docs January 2007

docs@lists.stg.fedoraproject.org

17 participants
16 discussions

preparing for elections
by Karsten Wade 11 Jan '07

11 Jan '07

While I am writing up the formal "nominations are now open" email, I did some modifications to various pages. Some of you are watching these changes (by setting your 'Subscribed wiki pages' to include Docs.* or DocsProject.* in your UserPreferences page), but I wanted to give a request to all to read through these pages. Probably best if we resolve objections and questions _before_ we open nominations. :) http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/DocsProject/Policy/FDSCoElections This page content and the entire election tools/process was borrowed directly from recent FESCo elections. There is about 20% difference in the content, so it is already fairly well vetted. Thanks - Karsten -- Karsten Wade, RHCE, 108 Editor ^ Fedora Documentation Project Sr. Developer Relations Mgr. | fedoraproject.org/wiki/DocsProject quaid.108.redhat.com | gpg key: AD0E0C41 ////////////////////////////////// \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\

1 0

FDSCo meeting minutes and IRC log 10-Jan-2007
by Karsten Wade 10 Jan '07

10 Jan '07

Here are the combined minutes and IRC log from the FDSCo meeting of 10-Jan-2007. = 0. Report on meeting with Fedora Project Board = * Followed agenda from mailing list, with additional short mention of upcoming elections: http://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-docs-list/2007-January/msg00000.html * Kudos around release notes, tools and processes, capabilities and number of contributors; proper respects from FDP delivered about how the quality of the distro has positively affected contributor levels in FDP * Max and Karsten are going to work on the click-through CLA and mapping it to ACLS, content control levels, and drift that by the appropriate $BRAINS * During FUDCon Boston 2007[0], we are going to host a hackfest session to hack on tools, Documentation Guide, etc. * No red flags (concerns) raised by FPB about working across distros and FLOSS projects on common docs; Karsten specified that we know some of the pitfalls (potential problems) - Aligns with Fedora stance on upstream contributions and sourcing * FDP is going to help the QA/Testing folks with documentation; that is going to give a proof point to show other projects that they can use FDP tools and processes and have their world rocked. * We need to better publicize the guideline that all Projects watch their ProjectName.* namespace in the Wiki == 0.1 Current Issues Blocking Success (Roadblocks) == 1. L10N -- Max has some actions to help out ... bottom line is, we have the permissions we need in the various projects, we just need the resources and leadership in various projects to make it happen 2. RHEL content -- Max actions mainly from here; we've made it known the various impacts on FDP and what can/cannot do, should/should not do. 3. Developer involvement -- Raised this perennial issue, asking for ongoing input/oversight/hammer throwing from the FPB. = 1. Elections moving forward - voting open 02 to 12 February 2007 = * Putting together elections with current tools * Putting up all FDSCo seats for (re)election - Top 4 vote receiving seats act for 12 months - Next 3 vote receiving seats are up for re-election in six months - After that, election is every six months, rotating either 4 or 3 seats being selected - Steering Committee elects its own chair, who is the effective project leader - Everyone who has CVS access ('cvsdocs' group) is eligible to vote - Everyone is encouraged to run for a seat * Elections are about standing up and being willing to show leadership, and about getting support from the community to be a leader * Self-nominations open within the next few days - Need to finalize the policy page[1] (Note: Agenda item about meeting times and motivating FDSCo is put aside until after the election; there is no point moving the meeting time right now, and we'll let the refreshed steering committee handle it's own motivation when the time comes.) = Actions = Karsten > Work with Max on the RHEL content situation. Karsten > Get a "Needs release note" flag in bugzilla for Fedora side [0] http://barcamp.org/FudconBoston2007 [1] Need to make this match the reality of what we is actually happening in this election, especially around voting technicalities. http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/DocsProject/Policy/FDSCoElections ## Begin full IRC log of meeting 17:17 < quaid> <meeting> 17:17 < quaid> ok, then 17:17 < quaid> 0. Report on meeting with with FPB 17:17 < quaid> We followed the agenda as posted on fedora-docs-list 17:18 < quaid> with a last minute addition that I said we were going to actively tackle elections and leadership stuff in FDP 17:18 * quaid posts URL of the agenda thread 17:18 < quaid> http://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-docs-list/2007-January/msg00000.html 17:18 * stickster is here 17:19 < quaid> hey, that's a cool 00000 msg number for 2007 17:19 < quaid> a fuller report can be had by reading the IRC log that is posted somewheres 17:19 < stickster> Heh, I win the msg# lottery 17:20 < quaid> my summary is that we were heard on all issues, good discussions had about them as well 17:20 < quaid> Max took a lot of actions from it, which is good since he is paid to take care of such issues :) 17:21 * quaid cuts a kiwi, one sec 17:22 < quaid> back 17:22 < quaid> umm, what else was good ... 17:22 * quaid looks at the agenda we used for references ... 