council July 2016

council-discuss@lists.fedoraproject.org

8 participants
23 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] #53: privacy policy should be updated to describe the privacy of Fedora installations, not participation in Fedora events
by fedora-badges 08 Nov '16

08 Nov '16

#53: privacy policy should be updated to describe the privacy of Fedora installations, not participation in Fedora events ---------------------+------------------- Reporter: zbyszek | Owner: Status: new | Priority: normal Component: General | Keywords: ---------------------+------------------- == How the privacy policy is specified == /usr/lib/os-release contains PRIVACY_POLICY_URL=https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Legal:PrivacyPolicy. PRIVACY_POLICY_URL is documented to "refer to the main privacy policy page for the operati[ng] system" [1]. This line was added to allow Gnome to display a link to the privacy policy without hardcoding the text or URL. It is currently shown by gnome-initial-setup [2]. [1] https://www.freedesktop.org/software/systemd/man/os- release.html#HOME_URL= [2] https://in.waw.pl/~zbyszek/fedora/gnome-i-s-privacy-policy- screenshot.png == Recent attempts at updating == There have been two drafts that I'm aware of: - https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Pfrields/PrivacyPolicyRedux discussed at [3] - https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Spot/PrivacyPolicyProposal discussed at [4] [3] https://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/desktop/2015-March/011700.html [4] https://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/council- discuss/2015-September/013633.html Neither of those significantly address issues that have been raised in response to both proposals. == What is wrong with current policy == [This part is subjective of course, please read it as prefixed with "IMO" everywhere] As stated in $subject, it's a policy for a different purpose. The privacy policy used as "the privacy policy for the OS" should primarily and prominently describe what information is collected (or otherwise made public) when Fedora is installed, when a user account on the Fedora machine is created, and in normal use of Fedora. Crafting a clear and simple policy will make a good impression that Fedora Project cares about it's users privacy, and is safe to use in situations where preserving personal information is important. A general problem is that existing policy and proposed draft do not make a clear distinction between a) installing Fedora and downloading updates, b) creating accounts for Fedora development and using the bug tracker, c) participating in Fedora conferences and such. Those three broad categories have completely different privacy implications. Without being clear to which of those the policy pertains means that the policy greatly overstates the types of information being collected. In effect the policy is much more relaxed (i.e. bad for the users) than it could be. Specific issues raised: Should there be mention of NetworkManager-config-connectivity-fedora? (ie, checking http://fedoraproject.org/static/hotspot.txt for captive portal) [5] In the section about 'Cookies and other Browser information', it might be useful to mention that the 'User Agent ID' of Browsers that are packaged in Fedora is configured to identify the system as running Fedora. [6] For example, the list in "Publicly Available Personal Information" really isn't palatable. A better way of showing this might be to say: "the information you give when creating your account will be public by default. You can see what data is publicly visible <here> (link to the public page for the user), modify your privacy settings <here>, and request deletion of the account <here>" [7] I also don't like the "Personal Information" vs. "Non-Personal Information". It might be how a lawyer works, but just because it pertains to a computer and not to a person doesn't make it less identifying. [7] the privacy policy needs to refer to "user account" in such way that it'll be clear that it's talking about accounts for contributors (FAS) and not a user account on your system or an online account you add via GOA, to make it clear Fedora doesn't scrape your name (or other identifying details) from Google / Facebook accounts added via GOA, nor the "Full Name" field of user accounts on your computer. [8] > we may disclose personally identifiable information about you to third parties > in limited circumstances, including: > ... > - for research activities, including the production of statistical reports (such > aggregated information is used to describe our services and is not used to > contact the subjects of the report). > "" AFAIK, in Germany, it's the laws that any such "passing on personal information" needs to be opt-in - "Opt-out" and "always-on" would be unlawful. [10] What procedures are being put in place so that EU residents (and hopefully everyone) can contact Fedora or Red Hat to obtain/understand/verify/delete their machine data, beyond obviously personal data? [5] https://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/council- discuss/2015-September/013643.html [6] https://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/desktop/2015-March/011703.html [7] https://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/desktop/2015-March/011727.html [8] https://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/desktop/2015-March/011729.html [9] https://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/council- discuss/2015-September/013637.html [10] https://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/council- discuss/2015-September/013637.html [11] https://lists.fedoraproject.org/pipermail/council- discuss/2015-September/013649.html == tl; dr == The policy is too complicated, yet lacks detail and does not provide strong guarantees. Statements like "The Information We Collect ... your Fedora Account password .. your SSH public key ... your affiliation" are not appropriate for a page linked to from the "Privacy Policy" link displayed during installation. I hope the Council can help to push towards a better policy document. Currently things seem to be stuck in minimal edits over the last year and half. Maybe the document should be opened for public editing on a wiki somewhere so that people can rearrange the text and take it further from current form. If the Council accepted the general idea of providing strong privacy guarantees things could move forward. -- Ticket URL: <https://fedorahosted.org/council/ticket/53> council <https://fedorahosted.org/council> Fedora Council Public Tickets

