14:00:58 <bcotton> #startmeeting Council (2022-09-28)
14:00:59 <zodbot> Meeting started Wed Sep 28 14:00:58 2022 UTC.
14:00:59 <zodbot> This meeting is logged and archived in a public location.
14:00:59 <zodbot> The chair is bcotton. Information about MeetBot at
14:00:59 <zodbot> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #halp #info #idea #link #topic.
14:00:59 <zodbot> The meeting name has been set to 'council_(2022-09-28)'
14:01:01 <bcotton> #meetingname council
14:01:01 <zodbot> The meeting name has been set to 'council'
14:01:27 <bcotton> #chair mattdm, sumantrom, riecatnor, bt0dotninja, spot, bcotton, siddharthvipul1, t0xic0der, dcantrell
14:01:27 <zodbot> Current chairs: bcotton bt0dotninja dcantrell mattdm riecatnor siddharthvipul1 spot sumantrom t0xic0der
14:01:43 <bcotton> #topic Introductions, Welcomes
14:01:43 <mattdm> Good morning!
14:01:43 <dcantrell> .hello2
14:01:43 <zodbot> dcantrell: dcantrell 'David Cantrell' <>
14:01:50 <AkashdeepDhar[m]> Hello hello 👋
14:01:58 <VipulSiddharth[m> Good Morning all 👋
14:02:11 <riecatnor[m]> .hello riecatnor
14:02:11 <zodbot> riecatnor[m]: riecatnor 'Marie Nordin' <>
14:02:17 <AkashdeepDhar[m]> .hello t0xic0der
14:02:18 <zodbot> AkashdeepDhar[m]: t0xic0der 'Akashdeep Dhar' <>
14:02:21 <VipulSiddharth[m> .hello siddharthvipul1
14:02:22 <zodbot> VipulSiddharth[m: siddharthvipul1 'Vipul Siddharth' <>
14:03:03 <spot> .hello spot
14:03:04 <zodbot> spot: spot 'Tom Callaway' <>
14:05:29 <bcotton> #topic Agenda
14:05:30 <bcotton> #info Strategic plan update
14:05:30 <bcotton> #info Ticket review
14:05:30 <bcotton> #info Your items here!
14:05:40 <bcotton> #topic Strategic plan update
14:07:01 <AkashdeepDhar[m]> I have an item for the open floor. I'll wait :)
14:07:21 <bcotton> Akashdeep Dhar: ack
14:07:32 <mattdm> or can add to the official list now if it's more than just a fyi?
14:08:17 <AkashdeepDhar[m]> We can add it to the list I guess. I have some status updates from the Websites and Apps Team.
14:08:47 <mattdm> Sounds good to me for #your items here :)
14:09:28 <bcotton> if it's just a broadcast of status, sounds like a topic for a commblog post
14:09:39 <bcotton> but for now, let's let mattdm talk about hte strategic plan
14:10:03 <AkashdeepDhar[m]> Ben Cotton (he/him): we do have one commblog lined up, this is a minor version of it.
14:10:57 * mattdm waits for #topic change
14:11:32 <bcotton> topic changed at 10:05 from my scrollback :-)
14:12:05 <mattdm> I'm not seeing zodbot messages. :-/
14:12:09 <mattdm> But I'll trust you :)
14:12:13 <spot> mattdm: just goooo
14:12:29 <mattdm> Anyway this is short, because the current status is: waiting on me to write stuff
14:13:00 <mattdm> In case people have forgotten, this is the follow-on from what Ben and Marie and I drafted a few months ago and I presented an overview of at Nest
14:13:18 <mattdm> We have the high-level goals in what I think are pretty good shape.
14:13:38 <mattdm> The next step is moving to the left (from theory to practice!) on the Logic Model, and filling out what it means.
14:13:59 <mattdm> And I need to find some time when I'm not crying about patents on twitter to do this.
14:14:36 <mattdm> I will try to get at least something going this Friday. I'm on my way down to Raleigh next week for an internal meeting.
14:14:43 <mattdm> so next week is not great.
