Obeying local laws "Attendees who are in violation of this policy may be subject to removal and banning from FUDCon (and future Fedora events). Whether an attendee is in violation is at the sole discretion of the conference organizers. Anyone with a possible concern relating to the code of conduct is encouraged to either email Rupali Talwatkar or talk directly to one of the designated FUDCon volunteers. Designated FUDCon volunteers will have a dark blue coloured VOLUNTEER badge." The line of particular concern here is: "Attendees who are in violation of this policy may be subject to removal and banning from FUDCon (and future Fedora events)." -- Ticket URL: <https://fedorahosted.org/council/ticket/40> council <https://fedorahosted.org/council> Fedora Council Public Tickets

2 15

[council] #43: Create the Fedora Public Budget Page
by fedora-badges 07 Nov '16

07 Nov '16

#43: Create the Fedora Public Budget Page -------------------------+------------------------------------------------- Reporter: decause | Owner: decause Status: new | Priority: normal Component: General | Keywords: budget, websites, FCL, transparency, | community -------------------------+------------------------------------------------- As per the results of our council discussion here (https://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/council- discuss/2015-October/013742.html) we are heretofore establishing a new page (wiki or otherwise) that will track the timeline and particulars of the Fedora Public Budget. It shall include: Budgetary Components, Projected and Adjusted for each fiscal year: - Regional Budget Allocations (APAC/EMEA/LATAM/NA) - Fedora Premier Event Budgets (FLOCK, FUDCon) - Central Discretionary Fund (approved by Council) - FAD specific Budgets Budgetary Milestones and Timelines: - August: In person meeting at FLOCK - September: Proposed budget components and metrics from each region - October: Ratification of Proposed Budget by Council - March: Confirmation of Received budget w/ Adjustment Meeting - Quarterly Check-ins with Regional Treasurers - Halfly approvals of Regional Funds, pending metrics and outcomes reporting If there are other details or resources that should be included on this page, feel free to leave them in the comments below. I would propose that this page eventually be made available at http://budget.fedoraproject.org -- Ticket URL: <https://fedorahosted.org/council/ticket/43> council <https://fedorahosted.org/council> Fedora Council Public Tickets

1 14

[council] #16: Periodic contributor survey
by fedora-badges 07 Nov '16

07 Nov '16

#16: Periodic contributor survey ---------------------+------------------- Reporter: mattdm | Owner: Status: new | Priority: normal Component: General | Keywords: ---------------------+------------------- This is a tracking ticket for establishing a process by which we get regular feedback from the Fedora contributor base. This is a companion to https://fedorahosted.org/council/ticket/1. The desired goals, methodology, and basically everything else are really different between users and contributors it will be better to track them separately. -- Ticket URL: <https://fedorahosted.org/council/ticket/16> council <https://fedorahosted.org/council> Fedora Project Board Public Tickets

1 3

[council] #42: Schedule a FLOCK Budget Planning Session w/Council
by fedora-badges 24 Aug '16

24 Aug '16

#42: Schedule a FLOCK Budget Planning Session w/Council -------------------------+------------------------------------------------- Reporter: decause | Owner: decause Status: new | Priority: minor Component: Board Meta | Keywords: FLOCK, session, budget, council, | fiscal, -------------------------+------------------------------------------------- As per our discussion about Budget Planning here, (https://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/council- discuss/2015-October/013742.html) one conclusion we came to was that Budget Planning for the next fiscal year would begin during August at FLOCK with a high-bandwidth in person meeting, that continued on maillists and IRC through September, and was delivered to the FCL in October, to be presented to Red Hat via OSAS. This ticket is a reminder that we need to schedule a session at FLOCK for the high-bandwidth in person session. -- Ticket URL: <https://fedorahosted.org/council/ticket/42> council <https://fedorahosted.org/council> Fedora Council Public Tickets

