= Fedora Board Meeting 2012-02-01 = * Meeting secretary: Jaroslav Reznik == Roll Call == === Present === Jared Smith Jaroslav Reznik Toshio Kuratomi Rudi Landmann Rex Dieter Christoph Wickert Jon Stanley Peter Robinson Guillermo Gómez === Not Present === === Regards === David Nalley == Agenda == Updates Board business === Updates === * Fedora 17 schedule update ** Feature submission deadline last week (2012-01-24) ** Feature Freeze in one week (2012-02-07) === Board Business === * Championing projects ** Due today! ** FAB mailing list/blog about... ** Toshio: Work on the Feature Process ** Peter Robinson: ARM as a Primary Arch ** Jon Stanley: QA how-to-debug and how-to-test pages ** Rudi: Streamline docs publication process * Ticket 131: retire torrent seed? ** https://fedorahosted.org/board/ticket/131 ** a lot of technical solutions (up to infra team?) ** Near future, Board would like to continue supporting torrents * Proposal -- We want torrents to be available but we don't care if that's done via our own infrastructure or on a different service that we point to from our website. ** Torrents provided: For F17 should cover all the things that are currently provided by torrent *** For future Fedora releases, Infra may reduce to what's on get.fp.o Voting: toshio +1 pbrobinson +1 rdieter +1 jreznik: +1 cwickert: +1 jsmith: +1 jstanley: +1 rudi +1 gomix: +1 => agreed (9 votes +1) ** Possible Addition: recommend that any third party used is using an open source torrent solution. cwickert: +1 rdieter: +1 jsmith: +1 jstanley -1 pbrobinson 0 toshio: 0 rudi +1 jreznik: +1 gomix: 0 => agreed (5 votes +1, 3 votes 0, 1 votes -1) ** Possible Addition: still build the .torrent files, even if no longer seeding the downloads cwickert: +1 jsmith: +1 jstanley +1 toshio: 0 rdieter: 0 pbrobinson +1 rudi +1 gomix: +1 jreznik: +1 => agreed (7 votes +1, 2 votes 0, 0 votes -1) jsmith to update ticket and communicate it to the infrastructure team Proposals from last meeting (IRC): * Proposal 1 was: The Board is comfortable with letting the Infra team make the call * Proposal 2 was: The Board asks the Infra team to try to use the current solution for F17 release (even if it's IPv4 only, etc.), and get feedback after release * Proposal 3 was: Table a decision pending further discussion on the mailing list * Proposal 4 was: ask infra to make sure they have a wide audience, and discuss this broadly before making their decision. cwickert: the decision should not be up to the infrastructure team peter: there are limited people resource (=>security implications etc.) Lack of people joining team? How to join infrastructure team: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Infrastructure/GettingStarted * Ticket 132: Endorsement of https://github.com/fedoraproject ** https://fedorahosted.org/board/ticket/132 ** Spot says they would need a trademark license agreement to use the Fedora trademark ** jsmith is uncomfortable granting a blanket trademark license -- would like to see the limit to the scope ** cwickert: What would it be used for? What makes it different from all the other upstream projects we are working with? ** toshio: Would like the limitation to be more about "just getting JBoss into Fedora" as opposed to what they posted to the advisory-board list ** toshio: The patch vs git pull request starts to border on rel-eng/infra issues (expanded trees on pkgs.fp.o, etc) ** toshio: doesn't answer the question "Why can't an individual contributor do this on their own -- why do they need a Fedora github account" ** pbrobinson/cwickert: Will the github account be a dumping ground in limbo between upstream and downstream? Is there a more specific (and valid) use case? ** rdieter: A lot of misgivings would be allayed if the scope were limited (to JBoss as example) -- is that a short-term thing? ** pbrobinson/cwickert: If it is limited to JBoss, are we discriminating other projects? ** -ENEEDINFO ** pbrobinson: fedoracommunity.o domains granted a trademark license still need a disclaimer. Wouldn't we still need one here? ** jsmith to update ticket * Trademark Guidelines Draft ** https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Pchestek/TMGuidelinesDraft ** Board members in general agreement that it's better than the current guidelines ** Need more time to digest the changes and read the specifics * Any other Board business? ** UsrMove feature *** General concern that coming in so late, this will cause us to slip *** Proposal: The Board puts forward a statement of concern regarding the feature and the process **** In trying to draft a proposal, came to the conclusion that anything we would say would be micromanaging. **** Instead of making a Board statement, we'll reach out to individuals to share our concerns privately == Other Notes == * Next Board meeting will be a public IRC meeting on Wednesday, February 8th at 18:30 UTC _______________________________________________ advisory-board mailing list advisory-board@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/advisory-board