14:14:58 <mattdm> but the week after that should be LOVELY, with no fires or problems
14:15:22 <mattdm> I think that's it. Any questions? :)
14:15:35 <bcotton> #action mattdm to start Discussion threads on each of the goals for the strategic plan
14:16:37 <mattdm> yep :)
14:17:20 <bcotton> #topic Open ticket review
14:17:29 <bcotton> #link
14:18:00 <bcotton> #link
14:18:16 <bcotton> mattdm any updates on this one?
14:18:53 <mattdm> Oh look. That is assigned to me :)
14:19:04 <mattdm> It is just waiting for me to contact them and say "add us please"?
14:19:12 <bcotton> from what i can tell, its just "Send an email and then you can close the issue"
14:20:11 <mattdm> sending email this second.
14:20:32 <bcotton> #info mattdm is sending an email as we "speak"
14:20:53 <bcotton> #link
14:21:13 <mattdm> DONE
14:21:13 <bcotton> i think this one is stalled on us collectively figuring out a framework for doing these sorts of things
14:21:16 <bcotton> 🎉
14:21:46 <mattdm> #link
14:22:27 <mattdm> Yeah. This ends with me saying that we need to set expectations and benchmarks about what we plan to get out from sponsorships in general
14:22:48 <mattdm> And apparently that was bucket of cold water on the discussion :)
14:23:17 <mattdm> ("This ends" being "the discussion thread currently ends", not "this, the concept, will inevitably reach this end")
14:23:21 <mattdm> (in case that wasn't clear)
14:23:24 <spot> "the end"
14:23:48 <mattdm> exactly
14:24:15 <mattdm> If anyone would like to push this further, please revive that discussion
14:25:24 <mattdm> I suggest we mark the ticket deferred for now. "This is deferred, pending development of a general rubric for selecting sponsorships, including clearly defined expectations and guidelines for benchmarks", or somethign like that
14:25:50 <riecatnor[m]> I think in order to get this one moving, the council needs to do a video call with at least half of us present to discuss and then start setting standards if we decide we want to do this sort of thing.
14:26:40 <mattdm> Good topic for a Real In Person Meeting!!!!!!1
14:26:51 <bcotton> i'm in favor of deferring it. Marie is right, but until someone wants to step up to coordinate it, it's not going to make any progress
14:27:44 <mattdm> note to self:  bring up a working meeting, either virtual or f2f, in open floor when we get there
14:28:51 <mattdm> #info note a draft proposal for what the policy for this should be does not have to come from the Council itself -- anyone interested could make a straw-bale proposal
14:30:35 <bcotton> so do we want to close this ticket as deferred or leave it open in the hopes that we come back to it at some point
14:31:31 <mattdm> Let's not give false hopes :)
14:32:05 <mattdm> I'll comment in the discussion thread as you close the ticket :)
14:33:08 <bcotton> objections?
14:33:39 <AkashdeepDhar[m]> None from my end
14:33:45 <dcantrell> nope
14:34:03 * mattdm sends comment
14:34:51 <bcotton> #agreed We'll close 406 as deferred for now in the hopes that someone (Council member or not) picks it up later
14:35:15 <bcotton> #link
14:35:43 <bcotton> I think the answer is "yes, although not perhaps as closely as we'd like." any reason to leave this open at this point?
14:36:41 <mattdm> Richard Fontana is now officially acting as our legal contact. We've got some more work to do on the process (this is one of the things distracting me from wrting strategy docs lol sigh) but I think we're in good enough shape to close now.
14:36:44 <dcantrell> I don't think so.  There's been so much work around reviving fedora-legal@ and the license review process, etc.  To me this fits in with that and, well, I don't see an action necessary on the ticket
14:36:53 <dcantrell> close it
14:37:27 <bcotton> #agreed 408 can be closed
14:37:30 <bcotton> on that topic...
14:37:39 <bcotton> #link
14:37:59 <bcotton> #link
14:39:06 * mattdm drafts proposal
14:39:12 <spot> i am intentionally staying out of that one.
