On 04/19/2012 01:22 AM, Matthew Garrett wrote: > On Thu, Apr 19, 2012 at 12:42:58AM -0400, Jon Masters wrote: >> Hi Matthew, >> >> On 04/18/2012 09:54 PM, Matthew Garrett wrote: >> >>> Right now I don't think ARM's doing a great job of that [being part of >>> the Fedora community]. Your meetings happen on the phone and aren't >> minuted. >> >> I am sorry that you feel that way. I think it is important to add some >> context to the point about meetings (I'm not sure how one generalizes >> that into a broader statement). We have meetings that are on the phone, >> and on IRC, on #fedora-arm, which you are welcome to join (though I >> understand that this is unusual to have a phone call and the timing >> might not be convenient to everyone's schedule - the current time was >> collaboratively chosen by everyone involved in Fedora ARM). We use the >> standard meeting bot, and we have an intention to move to >> #fedora-meeting in due course. For now we're still using #fedora-arm, >> but if it's important that we move meetings from now on, we can do that. > > #fedora-meeting is a given, but really, other parts of the project are > able to function by having meetings on IRC - It's important to have a > written record of not only what decisions were made, but also why they > were made. Thanks for making this point very clear. I'm sure we'll take it on board. I'm all for doing what makes sense - moving IRC channel is hardly difficult, and dropping the phone can be done (note that we are not the only part of the Fedora project that uses the phone though). >>> I've got no insight at all into >>> how your development process is progressing. >> >> I'm glad to see that you care deeply about the topic. You're welcome to >> join #fedora-arm, participate in the discussions, join the mailing list, >> and reply to any of the discussions there. You're also welcome to start >> new conversations, or raise issues on IRC any time you like. It might >> also be relatively easy for us to arrange to get you some hardware that >> you can run the ARM port on if you would like to help? > > I don't have the time or the inclination to be involved in the ARM port > at the moment. That's fine. Not a problem. Do note though that we're very willing to work with anyone who does want to get involved. You're most welcome. > What I *do* want is to have some visibility into what > you're doing in order to reduce the probability of decisions being made > that are incompatible with some other aspect of the distribution. It's certainly a good idea to make sure everyone is aware of important decisions. We certainly don't need the personal approval of any one person, but we hope that in general we make sane choices, and we can benefit by making sure that everyone is aware of our sane choices :) I think the team will need to do what makes sense. We're busily trying to make progress, and we need to make some decisions. For example, you're not running the build system, but Chris and the Seneca team are. They're doing a great job. It would probably be inappropriate to expect your approval for decisions we would need to make around the build system, but it would certainly be beneficial to share what we are deciding so that there is due opportunity for any course correction. So, we'll take your input on board and we'll try to increase the level of informational flow and general comfort of those observing our effort. > The > onus is on you to make sure that people are aware of relevant decisions > you've made. Of course, that's good input. I think we can always do a better job :) >>> At minimum you should be >>> meeting in #fedora-meeting and posting minutes to arm@ - ideally you'd >>> be Cc:ing them to devel@. >> >> Feel free to add that to the list of requirements for SA promotion. > > No, because it's not a requirement. In theory an SA could be perfectly > suited for PA promotion without any real involvement with the Fedora > community. It'd just be massively more difficult. I think there's a missunderstanding here. I don't recall suggesting that you need to add anything about "real involvement" to the list, just that if you feel certain specifics are required around meeting format, etiquette, and so forth, that would be useful to note down. >>> If you're doing everything transparently >> >> We are doing everything transparently. Some times it might happen on the >> "wrong" channel, and we might screw up with regard to certain >> expectations, but there is no attempt to be non-transparent. > > I appreciate that there's no deliberate attempt to avoid scrutiny, but > that's not enough. You need to take the initiative in being more active > in communicating with the rest of the project. Absolutely. We are a small team, and we are trying. Like you, the reason Brendan and myself are replying this late into the evening is that we are working around to clock to advance this project. We agree that the Fedora ARM team can do a better job at engagement and we will try to dedicate a good chunk of time to improving overall cohesion. Thanks, Jon. -- devel mailing list devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx https://admin.fedoraproject.org/mailman/listinfo/devel