1 2

[council] #49: Decision FUDCon APAC 2016
by fedora-badges 20 Jun '16

20 Jun '16

#49: Decision FUDCon APAC 2016 ---------------------+------------------- Reporter: gnokii | Owner: Status: new | Priority: normal Component: General | Keywords: ---------------------+------------------- following a conversation with Matthew I write this ticket: The rules for choose a place to holding FUDCons says, that FAmSCo and Board or now Council have to agree to the recommendation the local Ambassadors do. Until yet I only saw more questions which are answered and following that a discussion, if we should keep FUDCon. Please, keep in mind how that might look to the bidders, its already the second time the cambodian community did a bid, when instead of a decision a discussion comes up to wipe it out. It might look to this community that we not want it there and we dont want cambodians in our community. We already lost 2 months where a clear statement would have the local community enabled to work on making a successful FUDCon 2016. It is legitimate to discuss if FUDCon is still needed in the regions but have an eye that the bid means there putting people work and effort into it, especially in this case as there was a lot of requirements the indian community wanted to see before agree to the bid. So please go on and make a decision, to give the local community a chance to work on it. https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/FUDCon:Bid_for_PhnomPenh_2016 -- Ticket URL: <https://fedorahosted.org/council/ticket/49> council <https://fedorahosted.org/council> Fedora Council Public Tickets

1 6

[council] #38: Dopr
by fedora-badges 21 Mar '16

21 Mar '16

#38: Dopr ------------------------+------------------- Reporter: msuchy | Owner: Status: new | Priority: normal Component: Trademarks | Keywords: ------------------------+------------------- Hi, we (as Copr team) would like to introduce new service "DOPR". It is very easy. It combine user Dockerfile and user's Copr and create new docker image on DockerHub. You can see staging instance at: http://dopr-dev.cloud.fedoraproject.org/ We would like to start production instance. However some members of fedora-infra would like to see this go through Council first. There is some sense on this as this is kind of new way of distribution of Fedora (beside Spins, Remixs...). It creates all docker images directly on DockerHub so technically speaking they are not created in Fedora infrastructure, but they are created under Fedora account. And we would like to market it as "Fedorea + Copr" or similar. So my question: Does Fedora Council approve granting trademark usage on resulting docker images? -- Ticket URL: <https://fedorahosted.org/council/ticket/38> council <https://fedorahosted.org/council> Fedora Council Public Tickets

1 30

[council] #45: Sponsorship/Funding for FAD EMEA BUDAPEST 2015
by fedora-badges 22 Feb '16

22 Feb '16

#45: Sponsorship/Funding for FAD EMEA BUDAPEST 2015 ---------------------+-------------------- Reporter: rgeri77 | Owner: decause Status: new | Priority: normal Component: General | Keywords: ---------------------+-------------------- In this year we would like to organise, and run for FAD EMEA BUD 2015. We have made our calculations, and we have the venue places, but we require full funding/cover for food and hotel costs. NOT REIMBURSEMENT. More about the details can be found at here: Wiki: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/FAD_Budapest_2015_bid. The event is planned to be held at 2015. nov. 27-29. Budget sheet : https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1wl5YcHQOlcM6BeRludN9eq1iTKkbfp2HICg… We have less and less time to have confirmation for the venues, and the current date that we can hold the offers are 2015 oct. 25. After this date the hotel cancel the reservation, and give other price (I guess expensive), so as the conference room owner. -- Ticket URL: <https://fedorahosted.org/council/ticket/45> council <https://fedorahosted.org/council> Fedora Council Public Tickets

5 22

[council] #39: Required approval for Fedora Globalization FAD at Tokto 2015
by fedora-badges 12 Jan '16

12 Jan '16

#39: Required approval for Fedora Globalization FAD at Tokto 2015 ---------------------+------------------- Reporter: pravins | Owner: Status: new | Priority: normal Component: General | Keywords: ---------------------+------------------- Hi Council members. Need your inputs for Globalization FAD proposal. Detailed information available on https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/FAD_G11N_2015 Email regarding same has been sent to council list for discussion https://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/council- discuss/2015-July/013480.html -- Ticket URL: <https://fedorahosted.org/council/ticket/39> council <https://fedorahosted.org/council> Fedora Council Public Tickets