17:23 < quaid> * Agreed we need to work on diversity in the relnotes contributors, scalability, etc. 17:23 < quaid> * Max and Karsten are going to work on the click-through CLA and mapping it to ACLS, content control levels, and drift that by the appropriate $BRAINS 17:24 < quaid> * No promises about FUDCon except we are going to host hackfesting where we can 17:24 < quaid> so there is now a session we're running to hack on tools, Documentation Guide, etc. 17:25 * stickster has added that to the Fudcon page 17:26 * stickster listed himself as leader but only because he felt weird volunteering others 17:26 < stickster> quaid: What does "no promises" mean? 17:26 < stickster> That was <confused> not <taken_aback> 17:26 < quaid> um 17:27 < quaid> well, like, we can't promise to be productive 17:27 < stickster> Sure we can! 17:27 < quaid> or distracted by something more important or cooler 17:27 < stickster> :-) 17:27 < quaid> it's called the "Cali Caveat" 17:27 < stickster> Heh 17:27 < EvilBob> lol 17:27 < quaid> "Sure, dude, we'll do it ... unless something cooler comes along." 17:27 < quaid> where cooler could be your couch 17:28 < stickster> Well the hackfest is Sat+Sun, so between having almost two days and a strong pair of handcuffs, I'm sure we can keep you occupied :-D 17:28 < quaid> oh, all right 17:28 < stickster> LOL 17:28 < quaid> um 17:28 < quaid> so 17:29 * stickster is only 1/2 serious 17:29 < stickster> OK, 1/4 17:29 < quaid> I brought up the stuff about working across distros and FLOSS projects on common docs, mentioned we know the pitfalls, and no one there screamed at us 17:29 < quaid> so that's good 17:29 < quaid> don't have to hold back jmbuser :) 17:29 < stickster> I think that's really in the keeping with "Fedora points upstream" mantra 17:29 < quaid> right 17:29 < stickster> s/in the/in/ 17:30 < quaid> and acknowledging this area is broken, who knows how to fix it 17:30 * EvilBob goes to cook something, will be a little AFK 17:30 < quaid> * Mentioned that FDP is going to help the QA/Testing folks with documentation, and be able to use that as a proof point to show other projects how using our tools and processes will totally rock their world. 17:31 < quaid> * We need to better publicize the guideline that all Projects watch their ProjectName.* namespace in the Wiki 17:32 < stickster> Right, q.v. above (click-through CLA) 17:32 * stickster turns all pedantic for benefit of people reading IRC log on the list 17:32 < quaid> roger that 17:32 < quaid> yeah, we got it through that the CLA is an impediment to contributors on the Wiki and that it matters to fix this 17:32 < quaid> (just to stretch that note) 17:33 < quaid> so maybe one day Rik van Riel will get an account :D 17:33 < quaid> ok, onto the roadblocks 17:33 < EvilBob> heh 17:34 < quaid> 1. L10N -- Max has some actions to help out ... bottom line is, we have the permissions we need in the various projects, we just need the resources and leadership in various projects to make it happen 17:35 < quaid> 2. RHEL content -- Max actions mainly from here; we've made it known the various impacts on FDP and what can/cannot do, should/should not do. 17:36 < quaid> bottom line on that is going to be to do what is best for the community, and I think we have some consensus on what that is :) 17:36 < stickster> I think the Board is realizing (in part because of #1 there) that the resource needs are really mounting up 17:36 < stickster> And it's going to take some serious cat-herding to get people working on the right stuff 17:36 < quaid> 3. Developer involvement -- Raised this perennial issue, asking for ongoing input/oversight/hammer throwing from the FPB. 17:37 < stickster> right on 17:37 < quaid> and that is the agenda 17:37 < quaid> My actions from it are: 17:38 < quaid> k> Work with Max on the RHEL content situation. 17:38 < quaid> k> Get a "Needs release note" flag in bugzilla for Fedora side 17:38 < quaid> that's it :) 17:39 < quaid> I forgot ... was that last one a "talk to lmacken" suggestion? 17:39 < quaid> ok, that was a long report 17:39 < stickster> Yes, I have a BZ session open right now to find out the current lay o' the land 17:39 < quaid> ok, moving on in the agenda from here ... 17:39 < quaid> I'd like to move around the next stuff 17:40 < quaid> and talk Elections first, since I invited abadger1999 to hang out and hear any questions we have about technical stuff 17:40 * abadger1999 waves 17:40 < quaid> so s/1. WTF .../1. Elections/ 17:40 < stickster> https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla/describekeywords.cgi (?) 17:40 < stickster> Hi abadger1999 17:41 < quaid> abadger1999: we're using the FESCo processes and modifying them to do FDSCO elections 17:41 < quaid> and figured the election tools would be a good thing to work with too :) 17:41 < quaid> what do we have to do to get that going? what should we know? 17:41 < abadger1999> The documented on the wiki process or the "occurred in the last election" process? 17:42 < quaid> stickster: not sure what those are? I'm thinking of a flag that appears, a checkbox with "Needs release note", and it sounds as if it is only implemented for RHEL and internal view 17:42 < stickster> Reality is probably the best place to start ;-D 17:42 < stickster> Might be 17:42 < quaid> abadger1999: ah, see, here you are already valuable :) 17:42 < stickster> quaid: I only have the normal "Fedora bugs" group view 17:42 < abadger1999> k. the current cgi puts a ballot of candidates on a webpage. 17:42 < quaid> abadger1999: I have this page up that we want to start modifying to match reality and what can work ... 17:43 < abadger1999> quaid: Go ahead. 17:43 < quaid> http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/DocsProject/Policy/FDSCoElections?highlight=%… 17:43 < quaid> sorry, had to find it 17:43 < quaid> urp 17:43 < quaid> http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/DocsProject/Policy/FDSCoElections 17:44 < quaid> so that is nearly a 100% copy, with s/FESCo/FDSCo/g 17:44 < abadger1999> Yeah, that looks familiar :-) 17:44 < EvilBob> stickster: is the Release notes bug stuff different than the alias we have been using? 