1 9

[council] #63: Annual PRDs review - July 2016
by fedora-badges 07 Nov '16

07 Nov '16

#63: Annual PRDs review - July 2016 ---------------------+-------------------- Reporter: jkurik | Owner: Status: new | Priority: normal Component: General | Keywords: meeting ---------------------+-------------------- This is a request for the annual review of PRDs as requested by Council at [https://fedorahosted.org/council/ticket/27 Proposed Schedule for PRD Refresh ticket]: * [https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Cloud/Cloud_PRD Cloud] * [https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Server/Product_Requirements_Document Server] * [https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Workstation/Workstation_PRD Workstation] * ~~[https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Env_and_Stacks/Product_Requirements_Document Env and Stacks]~~ To discuss potential changes in PRDs within the Fedora community a workshop on FLOCK 2016 should be scheduled as well. -- Ticket URL: <https://fedorahosted.org/council/ticket/63> council <https://fedorahosted.org/council> Fedora Council Public Tickets

1 5

[council] #61: Fedora Packaging Guidelines: Weak Dependencies on packages from third-party repos
by fedora-badges 07 Nov '16

07 Nov '16

#61: Fedora Packaging Guidelines: Weak Dependencies on packages from third-party repos -------------------------+-------------------- Reporter: maxamillion | Owner: Status: new | Priority: normal Component: General | Keywords: meeting -------------------------+-------------------- Currently there are not guidelines on whether or not a Weak Dependency can reside in a third-party repository or must reside within the Fedora repositories as with hard Requirements. I am doing a package review and one of the software's utilities requires ffmpeg but since we don't offer that, the packager requesting review moved it into a "Suggests:" directive and I'm unsure of how to properly handle that at this time. Please advise. https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=1308561 -- Ticket URL: <https://fedorahosted.org/council/ticket/61> council <https://fedorahosted.org/council> Fedora Council Public Tickets

1 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] #62: Fedora Security: possible trademark violation
by fedora-badges 07 Nov '16

07 Nov '16

#62: Fedora Security: possible trademark violation -------------------+----------------------------- Reporter: potty | Owner: potty Status: new | Priority: normal Component: Legal | Keywords: legal, trademark -------------------+----------------------------- Hello Council! Abdel, from Panama is writing. There is a website called Fedora Security [1] which is not related to the Fedora Security Lab [2]. As I understand from the Trademark Guidelines [3], it is a violation. Quote: "Fedora®, the Fedora word design, the Infinity design logo, Fedora Remix, and the Fedora Remix word design, '''either separately or in combination''', are hereinafter referred to as "Fedora Trademarks" and are trademarks of Red Hat, Inc." Correct me if I am wrong. Thanks in advance. Regards! Reference: [1] http://fedorasecurity.com [2] https://labs.fedoraproject.org/en/security/ [3] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Legal:Trademark_guidelines?rd=Legal/Trademar… -- Ticket URL: <https://fedorahosted.org/council/ticket/62> council <https://fedorahosted.org/council> Fedora Council Public Tickets

1 2

[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] #57: Seeking Council feedback/input on draft third party software policy
by fedora-badges 24 Aug '16

24 Aug '16

#57: Seeking Council feedback/input on draft third party software policy ----------------------+------------------------ Reporter: pfrields | Owner: Status: new | Priority: normal Component: General | Keywords: workstation ----------------------+------------------------ The Workstation WG has been collaborating for some time on a third party software policy that would make the widest possible range of software available to Fedora users in a easily consumable format, while ensuring users have all the information necessary to decide on the software they install. A draft of the policy is available here: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Workstation/Third_party_software_proposal The WG has reached the point that it wants direct Council feedback, questions, concerns, etc. before further action. We're not looking yet for technical changes to the distribution, release mechanisms, etc., although we ''are'' happy to receive questions about that from the Council. However, we're specifically looking for Council feedback on the principles and practices in the policy to see that they align with what the Council would like to see in Fedora's future. The WG members would be happy to have a Council or Workstation WG meeting dedicated to this topic if desired. I can help with scheduling that if needed. -- Ticket URL: <https://fedorahosted.org/council/ticket/57> council <https://fedorahosted.org/council> Fedora Council Public Tickets

2 44

[council] #50: Schedule a Flock Council Update & Town Hall for Krakow 2016
by fedora-badges 24 Aug '16

24 Aug '16

#50: Schedule a Flock Council Update & Town Hall for Krakow 2016 -------------------------+------------------------------------------------- Reporter: decause | Owner: decause Status: new | Priority: normal Component: Board Meta | Keywords: Flock, Flock 2016, Council Update, | council -------------------------+------------------------------------------------- This the is the traditional Flock session where members of the council meet with community members and update folks on the status of Objectives, as well as discuss issues and ideas for the future. -- Ticket URL: <https://fedorahosted.org/council/ticket/50> council <https://fedorahosted.org/council> Fedora Council Public Tickets

1 2

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

MOVED to https://discussion.fedoraproject.org/tag/council July 2016