01:32:38 <jsmith> #startmeeting FAmSCo town hall meeting
01:32:38 <zodbot> Meeting started Tue Nov 22 01:32:38 2011 UTC.  The chair is jsmith. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.
01:32:38 <zodbot> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #halp #info #idea #link #topic.
01:32:48 <jsmith> #meetingname fedora_townhall
01:32:48 <zodbot> The meeting name has been set to 'fedora_townhall'
01:32:57 <jsmith> #topic Candidate introductions
01:33:06 <jsmith> Candidates, please introduce yourselves quickly.
01:33:32 <gbraad_china> .fas gbraad
01:33:33 <zodbot> gbraad_china: gbraad 'Gerard Braad (吉拉德)' <fedora@gbraad.nl>
01:33:42 <jsmith> (While the candidates are introducing themselves, people can write questions in #fedora-townhall-pubic and I'll add them to the queue
01:33:56 <herlo> .fas herlo
01:33:57 <zodbot> herlo: herlo 'Clint Savage' <herlo1@gmail.com>
01:33:59 <gbraad_china> Long-time linux user. I am/have been on the previous FAmSCo
01:34:04 <yn1v> .fas yn1v
01:34:05 <zodbot> yn1v: yn1v 'Neville A. Cross' <neville@taygon.com>
01:34:11 <tuanta> .fas tuanta
01:34:12 <zodbot> tuanta: tuanta '' <tuanta@iwayvietnam.com>
01:34:27 <gbraad_china> ambassador for many years and using Red Hat/Fedora since 4.1
01:35:06 <gbraad_china> work as a developer for a Open Source company. mostly deal with the Chinese F/OSS community... eg. Mozilla and Fedora
01:35:15 <gbraad_china> and recently MeeGo/Tizen
01:35:52 * herlo apologizes to gbraad_china for butting in with his info...
01:36:02 <yn1v> My name is Neville Cross from Nicaragua, I am currently running for a second period on FAmSCo. I have been helping marketing and freemedia
01:36:05 <gbraad_china> no harm, please continue
01:36:59 <herlo> I have been with Fedora since 2007, and an ambassador since 2008. Most of my work is with getting the event boxen and media replication process simplified as well as helping develop the ambassador join process
01:37:53 <tuanta> I am Tuan from Vietnam. Fedora user since 2003, contributor since 2009, package maintainer, active ambassador in Vietnam with a lot release parties, other events and presentations.
01:38:08 <tuanta> I am also co-chair for Fedora Ambassador APAC meetings.
01:38:48 <tuanta> EOF
01:38:51 <cwickert> Hi, I'm Christoph from Germany. I'm a Fedora contributor since 2005, proven packager, packager sponsor, proven  tester, ambassador and community monkey.
01:39:08 <cwickert> Currently maintaining the LXDE  desktop and Spin, most Xfce and some more stuff, all together ~ 150  packages. I'm also the spins wrangler and EMEA media wrangler.
01:39:32 <cwickert> I member of FESCo from F12 till now but I will not run again because I now want to work in FAMSCo
01:39:33 <cwickert> EOF
01:40:01 <jsmith> OK, thanks for those introductions
01:40:17 <jsmith> #topic Questions and answers
01:40:44 <jsmith> Again, if people here (either members of the public or candidates) have questions they would like to ask, please post them in #fedora-townhall-public
01:40:55 <jsmith> Now on the first question:
01:41:06 <jsmith> Q from inode0: What do you see as the pros and cons of moving the budget which currently FAmSCo has oversight of to a body with representation from a wider cross-section of the Fedora community? (cwickert, gbraad_china, herlo, tuanta, yn1v)
01:41:34 <cwickert> As I am the one who proposed it, I hardly see and downsides but only advantages
01:41:41 <cwickert> Pro:
01:41:56 <cwickert> FAmSCo doesn't deal with budget requests in a timely manner
01:42:20 <cwickert> FAmSCo can only approve a limited budget, everything else needs to be confirmed by the local ambassadors
01:42:51 <cwickert> and often neither FAmSCo not the local ambassadors know the person to make the budget request
01:42:54 <cwickert> or his work
01:43:50 <yn1v> !