17:44 < quaid> yeah 17:45 < abadger1999> Are you going to wait until after F7 to hold the election? 17:45 < stickster> EvilBob: yes 17:45 < EvilBob> ok 17:45 < quaid> it's a special flag that probably does much the same thing as putting in a blocker + a Cc: 17:45 < stickster> EvilBob: We are looking for a checkbox that developers can simply tick to mark something for relnotes interest 17:45 < quaid> abadger1999: well, I dunno at this point 17:45 < EvilBob> stickster: Awesome 17:45 < quaid> abadger1999: I'd like to do it sooner, meant to do it earlier :) 17:45 < stickster> EvilBob: Apparently such an animal exists on the internal RH view for RHEL Release Notes in BZ 17:45 < quaid> EvilBob: it exists for RHEL, we just need a copy for us :) 17:46 < quaid> abadger1999: do you have a recommendation on timing? or ...? 17:46 < EvilBob> I was just a bit confuzeld 17:46 < quaid> sure, i forget that people don't have all the view. 17:46 < abadger1999> Okay. Well, what we have now is slightly different than the policy on the wiki. I'm planning on modifying the voting app to match the wiki by F7 so FESCo can follow its own policy (unless the merger changes things) 17:46 < quaid> s/view/same view/ 17:46 < abadger1999> Currently: 17:47 < abadger1999> The app displays a ballot with all the candidates. 17:47 < abadger1999> You select a nuber of candidates equal to the number of open seats. 17:47 < abadger1999> The vote is recorded for your Fedora account. 17:47 < abadger1999> At the end of the election period, the voting app stops allowing votes. 17:48 < abadger1999> I read the table in the database that has the results and tell you who got how may votes. 17:48 < abadger1999> Set up and tear down is currently manual -- You give me a list of the candidates and the start and stop dates. 17:49 < abadger1999> I enter it in with a little script. 17:49 < abadger1999> I have to read the database to get the information out to you afte rthe election. 17:50 < abadger1999> So if that's okay with you, you can hold the election any time after you get the list of candidates and how many open seats. 17:50 < quaid> ok 17:50 < quaid> the post F7 is a self-service version of the above? 17:50 < quaid> is voting open to all those with Fedora accounts? or just e.g. 'cvsdocs'? 17:51 < abadger1999> That's one of the goals for the post-F7 world. 17:51 * quaid reads his own page 17:51 < quaid> it was a cvsextras account requirement, right? 17:51 < abadger1999> Yeah -- the voting is constrained to a group within the accoutns system. 17:51 < abadger1999> You can set it to cvsdocs if you want. 17:52 < abadger1999> I set it to the ambassadors group when they held their election earlier this year. 17:52 < EvilBob> cool 17:53 < EvilBob> My biggest question is "Do we have enough interest in leadership to have an election" 17:53 < quaid> one way to find out 17:53 < quaid> offer an election :) 17:54 < stickster> right on 17:54 < EvilBob> How many seats do we want to have ttal 17:54 < EvilBob> total 17:54 < quaid> no fewer than 5 or more than 9? 17:55 < quaid> all seats? and what do we want to do about the chair? 17:55 < quaid> maybe we guage interest and constituents? 17:55 < EvilBob> Are all seats up for "the taking" or are some seat secured for this first election? 17:55 < quaid> s/ua/au/ 17:55 < stickster> I would say, let the elected members choose their leader amongst themselves 17:55 < stickster> IOW, like most boards 17:55 < EvilBob> IMO keeping some seats to allow for transition can be helpful 17:56 < stickster> EvilBob: Probably useful to do in the 2nd election + 17:56 < quaid> my thinking would be to _add_ to what we have in terms of active seats 17:56 < stickster> I would say, make the 1st election "all seats" so we can rightly claim that everyone is community-selected 17:56 < EvilBob> 70 or more percent turn over could be drastic and also delay some of our long term goals 17:56 < quaid> right now there are three of us who regular make meetings and (agree to) do shit 17:57 * quaid happily throws his hat into the ring 17:57 * stickster too 17:57 * stickster kicks EvilBob under the table 17:57 < quaid> maybe he knows something we don't :) 17:57 < stickster> heh 17:57 < EvilBob> IMO personally I would like to see the seats of you two and Tommy as "transition" seats 17:58 < stickster> I only want to stay on FDSCo if the community wants me there 17:58 < stickster> I enjoy it and would miss it but I want to feel like folks are happy with me doing it 17:58 < EvilBob> I will put my hat in the ring , next election you guys can do the same, How long are the terms for? 17:58 < stickster> other than quaid who loves me no matter what 17:59 < quaid> are we big enough to "need" 5? 17:59 < quaid> stickster: true dat! 17:59 < quaid> or "need" 7? 17:59 < stickster> quaid: Whew, thanks 17:59 < quaid> or "need" 9? 17:59 < stickster> I would say 5 is a minimum 17:59 * quaid takes a big hit of crack 17:59 < EvilBob> I say we shoot for 7 17:59 < quaid> 12? 17:59 < quaid> 21? 17:59 < stickster> 3 just feels too much like a cabal 17:59 < stickster> 53 yo 17:59 < quaid> 42 17:59 < EvilBob> but elect 4 this election 18:00 < quaid> this is the election we should have had last Nov., the "+4" one 18:00 < EvilBob> in 6 months we have another election and rotate the other 3 heads 18:00 < quaid> and be planning now for the "all seats" 18:00 < EvilBob> Right 18:00 < quaid> any other thoughts in the channel? 18:00 < abadger1999> Oh, One thing I have found in FESCo is that it works out to be a twelve month commitment because of Fedora's schedule. 