14:39:29 <bcotton> spot++
14:39:30 <zodbot> bcotton: Karma for spot changed to 1 (for the current release cycle):
14:39:38 <dcantrell> so is this just abolish it outright or abolish it with the intention of replacing it with something else?
14:39:54 <mattdm> Proposal: "The Council agrees with this recommendation. Let's drop it. We'll ask FESCo and the Fedora Infrastructure team to come up with a practical plan for implementation."
14:40:33 <mattdm> dcantrell: My understanding: drop it in favor of implicit agreement.
14:40:50 <spot> I abstain from voting on that proposal.
14:40:58 <mattdm> Maybe we should get Richard to a video meeting to talk about it
14:41:31 <bcotton> -1. i'd rather see what the plan looks like before we start asking people to implement it
14:41:45 <mattdm> Thank you Spot. If you have any commentary you think would be useful I'd be happy to hear it, but if you just want to Not Get Started that's cool too.
14:41:57 <dcantrell> I think that's where I am.  -1
14:42:17 <spot> I am concerned that this will cause more problems and I am unclear exactly what problem removing it solves.
14:42:23 <bcotton> i don't think it has much of a practical impact one way or another, so if the cost of removing it is great, it's better to keep it
14:42:24 <riecatnor[m]> I am curious what work this would generate- would we need to update every current sub project with something? what about those who already signed it versus those who wouldn't in the future
14:42:28 <dcantrell> spot: agreed
14:42:31 <mattdm> Ben Cotton (he/him): Can you maybe rephrase? My thinking is: the basic policy decision needs to come first
14:42:52 <mattdm> riecatnor: I think there's no harm in having signed it. I signed the _actual_ CLA back in the day :)
14:43:03 <bcotton> mattdm: i think we can't make the policy decision until we know what the impacts will be
14:43:26 <bcotton> otherwise it's a wish, not a policy
14:44:24 <mattdm> Ben Cotton (he/him): I think we should make the policy decision based on legal / policy impacts
14:45:22 <bcotton> then those need to be made more clear
14:45:46 <bcotton> i remain -1. you can decide whether my vote counts here or not :-)
14:45:53 <mattdm> Okay. So: should we invite Richard to a video meeting? Or a future text meeting? Or ask for more from him async?
14:46:31 <bcotton> i think async is better. because we'll want to weigh the policy/legal impacts against the practical impacts
14:47:24 <bcotton> richard talks about "at least theoretical" problems with the FPCA. We know there will be non-theoretical work that has to be done to remove it.
14:47:57 <mattdm> So, people with questions, please ask in the discussion thread. And, `#action mattdm point richard to the thread`
14:47:59 <bcotton> and, as neal pointed out in discussion, i'd like to know what "a looser set of guidelines" looks like before deciding to ditch the FPCA
14:48:45 <bcotton> #action mattdm point richard to the "abolish the FPCA" thread
14:48:53 <mattdm> Yeah, I think that's reasonable. I don't want it to get blocked on "well, there's a workflow thing set up FreeIPA, so we can't move forward ever"
14:49:15 <bcotton> #action everyone to ask questions in that thread
14:49:39 <bcotton> okay, we're nearing the end of the hour and there are two topics folks brought up so...
14:49:44 <bcotton> #topic Websites & Apps update
14:50:05 <bcotton> Akashdeep Dhar: go ahead
14:50:05 <AkashdeepDhar[m]> I had some updates from the Fedora Websites and Apps Council Objective that I thought I would share here.
14:50:23 * AkashdeepDhar[m] promises that it's just the mini version of the updates
14:50:43 <AkashdeepDhar[m]> We have started working on an article for the commblog and have also started off with a creating a community-wide survey The survey in question (talking about tautology) would be shipped alongside the commblog and we plan on having it for a couple of weeks. This should help us understand what things we should improve upon and have some pointers for creating the team roadmap after the
14:50:43 <AkashdeepDhar[m]> council objective is completed.