01:43:58 <cwickert> but if we had somebody from every team in the body that has a mandate over the budget, things could run better
01:44:07 <cwickert> we need to make sure that we share the money equally among all groups and projects and not just among the ambassadors
01:44:44 <cwickert> also I feel that ambassadors, who are often the FUDCon organizers, are not in the position to decide about sponsoring requests
01:44:50 <cwickert> for the reasons I just outlined
01:44:53 <cwickert> Con:
01:45:22 <cwickert> For FUDCons, the budget for sponsoring event attendees comes form the total FUDCon budget
01:45:33 <cwickert> but this is all the CONs I can think of
01:45:35 <cwickert> EOF
01:46:16 <yn1v> Pro: we can help other contributors to participate in events where we can get a diverse set of skills. We can make other teams be on the spot light. Con: we are challenging the status quo. We are taking away power from famsco. My view: we should go for this.
01:46:23 <yn1v> eof
01:47:20 <gbraad_china> Pro: budgets could move along quicker
01:47:40 <gbraad_china> as this was the biggest issue with FAmSCo in recent time and maybe year(s)?
01:48:14 <gbraad_china> and allows for better distirbution among different interests beyond Ambassadors as most of this work is already related to marketing
01:48:33 <gbraad_china> Con: neglect and lose of contact with the people who actually do things.
01:48:44 <gbraad_china> however, I believe we can work on that to streamline
01:49:17 <gbraad_china> So I would not see a big problem to go for this solution as dealing with budgets in a timely manner is important. the rest we can iron out
01:49:20 <gbraad_china> EOF
01:50:12 <herlo> Pros: Fedorans can know who and how to request funding. Process can be clearly defined, which can improve response times. Individuals will know more quickly if they can obtain funds to do more work to benefit Fedora.
01:51:07 <herlo> Cons: Migration from FAmSCo to another body. Is the new group and elected group? Or do they become appointed by FAmSCo, FESCo and the Board, etc?
01:51:11 <herlo> eof
01:51:21 <cwickert> !
01:52:08 <tuanta> please, cwickert, you can interrupt me
01:52:15 <cwickert> herlo: the group that I have in mind consists of delegates, they are appointed/elected by the groups. every group sends one representative. EOF
01:52:40 <herlo> cwickert: thanks for the clarification
01:52:46 <herlo> eof
01:52:53 <tuanta> Pro: it could be helpful for other contributors; Con: it could slow down the whole process (if we do not have any ways to manage it).
01:53:02 <tuanta> I think it would be better. Budgets should be arranged for other contributors who need it, not only for ambassadors.
01:53:14 <tuanta> eof
01:53:47 <jsmith> OK, a follow-up to the previous question:
01:53:53 <jsmith> Q from inode0: people seem convinced another body could process funding matters better than FAmSCo but I see no reason to believe this, why would that be any better?  (gbraad_china, herlo, tuanta, yn1v, cwickert)
01:54:57 <gbraad_china> They can probably deal quicker with the budget.
01:55:46 <gbraad_china> As with the previous FAmSCo we noticed a lot of time got unnecesarily consumed by 'waiting state' for approval and payment. this caused issues and pain and worst of all delays in getting tickets
01:56:13 <gbraad_china> IF this other body is more committed I do believe things could move quicker
01:56:51 <gbraad_china> however, I still believe FAmSCo is a representative body of the ambassadors and knows better what goes on in the local community
01:56:56 <gbraad_china> and who they deal with
01:57:17 <gbraad_china> if they are granted more rights, I also believe more of this budget bottleneck can be taken awat
01:57:23 <gbraad_china> s/awat/away
01:58:08 <gbraad_china> I also believe the budget is not correctly divided and I believe another body is better at granting this according to real needs
01:58:11 <gbraad_china> EOF
01:58:38 <herlo> The internal debate I am having with this is related to the fact that while FAmSCo controls the budget, it does not imply that the monies within that budget are for Ambassadors alone. I do think that breaking out the budget to a separate group will help remove this perception. I don't know, however, if migrating the process away from FAmSCo is a better solution, other than to say that there could be a better process and a more focused gr
01:59:15 <herlo> I would say though, that managing budgets themselves are a large task.