18:01 < stickster> Yes, that's true. 18:01 < quaid> about "elect all to make it clearly a community committee" v. "elect a majority of the committee from the community" 18:01 < stickster> So we're asking essentially for 1 year of volunteer effort; we can be up front about that 18:01 < abadger1999> That seems to be a tad on the long side as it's hard to predict how much time you'll have 12 months from now. 18:01 < quaid> true 18:01 < EvilBob> 12 month commitments, 1/2 elected on 6 month intervals 18:01 < abadger1999> OTOH, having votes every six months seemed like overkill. 18:02 < stickster> I think web votes and 1/2 turnover make this a lot easier 18:02 < quaid> abadger1999: even for a split of seats, only 1/2 up every 6 mon? 18:02 < stickster> It's not like you have to drive to the polls :-D 18:02 < stickster> I don't want to overthink it 18:02 < quaid> we need an even # of seats then 18:02 < quaid> ultimately :( 18:02 < quaid> :) that is 18:02 < abadger1999> The thought when we wrote the FESCo policy was that wht counts is how many times the Fedora contributors would have to vote for people. 18:03 < quaid> ah, hmm 18:03 < EvilBob> having elections every 6 months will allow for people mid term to get out and be replaced 18:03 < abadger1999> If they have to vote separately for the Fedora Board, FESCo, and Docs... each every six months, that would add up. 18:03 < quaid> how many people have that many votes to make? 18:03 < quaid> most wouldhave one project, and one board 18:03 < quaid> right? 18:03 < EvilBob> Yeah I am a freak 18:03 < EvilBob> LOL 18:04 < abadger1999> We tried to address some of this by trying to get elections merged into one ballot and also holding elections on a ~12month schedule. 18:04 < EvilBob> I do not think we need an equal number of seats each election 18:04 < EvilBob> We can do 4+3 18:04 < EvilBob> errr 18:04 < EvilBob> 4 and 3 18:05 < stickster> EvilBob: +1... any reason that wouldn't work? 18:05 < abadger1999> quaid: I don't know. I know I'm not hte only one in multiple groups. 18:05 < quaid> but in FDP there aren't that many 18:05 < quaid> I think we can start with "every six months" and leave a "room to reevaluate" in the charter 18:05 < quaid> I really want there to be a replacement room half way through the year commitment 18:06 < quaid> then people can know there is a "drop out" target, and they can trigger their seat to be added into the vote 18:06 < stickster> I just want to get elections rolling :-) The # of votes is going to give us a GREAT idea how many people sub'd to the list give a crap 18:06 < quaid> so every once in a while it's a X+Y v. just X 18:06 < EvilBob> In my last two years as part of FDP and the last year as part of FDSCo Tommy, Paul and Karsten have done the most work, I would like to see those seats "secured" for this first election, I would assume that these parties would be re-elected even if they put their hats in the ring 18:06 < stickster> Yeah, much like poker, there's really no reason you can't draw 4 instead of 3 18:06 < abadger1999> quaid: Reevaluation and flexibility is always a plus :-) 18:06 * stickster has easy house rules 18:07 < quaid> I like this best-of idea then: 18:07 < quaid> put up 4 seats now, so we are "majority community elected" 18:07 < stickster> Yes 18:07 < quaid> then we can revote the Chair position and move forward, with continuity 18:07 < stickster> Yes 18:07 < quaid> so e.g. I could be replaced as Chair and still have continuity of duties with pleasure :) 18:07 < stickster> heh 18:08 < EvilBob> If Tommy is against "securing his seat" or would like to step down and not put his hat in I understand that 18:08 < EvilBob> We should give him that option 18:09 < stickster> All of us have that option :-D 18:09 < EvilBob> I have no problem putting my hat in the ring 18:09 < EvilBob> and would like to do so 18:09 < stickster> You're on, cowboy 18:09 < quaid> well, now, let's talk about this more ... 18:10 < stickster> Yes, let's 18:10 < quaid> what is the real risk that a coup or overriding of all the actioneers? 18:10 < EvilBob> We do need to keep 3 of the current board IMO 18:10 < quaid> but why not just put them all up to vote/ 18:10 < stickster> Um, I think it's pretty low, and if it were to happen, maybe we deserve it 18:10 < quaid> right 18:10 < quaid> that's my thinking ... it would just be better to wipe clean and roll with that 18:10 < EvilBob> I think that keeping some seats will make the transition easier 18:10 < quaid> agreed 18:10 < stickster> This is what I was saying before... but I thought I was a minority of one 18:11 < EvilBob> stickster: no not at all 18:11 < stickster> EvilBob: But how likely is it that we won't end up with some folks re-elected anyway? 18:11 < quaid> well, this is the "first reevaluation of our decision" 18:11 < EvilBob> stickster: I also see value in what you are saying 18:11 * abadger1999 Notes that there was no coup when FESCo held its election 18:11 < stickster> I think, pretty low... let's throw caution to the wind. 18:11 < quaid> yes, caution, wind 18:11 < stickster> abadger1999: 'zactly 18:12 < abadger1999> It all depends on how many crazy^Wwell-meaning candidates you have who want to be on the Board. 18:12 < quaid> my concern is there won't be enough :) 18:12 < quaid> one reason to make there be enough seats and candidates 18:12 < quaid> if we hold back three seats, we hold back three candidates 18:12 < EvilBob> abadger1999: I honestly think we will have some trouble fuilling seats with out help from a train 18:14 < BobJensen> getting railroaded in to helping is not a lot of fun 18:14 < BobJensen> it is one of the reasons that my hat was not in for the ambassadors election 18:16 < BobJensen> How many seats? How many votes for each contributor? 