On Tue, May 10, 2016 at 12:50 PM, Josh Boyer <jwboyer@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
ALL Hail Tux the Magnificent,On Tue, May 10, 2016 at 3:41 PM, Stephen John Smoogen <smooge@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> On 10 May 2016 at 15:30, Matthew Miller <mattdm@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>> This came up in our Council meeting yesterday¹. Specifically, the
>> suggestion:
>>
>> "Growth Model for the Fedora Project. What is it? Do we have one? There
>> was a fair amount of feedback stating that without specifcs. There is
>> NO plan"²
>>
>> So, there *is* a plan, with several components. Since the first Flock
>> in Charleston, much of it has been under the "Fedora.next" umbrella.³ I
>> feel like we've talked about it quite a lot, but I'm definitely happy
>> to do more.
>
> To me that speaks of "What do you mean by Growth Model and why doesn't
> all the stuff we have talked about the last 3 years not match that?"
> Because to me this is more about definition mismatch than actual lack
> of information. Is there something more defined on what a "Growth
> Model" is supposed to be?
This is a fair point.
+1
The question in the meeting seemed somewhat two-pronged. There is
"user/contributor growth" and "growth of the Fedora budget". Matthew
has focused on user growth here, and contributor growth hopefully (but
not necessarily) follows from that. It might be worth discussing the
contributor aspects in more detail.
FPL did a great job of explaining the project part. It seems clear that most folks are aiming to increase budget for FY19, but wanting to make sure its 'justified.' I do think there are resources like server space or items that could be done in FY18 without needing to increase Fedora budget.
As for Fedora budget growth, that is somewhat tied to the above. I
said in the meeting that I didn't see the budget growing until FY19 at
the earliest. That is mainly because aside from user/contributor
growth that we need to measure, the budget process Remy and the
Council is working on is laying the foundation for *justification* of
a bigger monetary budget. Hopefully being much clearer in where and
how we're spending our money, and tying that back to impact for the
project will help us justify a larger budget to fund even more growth.
So we clearly have a plan here too, even if we don't realistically
expect it to pay off (no pun intended) for a bit.
+1 (qualified with sub-projects that have already been funded, and have sorta dissipated.) The clarifications here help give context and vision. Thank you.
FPL's letter was waaaaaaay better than what I would have sent, and likely saved some drama. :D Im tabling most of money issues for F18 and will make case for 19, in due time, and to allow the growth to happen (as it is already.)
josh
_______________________________________________
council-discuss mailing list
council-discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct
http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/council-discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
The Fedora Project's mission is to lead the advancement of free and
open source software and content as a collaborative community.
-MD
_______________________________________________ council-discuss mailing list council-discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Fedora Code of Conduct: http://fedoraproject.org/code-of-conduct http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/council-discuss@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx The Fedora Project's mission is to lead the advancement of free and open source software and content as a collaborative community.