1 20

[council] #48: Trademark approval for unixstickers.com
by fedora-badges 11 Jan '16

11 Jan '16

#48: Trademark approval for unixstickers.com ------------------------+------------------- Reporter: mattdm | Owner: Status: new | Priority: normal Component: Trademarks | Keywords: ------------------------+------------------- http://www.unixstickers.com/ has asked for trademark permission to make Fedora stickers. In return, they'll provide us with a supply of branded items at no cost to us to distribute at events like Flock and FUDCon. They've actually been asking for a few _years_, and over the past several months, Tom Callaway has worked with Red Hat Legal to create a contract which Fedora Legal, RH Legal, and unixstickers all feel good about. (I can provide council members a copy if you care; it's... you know, legal stuff.) And Máirín Duffy has worked (significantly, as I understand it) to make sure the designs are correct and up to brand standards. Spot also says that he has samples and the quality is very high. Right now, they've only discussed stickers, but the vendor has a wide range of merchandise which could be an option in the future. Since trademark decisions are important, we need full consensus: at least 3 +1s and no -1s. Let's do that by the end of the week (Friday, December 11th). -- Ticket URL: <https://fedorahosted.org/council/ticket/48> council <https://fedorahosted.org/council> Fedora Council Public Tickets

1 9

[INPUT REQUESTED] Fedora Policy on generated code
by Stephen Gallagher 19 Dec '15

19 Dec '15

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Please keep responses on the devel@ list. CCed to the Council list for visibility and discussion of how this fits with our "Freedom" foundation. == Premise == Some upstream distribute tarballs that include code and content that has been generated at distribution time. Some (non-exhaustive) examples of this include: * Code produced by gdbus-codegen * Code generated by a YACC implementation such as bison or jison. * Autotools scripts such as libtool * Man-pages that are built from templates such as Docbook. * Minified JavaScript or CSS There are many other examples, but those are readily called to mind. This brings up several important questions: 1) Do we require that the original data used to generate this code is included in the SRPM? 2) Do we require that whatever tools are necessary to generate this code is packaged in Fedora (with all the legal and policy requirements that this implies)? If we do not, do we require that the code used by upstream is free software? 3) Do we require that building in Fedora always requires regeneration of this code from the original data? == Analysis == Shipping pre-generated content may introduce risk: * If the pre-generated code produces code that is not human-readable, it may be impossible to audit (or verify that it actually matches the input files, if available). For example, a compromised upstream might be shipping a back-door, possibly without knowing. * If a bug or security vulnerability is discovered in the generated code, will it be reasonable for a Fedora maintainer to patch it? Patching the source files vs. patching the generated output can be a very significant difference in the level of effort. * Code that was pre-generated by upstream may have been done with build flags that differ from Fedora's own set of hardened and optimized flags, resulting in a poorer experience (or less secure Forcing the re-generation of all such code may be infeasible in many cases. For example, the call has gone out numerous times in the past to mandate that `autoreconf` must be run on all autotools code (to enforce compiler flags) and every time it has been defeated because many programs won't generate with anything but the version of autotools that was used by upstream (which is a separate problem). FESCo discussed this very briefly in our last meeting, but it was decided that we should open this up to community discussion before attempting to make a decision. Please add your thoughts to this thread and FESCo will revisit it at our next meeting (after the New Year). -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2 iEYEARECAAYFAlZ0Wu8ACgkQeiVVYja6o6PYCgCfZ60GH/PYiDqlZzPX38XEAhMI 97UAn2kBrPcbOvdjK2sYkwFCiO/dzXwu =ge2Z -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

2 1

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

MOVED to https://discussion.fedoraproject.org/tag/council December 2015