18:16 < BobJensen> How do we railroad people in to being candidates? 18:16 * BobJensen ducks 18:17 < BobJensen> an odd number of seats is a must if the contributors are active 18:17 < stickster> OK, my feeling is, let's try to fill 7 seats... an "all-in" election 18:18 < BobJensen> with 7 seats I would say each contributor should get 4 votes 18:18 < stickster> I think some of our new folks are going to be interested in running... jmb, dg, ad... 18:18 * stickster gives gratuitous shouts 18:19 < BobJensen> if we only have 7 people running do we go with everyone or reduce our head count to 5? 18:19 < BobJensen> ghenry: ping 18:20 < stickster> abadger1999: How did that work with FESCo? 18:20 < abadger1999> We held the election before the policy as formulated. 18:21 < abadger1999> We had an open call for candidates for 2+ weeks because people were slow to sign up as candidates. 18:21 < stickster> abadger1999: yeah, just read it again 18:22 < stickster> BobJensen: Answer is, it stays open an extra week... if still only 7, they all get confirmed 18:22 < abadger1999> Some people put themselves on as "conditional candidates" ie: they would take a seat if no one else wanted it. 18:22 < stickster> abadger1999: Yeah, I remember that part 18:22 < abadger1999> When we wrote the policy we explicitly wanted to avoid the conditional candidates. 18:22 < abadger1999> Because it was confusing. 18:23 < BobJensen> I agree there 18:23 < BobJensen> either you are in or you are out, no fence sitting 18:23 < abadger1999> We did come up with more than the minimum number of seats. Even leaving off the conditional candidates we still had two extras people. 18:24 -!- megacoder [n=MegaCode(a)c-71-231-222-164.hsd1.or.comcast.net] has joined #fedora-docs 18:24 < BobJensen> If you are not committed to making it to "most" of the meetings and helping get stuff done then don't let others force you in 18:24 < BobJensen> Hey tommy 18:24 < abadger1999> But we did have to talk to a few people on IRC and make recommendations in private and on the mailing list soliciting people we thought would be good. 18:24 < megacoder> BobJensen, hi 18:25 < stickster> Hey megacoder 18:25 < BobJensen> megacoder: I was just talking about you 18:25 < stickster> We're doing governance stuff... getting an election lined up 18:25 < megacoder> BobJensen, my spider sense was tingling 18:25 < megacoder> stickster, ack 18:25 < BobJensen> megacoder: Cool, I put up the beacon but it is overcast here, did not think you could see it 18:26 < megacoder> Did I get volunteered for something? 18:26 < BobJensen> megacoder: not yet 18:26 < megacoder> BobJensen, and you are where? 18:26 < stickster> quaid has gone silent but he may simply be ponderin' 18:26 < quaid> sorry 18:26 < BobJensen> east about 1200 miles 18:26 < quaid> I did get distracted by something :) 18:26 < stickster> one word, handcuffs :-D 18:28 < stickster> So the competing possibilities are: 18:28 < stickster> 1. Hold back a few seats and elect some more (4?) 18:28 < BobJensen> megacoder: we were talking about the election, I suggested we "secure" a few of the seats this election to ensure a graceful transition. I suggested that quaid stickster and yourself remain on the board at this time 18:28 * quaid watches 18:28 < stickster> 2. Elect all the seats at once, not worrying about a coup 18:29 < stickster> 3. Uh, have a sandwich and a $BEVERAGE. No. There is no 3. 18:29 < megacoder> BobJensen, OK by me, but my attendance is really spotty of late. 18:29 < quaid> (and secretly being relieved if there is a coup, yay more time for me!) 18:29 < stickster> lol 18:29 < BobJensen> I am wondering can both BobJensen and EvilBob run? 18:29 < quaid> nes 18:29 < BobJensen> LOL 18:29 < stickster> As long as you bribe me twice 18:30 < stickster> My vote is #2 18:30 < BobJensen> Anhow seriously I am on the fence right now as to how we do this, I would like to see 6month elecions of ~1/2 the board 18:31 < megacoder> I wouldn't want to belong to any group that would have members like me??? 18:31 < megacoder> stickster, is that what you meant? 18:31 < stickster> Regardless, I like the idea of 6-month half-turnover elections 18:31 < BobJensen> But at the same time I can see the value of "starting clean" 18:32 < stickster> BobJensen: We can do both 18:32 < quaid> ah, hmm 18:32 < BobJensen> in 6 months time we will be all community elected 18:32 < quaid> but how to choose which seats are up for election at the 6 mon mark? 18:32 < quaid> (if we start clean now) 18:32 < BobJensen> quaid: the X that were hed back this time and anyone that wants out 18:32 < BobJensen> IC 18:33 < BobJensen> I do not know how that could/should/would work if we start clean now 18:33 * stickster laughingly notes that the Board faces this very issue in April :-D 18:34 < quaid> maybe this is another lesson we can relearn 18:34 < quaid> two choices I see: 18:34 < BobJensen> I think by keeping some seats back we eliminate that potential problem 18:34 < abadger1999> The half with the least votes are up for re-election in 6 months? 18:34 < quaid> 1. Start clean, have 4 seats "1 year" and 3 seats "6 mons" 18:34 < quaid> 2. Start with +4 and draw lots as to who get the 3 left, then spin those 3 in six months 18:35 < quaid> abadger1999: interesting third option 18:35 < BobJensen> Hmmm 18:35 < BobJensen> the 3 with the lowest number of votes is an interesting idea 18:36 < BobJensen> I also think that we should make sure we try to "revitalize" some of our people that have been on extended LOA also 18:36 < megacoder> Is there a motivating need to change the tenure and method? 18:36 < quaid> well, that's next 18:37 < quaid> after we announce is when we start talking amongst ourselves to politick for more people 18:37 < BobJensen> personal email/contacts should be inorder IMO 18:37 < quaid> megacoder: how do you mean? "why elections?" or ? 