14:51:55 <AkashdeepDhar[m]> The Websites 3.0 efforts are well underway and there are, in an average, around 5-8 people actively working on its design and development. In the meanwhile, I took the time to refine the documentation around the websites apprenticeship a bit more with the help of folks involved in mentored projects. Smera Goel joined us yesterday in our weekly meeting and the team had a talk about participating in Outreachy and Hacktoberfest
14:51:55 <AkashdeepDhar[m]> events.
14:52:16 <AkashdeepDhar[m]> (Smera Goel is the new Mindshare rep for Mentored Projects)
14:52:28 <AkashdeepDhar[m]> I will keep you folks updated about stuff as and when they happen. That's it from my side. :)
14:52:32 <AkashdeepDhar[m]> Fin.
14:52:57 <mattdm> #topic A high-intensity working council meeting
14:53:37 <mattdm> I think we need to do this. Both for the next step for the strategy (after the aforementioned stuff which is blocked on me) and for other things like the kde sponsorship
14:54:05 <mattdm> I'd love to have it in person, possibly as soon as November -- but maybe January/February failing that.
14:54:44 <mattdm> What is all y'all's general sense on this? Particularly around travel and in-person meeting
14:55:11 <dcantrell> I am in favor of an in person meeting
14:55:16 <spot> me too
14:55:31 <AkashdeepDhar[m]> Yep, we definitely should have it :)
14:55:35 <mattdm> I think the video meetings we did ... two years ago? what is time even? were better than nothing, but not nearly as good as in person.
14:55:51 <mattdm> Okay cool. Does November seem too soon?
14:55:51 <dcantrell> November is going to be tough because I've got ATO happening right at the end of Oct then Nov, then I have a wedding at the Bar None Ranch in Arizona, then I have family travel because we are welcoming a new family member
14:56:19 <mattdm> congratulations on your wedding
14:56:26 <mattdm> :)
14:56:30 <dcantrell> no no, I am married.  but we are invited to a wedding
14:56:32 <riecatnor[m]> organizing it around FOSDEM might be a thing? (I won't be a part most likely, just an idea!)
14:56:38 <mattdm> :)
14:56:56 <bcotton> i think we're a little close to November to just be starting planning, given history. but aiming for jan/feb seems reasonable
14:56:56 <dcantrell> (and I was trying to reference Hey Dude, one of the first two live action Nickelodeon shows from many many moons ago)
14:57:08 <dcantrell> jan/feb better, I agree
14:57:13 <bcotton> dcantrell is a little wild and a little strange
14:57:17 <mattdm> (Sorry, not a Nickelodeon kid.)
14:57:21 <dcantrell> bcotton: indeed
14:57:47 <dcantrell> mattdm: that is no an acceptable excuse.  you have to go way out of your way to avoid pop culture.  see: the internet
14:57:58 <mattdm> Okay, let's start planning on that. I think a US location is going to be easiest for most of us.
14:58:10 <mattdm> Maybe Mexico. I could go to Mexico in February.
14:58:22 * dcantrell checks exchange rate
14:58:32 <spot> pls just give me time to recover before FOSDEM. :/
14:58:46 <mattdm> spot: When is FOSDEM?
14:58:51 <riecatnor[m]> FOSDEM is feb 4&5
14:58:52 <riecatnor[m]>
14:59:01 <spot> riecatnor[m]++
14:59:10 <dcantrell> mattdm: on location, would we aim for using a RH office?
14:59:55 <mattdm> dcantrell: Maybe. Previously we've all stayed at a single hotel -- usually can get a conference room thrown in for free with that.
15:00:04 <bcotton> okay, we're out of time, so we can continue this conversation elsewhere
15:00:06 <dcantrell> ok, either works
15:00:10 <dcantrell> bcotton: thanks
15:00:13 <bcotton> quick reminder
15:00:14 <bcotton> #topic Next meeting
15:00:28 <bcotton> #info The next regular business meeting is Wednesday 26 October
15:00:48 <bcotton> #info The next video meeting is Wednesday 12 October. The topic will be "Amazon Linux"
15:00:52 <bcotton> #link
15:01:12 <bcotton> and with that, we'll let IoT take the stage
15:01:13 <bcotton> #endmeeting