01:59:16 <herlo> eof
01:59:43 <tuanta> Mostly, I guess, those people thought that a more powerful person/group could deal with the budget faster; However, in my view, I think FAmSCo could improve their work to cover this better.
02:00:30 <tuanta> If we can have budget manager work much closer with FAmSCo, everything would be fine.
02:00:31 <tuanta> eof
02:00:40 <yn1v> You have to be an Ambassador to be in FAmSCo. So if you are in another team, let's say translation, it does not makes much sense to ask ambassadors for budget to participate in an event that makes sense from another team. This is why I think it will be better to have budget in another body, better represented. Having said that, we can work to streamline the budget process and make bridges to others teams, to let them know that is not only ambassado
02:00:40 <yn1v> rs budget, but event/recruting budget. But it will be hard to change perceptions.
02:00:47 <yn1v> eof
02:02:29 <cwickert> Well, first of all they hardly can do worse than FAmSCo. :( FAmSCo just takes way to long. This year I spend ~3500 EUR form my own pocket and waiting for money really hurts.
02:02:44 <cwickert> If it is a group of delegates, we make sure that at least one delegate knows the requester and his work and can make a recommendation
02:03:03 <cwickert> A good example are FUDCon requests: We just do "first come, first served" and look at the funding requests but hardly at what the people achieved for Fedora recently
02:03:19 <cwickert> While I admit that the ambassadors need a lot of money to do their work, there are areas of Fedora they have no insight in and thus they should not be controlling
02:03:35 <cwickert> When I propose that a Fedora Council it want it to handle more money than the current ComArch budget
02:03:58 <cwickert> say they could also decide about some infrascturcture budget, but this is up to further discussion
02:04:08 <cwickert> there is still a lot of questions to be ansered
02:04:18 <cwickert> but it can't be worse than now
02:04:19 <cwickert> EOF
02:04:33 <jsmith> Q from jsmith: Would you be for or against requiring new ambassadors to be an active member of at least one other special interest group before joining the Ambassadors program?  (herlo, tuanta, yn1v, cwickert, gbraad_china)
02:05:17 <herlo> ooh, good question
02:06:58 <herlo> I think I am for this, but also for lowering barriers to joining the ambassadors group overall. The thought I had with regard to this is to make it easier to share Fedora with others, by showing that you know things about FOSS, freedom and a little about how docs or art or freemedia work within Fedora too.
02:07:41 <herlo> there are a lot of easy ways to get started in ambassadors. I'm just not sure it should be the *first* place to go.
02:07:44 <herlo> eof
02:08:27 <tuanta> I think new ambassadors should do some others before joining too.
02:09:24 <tuanta> I meant, at least, people can join into freemedia group. it's easy; then he/she can help others.
02:10:11 <tuanta> and, before sponsoring a new ambassador, we, at least, can know who he/she is
02:10:17 <tuanta> eof
02:10:32 <yn1v> I am against to make a requisite for people to be part of other team before becoming an Ambassador. If that was the case, probably I will not be in the project today. Where there is no presence, we need somebody that act as local contact. probably where we have enought presence, we can demand more from new candidates.
02:10:42 <yn1v> I can see how starting on other team will benefit a new candidate for ambassador. I think we can suggest that, but not to make it a rule.
02:10:45 <yn1v> eof
02:11:34 <cwickert> For me an additional group membership is not a requirement but a recommendation. I personally think the ambassadors should not be a beginners group and they should know the whole project because they represent Fedora.