18:37 < stickster> BobJensen: Of course, free to do that in addition to posting the call on the f-docs-l and f-announce-l 18:37 < BobJensen> Tammy Fox is an example of someone that we should see if we can get back in 18:38 < stickster> Is she still even active in the project? 18:38 < megacoder> quaid, I see discussions of split tenure, oddball scoring and the like. I'm wondering what the problem really is. 18:38 < BobJensen> she has been around a little bit in the last 6 months 18:38 < quaid> megacoder: lack of acknowledged leadership, meaning FDSCo is too quiet 18:38 < megacoder> Ah. OK, then 18:39 < stickster> Plus, it's a project requirement now. 18:39 < quaid> megacoder: also, the committee has never been community elected, and that is the direction the rst of the Project takes 18:39 < quaid> ah, requirement, then 18:40 < BobJensen> quaid: should we check with someone from the ambassadors steering comm to see how their transition went? 18:40 < megacoder> Well, since it's in The Rules... 18:40 < quaid> <singsong>The rules</singsong> 18:41 < quaid> ok, then 18:41 < quaid> do we have a consensus then? 18:42 < quaid> all seat open, lowest three votes are up again in six months 18:42 < BobJensen> I say we take the two ideas to the community 18:42 < BobJensen> see what the community wants 18:42 < quaid> well, if we don't have a consensus nor a compelling reason to force me to choose 18:42 < quaid> then the list it is! 18:43 < stickster> OK, let's make it a point to make a decision next week 18:43 < megacoder> +1 18:43 < BobJensen> as I stated I am on the fence, if the others want to vote we can 18:43 < BobJensen> stickster: +1 18:44 < BobJensen> can or should we vote on this internally? 18:44 < BobJensen> if you guys think it is OK for the 4 f us to make the choice I am OK with that 18:44 < quaid> oh, we have such power, surely 18:44 < quaid> but 18:44 < quaid> is the fact we have no consensus a sign we need more discussion? 18:44 < quaid> yes 18:45 < quaid> fwiw, our charter for this committee specifically gives us power to do stuff like this. 18:45 < BobJensen> I like the #1 option more and more 18:45 < quaid> the next FDSCo can dismantle all this and do something new :) 18:45 < megacoder> We have repeatedly announced this is an open meeting, with anyone invited. Those interested are probably here now. 18:45 < stickster> BobJensen: Uh, which was #1? 18:45 * stickster scrolls back 18:45 < BobJensen> all seats with the 3 low votes getting a second chance in 6 months 18:46 < BobJensen> <quaid> 1. Start clean, have 4 seats "1 year" and 3 seats "6 mons" 18:46 < BobJensen> <quaid> 2. Start with +4 and draw lots as to who get the 3 left, then spin those 3 in six months 18:46 < stickster> Yeah, if everyone hates us for it, they can always take action at election-time 18:46 < quaid> megacoder: well, this is a the middle of the night in EMEA and parts of APAC, so ... 18:46 < megacoder> Either we can make this decision or we're not empowered enough to be here anyway AFAICT 18:47 < BobJensen> I vote for #1 18:47 < megacoder> I vote for #1 18:47 < stickster> I vote for #1 18:48 < quaid> sure, I like it, too 18:48 < megacoder> I am unanimous in that 18:48 < BobJensen> Looks done to me 18:48 < stickster> So are I 18:49 < BobJensen> Now we are targeting 7 seats, when will we have the election? 18:49 * quaid looks at a calendar 18:49 < stickster> abadger1999: If you're still around, what's required to get this thing activated? 18:49 < BobJensen> weekend after fudcon? 18:49 < quaid> he just give him the list of candidates and the # of open seats 18:49 < abadger1999> Just information. 18:49 < megacoder> Where can I get matching campaign funds? 18:49 < quaid> yeah, I think we need FUDCon for publicity :) 18:49 < quaid> megacoder: here's some 18:50 < BobJensen> howmant votes does each contributor have? 18:50 < stickster> Yeah, plus it would be awkward if we all showed up there as unelected people in event of a coup 18:50 < abadger1999> Send to me the list of candidates (preferably account system usernames, but I can get it from any information in the account sys: email, irc nick if there, real name, etc) 18:50 < stickster> megacoder: Rule says, you get 15 times your Fedora salary 18:50 < megacoder> stickster, wfm 18:50 < stickster> See Max for a check 18:50 < abadger1999> The start and end dates (I'll make them start and end at midnight UTC.) 18:50 < quaid> BobJensen: one vote for each seat? 18:51 < abadger1999> How many seats. 18:51 < stickster> abadger1999: Does the voting app use the new range voting technique? 18:51 < BobJensen> quaid: that seems extreme and would be a problem if we only have 7 candiates 18:51 < quaid> I'm out of my depth with voting theory 18:52 < abadger1999> No. If you want that, you have to wait. 18:52 < stickster> Ah 18:52 < stickster> Well then, one vote per seat then :-) 18:52 * stickster does not want to wait 18:52 < BobJensen> quaid: If we have 7 seats and 4 votes it will allow us to have some numbers of variance 18:53 < stickster> BobJensen: I don't think looking for variance is important 18:53 < abadger1999> You do not have to cast every vote that you're allowed, though. 18:53 < BobJensen> stickster: as long as we have more than 7 people committed 18:53 < abadger1999> I could only vote for two people even if there's four open seats. 18:53 < quaid> how about ... "Up to 7 votes, one per seat, vote as many as you feel" 18:53 < BobJensen> OK 18:53 < stickster> That's how the app works IIRC 18:54 < megacoder> Yeah, that should prevent any hanging chads. 18:54 < BobJensen> I can live with that, not like we have a lot of choices 18:54 < quaid> if there is 100% vote:seat, then it's SEP 18:54 < quaid> Somebody Else's Problem 18:54 < quaid> i.e., the next board figures out how to come up with the three seats for the next election. 18:54 < BobJensen> OK so if we are going this way we need to have a way to get the 3 for the next election in the case of a 7 way tie 18:55 < BobJensen> Pass the buck? 18:55 < quaid> yep 18:55 < BobJensen> that works 18:55 < quaid> pass the buck 18:55 < stickster> yup 18:56 < BobJensen> Looks like we have it all figured out 18:56 < quaid> February 2007 18:56 < quaid> Su Mo Tu We Th Fr Sa 18:56 < quaid> 1 2 3 18:56 < quaid> 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 18:56 < quaid> 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18:56 < quaid> 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 18:56 < quaid> 25 26 27 28 18:57 < quaid> how long should voting be open? 18:57 < stickster> One week 18:57 < megacoder> 1 week 18:57 < quaid> abadger1999: is that right/ 18:57 < BobJensen> Start clean, have 4 seats "1 year" and 3 seats "6 mons", the three with the lowest number of votes are the 6 months, in the case of a tie the new board sets the rule 18:57 < BobJensen> 10days 18:57 < BobJensen> 1st - 10th 18:58 < abadger1999> one week? It's up to you. FESCo made it so there were two weekends of voting. 18:58 < megacoder> Yeah, 10 days, just in case someone is off on vacation or TDY. 18:58 < quaid> 2 through 12 18:58 < stickster> quaid: +1 18:58 < BobJensen> quaid: +1 18:58 < stickster> Extra weekday on the end there 18:58 < quaid> opens on FUDCon and ends the second Monday following 19:01 * EvilBob goes to find "Vote for EvilBob" buttons to order online 19:01 < abadger1999> Bring them to FudCon ;-) 19:01 < quaid> ok 19:01 < quaid> wow, that was a nice long discussion :) 19:01 < EvilBob> yeah, nice change 19:02 < stickster> EvilBob: You should have two different and opposite-colored buttons, "Vote for EvilBob" and "Vote for BobJensen" 19:03 < stickster> You could get twice as many votes that way 19:03 < BobJensen> LOL 19:04 < quaid> ok, the other item about meeting time and such 19:04 < BobJensen> I think one of my customers makes buttons 19:04 < quaid> we can just table that until we have a new committe to wrangle out new timing needs 19:04 < stickster> +1 19:04 < BobJensen> quaid: Yes I agree 19:05 < abadger1999> FWIW, there are 89 people in the cvsdocs group so that's your pool of voters. 19:05 < quaid> hmm 19:06 < BobJensen> abadger1999: and how many will be at fudcon so I know how many buttons to bring? LOL 19:06 < quaid> how big is cvsextras? 19:06 < BobJensen> quaid: not a lot more IIRC 19:06 < quaid> abadger1999: btw, can you do 1+ groups to draw from? i.e., if we wanted to add e.g. ambassadors or cvsextras? 19:07 < abadger1999> Hmm... That was a plan that I had. 19:07 < quaid> ok, no worries 19:07 < abadger1999> If the script doesn't presently do it, I can adapt it pretty easily. 19:07 < quaid> just curious, not sure who else we'd open to 19:07 < BobJensen> quaid: trans maybe? 19:08 < abadger1999> 254 in cvsextras 19:08 < BobJensen> quaid: however I agree with what was said today that we need to eliminate the seperation 19:09 < quaid> yeah, I like that pool of voters bigger 19:10 < abadger1999> ambassadors has 151 19:11 < quaid> well, we got what we got 19:11 < quaid> anything else for today? 19:11 < quaid> AOB? 19:12 < BobJensen> FUDCon Hackfest? 19:12 < quaid> stickster suggested we tackle Documentation Guide and tools at that time, trying to sucker in some others to play with tools. 19:12 < BobJensen> What are we doing if anything? What's the plan? 19:12 < stickster> Yes 19:12 < stickster> See the page I helpfully set up 19:12 < abadger1999> BobJensen: (I think the translation teams are still on elvis => RH box with a separate account system.) 19:13 < quaid> abadger1999: yes, correct 19:13 < BobJensen> abadger1999: Yes I know 19:13 < stickster> http://barcamp.org/FudconBoston2007HackFestDocs 19:13 < BobJensen> stickster: Sweet 19:14 < BobJensen> stickster: the Sonars are planing on driving up From Virginia Beach 19:14 < quaid> do we get to invite our own people? 19:14 < quaid> or is that a Max list? 19:14 < quaid> like, megacoder 19:14 < stickster> Talk to Greg I think 19:14 < BobJensen> stickster: I have not added thier names to the list for Greg yet 19:15 < stickster> I'm not sure if Fedora is paying for anyone other than those who have been invited already 19:15 < stickster> But that is because I have no idea 19:16 < stickster> Only Greg knows right now 19:16 < stickster> Oh wait, that might not be true.. 19:16 < megacoder> Bribes happily accepted but not excepted 19:17 < stickster> I see that Jon Steffan will be coming... See #3 on my hackfest list :-) 19:18 -!- jassy [n=jsingh(a)202.41.228.162] has joined #fedora-docs 19:18 < BobJensen> stickster: Yup 19:18 < BobJensen> stickster: I need to talk to Greg about some funding there 19:18 < BobJensen> stickster: well for me also 19:19 < BobJensen> is the meeting over then? 19:19 < BobJensen> or do we have ANOTHER 40 minutes? 19:19 < stickster> heh 19:19 < BobJensen> lol 19:19 < stickster> Someone call it please! 19:19 < stickster> 10 sec? 19:19 < BobJensen> this is what I was doing last weekend http://s9.photobucket.com/albums/a51/deride/icerace07/?action=view&current=… 19:20 < stickster> 5 sec 19:20 < stickster> 4 19:20 < stickster> 3 19:20 < stickster> 2 19:20 < stickster> 1 19:20 < megacoder> Time of death is 19>20 19:20 < stickster> </meeting> -- Karsten Wade, RHCE, 108 Editor ^ Fedora Documentation Project Sr. Developer Relations Mgr. | fedoraproject.org/wiki/DocsProject quaid.108.redhat.com | gpg key: AD0E0C41 ////////////////////////////////// \\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\\

1 0

Docs Successes and Needs
by Paul W. Frields 09 Jan '07

09 Jan '07

I should have started this thread on Wednesday but my home schedule has been a bit topsy-turvy of late: The Docs Project has been invited to participate in the next Fedora Project Board meeting. We should be prepared to talk about the successes we've had over the past two releases and what remains to be done. The way I see it, here are some starter issues. I'd appreciate plenty of input, but please keep in mind that the issues should be things the Board cares about (e.g. blockers in other subprojects that we haven't been able to resolve after repeated attempts, resource needs that might require Real Funds -- things we can't provide by ourselves). Successes: 1. Best-in-the-world release notes, provided by the community. 2. Growing contributor base, including work on additional entry-level to intermediate-level guides. 3. Progress toward integrating with the Fedora package universe. Future Predictions: 1. Possible click-thru on Wiki will allow easier contribution without all the GPG+SSH+CLA+EditGroup rigamarole 2. FUDCon presence will result in major updates to available docs, making it easier for new people to learn processes Outstanding Issues: 1. Translation Project disconnect - what do we need here in concrete terms? App rewrites and process changes? Red Hat internal group(s) originally had ownership of this, yet we've seen no progress in the past months... or year(s). 2. Content from RH, licensed under our terms (OPL w/no options). What else am I missing -- especially in the third area? -- Paul W. Frields, RHCE http://paul.frields.org/ gpg fingerprint: 3DA6 A0AC 6D58 FEC4 0233 5906 ACDB C937 BD11 3717 Fedora Project Board: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Board Fedora Docs Project: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/DocsProject

4 6

Self-Introduction: Pedro Mondim (dubhe)
by Pedro Mondim 08 Jan '07

08 Jan '07

Hi everyone! My name is Pedro Mondim, I'm portuguese (living in Porto) and I'm finishing a licenciate's degree (something between a bachelor and a master) in Astronomy. After some time using linux (started with Ubuntu, then Fedora Core) I thougth I could give a small contribution to the portuguese translation project. In spite of some initial confusion with the required steps to be part of the project, I think I'm now in the correct path :) This is the first time I participate in a project like this one but it really seems to be a worthwhile thing to do. The required GPG key and fingerprint: pub 1024D/CD5870E9 2007-01-04 Key fingerprint = 5719 F367 CB8F 3BA0 6075 4A8C 1ED3 8D44 CD58 70E9 uid Pedro Mondim (dubhe) < pmondim(a)gmail.com> sub 2048g/09ACAF10 2007-01-04 Finally, I'll use this self-presentation for a question: it's the first time I'm using GPG keys and I'm not quite sure of what's needed to really use it; what I wrote above (under "The required GPG key and fingerprint:") is enough for signing an email or is it necessary to attach a "signature.asc" file, as I've seen on some emails? (and how such file is created? just copy the key, paste it and save file as .asc?) Thanks for your help! With my best regards, Pedro Mondim

1 0

Introduction: David Douthitt
by David Douthitt 08 Jan '07

08 Jan '07

Hello! I am David Douthitt, a UNIX System Administrator living in Beloit, Wisconsin, USA - just south of Madison, the capital city. I've experience with a variety of Linux and UNIX variants on a variety of platforms. Most relevant to Fedora is my experiences with Red Hat Linux (since version 4), CentOS, and Red Hat Enterprise Linux. I've also helped with other documentation needs, including documentation in the CFEngine project and also in Wikipedia (mostly a lot of proofreading). I've also written and published a book recently (about advanced system administration), and am about to release another (a guide to GNU Screen). I've also just signed up for the Fedora Infrastructure Project. I'll contribute here as time permits, and am always willing to write something as desired. I also have a basic knowledge of French (though not of technical French).

2 1

Re: Config stuff and glump (as my introduction)
by David Douthitt 06 Jan '07

06 Jan '07

Konstantin Ryabitsev wrote: > I do hate cfengine (probably party due to the way it's set > up here), and I do not consider puppet to be a good alternative, > mostly because it's "yet another config language" and because it's > written in ruby. Well.... I personally think that puppet being written in Ruby is a plus :-P However, puppet itself is not Ruby; it is only developed in Ruby. Ruby is also used extensively for the FreeBSD portsupgrade tool and for Ruby on Rails. I suspect its more widely used than most realize, and if I'm not mistaken, Ruby is included in one or more of the standard Red Hat installs. I must admit that the creation of my first customized Red Hat installation CDROMs was largely done to include Ruby v1.4....

1 0

2024

2023

2022

2021

2020

2019

2018

2017

2016

2015

2014

2013

2012

2011

2010

2009

2008

2007

2006

2005

2004

2003

2002

docs January 2007