02:11:50 <cwickert> But this is a very European POV: We have a lot of skilled contributors here and a lot of very active ambassadors, so we are not struggling for new ambassadors
02:12:04 <cwickert> In other countries or regions things are quite different: They are happy about every contributor and every new ambassador can help Fedora grow
02:12:20 <cwickert> So we should support these regions where the community still needs to develop and not set to high standards for them
02:12:26 <cwickert> Thus only a suggestion or recommendation but not a strict requirement
02:12:28 <cwickert> EOF
02:12:38 <gbraad_china> it wouldn't hurt, but do not see this as a strict requirement. many ambassadors enjoy representing fedora as an ambassador (after being a user). they feel committed and part of a team. requirement them to join another SIG might increase the barrier for entrance to the project. Especially in China is it not a common thing to contriute to a project
02:13:23 <gbraad_china> but having them join the project, you can teach them about the concepts and help them become contributors. I believe users are potentials contributors and the same goes for the ambassadors. good one's will develop themselves
02:13:27 <gbraad_china> EOF
02:14:46 <jsmith> kaio: Please go ahead and answer as well...
02:16:43 <kaio> I think the only requirement for joining Ambassadors team is the love to Fedora and the passion to tell others how good Fedora is. I won't support the requirement but encourage them to join one of the SIGs once they joined as ambassador. There are people who only uses Fedora and we should help them fit in for contributions gradually, no matter they are ambassadors or not.
02:17:27 <herlo> !
02:18:14 <kaio> If we require joining a SIG first, this may discriminate non-technical people.
02:18:17 <kaio> EOF
02:18:40 <jsmith> => herlo
02:18:45 <herlo> I think there is some possible middle ground here. Having new ambassadors join from other SIGs could have a lower barrier than say a brand new contributor who wants to join fedora first.
02:18:50 <herlo> eof
02:19:04 <herlo> s/fedora/fedora ambassadors/
02:19:59 <jsmith> OK, due to our late start, some of our candidates have to go, but we've got one more question in the queue
02:20:29 <jsmith> Q from inode0: Are FAmSCo monthly reports accurate? Are they intended to be useful beyond making activity more transparent? (tuanta, yn1v, cwickert, kaio, herlo)
02:21:07 <tuanta> My answer is very short: Yes
02:21:45 <tuanta> I like reading them
02:21:46 <tuanta> eof
02:22:43 <yn1v> Monthly report summarize what is reported. If there are activities that were not reported back, they do not show on the monthly report.
02:23:25 <yn1v> I think they help transparency, but it is a team task, not only famsco members to make it useful
02:23:41 <yn1v> I like to review them.
02:23:43 <yn1v> eof
02:24:00 <cwickert> How can I know they are accurate? I cannot prove them right or wrong.
02:24:12 <cwickert> But IHMO FAmSCo should not spend too much time on writing reports but work on the requests of the ambassadors.
02:24:21 <cwickert> In a perfect world FAmSCo wouldn't need to publish monthly reports to proof they actually did something.
02:24:44 <cwickert> I want a more active FAmSCo where every ambassador knows what they have done for him lately - then we don't need any reports. :)
02:24:47 <cwickert> EOF
02:26:47 <kaio> personally I think the reporter has done the reports at the highest degree
02:27:39 <kaio> I would like to point out that as the report was edited and published on the fedora project wiki, it supposed to be written by all of the ambassadors instead of any famsco members
02:28:16 <gbraad_china> they are as aqurate as the information FAmSCo gets. I also do not believe we should start duplicating information that is already provided on a wiki page. streamline the process and make the report more part of the general community and not just an additional task of FAmSCo. the reports are only useful for budget information and how it affects the community in a region. Events and other stuff can be on a page as on ongoing process
02:28:22 <gbraad_china> EOF
02:29:04 <jsmith> OK, we're out of time, but I'd like to thank all the candidates that joined us for the town hall meeting.
02:29:08 <herlo> It is difficult to say whether the reports are accurate. To me, it would seem that creating a report from the fama trac instance might suit us better overall. The only thing lacking would be the budget and events, which could be added by an ambassador and reviewed by a FAmSCo member before publishing. I do like the fact that it's being reported, however, especially for transparency.
02:29:13 <kaio> along my exp as last famsco, I felt time was not efficiently used but in many wiki gardening such as reports or SOPs rather than leading on activities organizations.
02:29:15 <kaio> eof
02:29:17 <herlo> eof
02:29:33 <jsmith> (Sorry, I thought folks were done)
02:29:41 <jsmith> (my bad)
02:29:53 <tuanta> lol
02:29:58 <herlo> :)
02:30:45 <jsmith> Anyway, thanks again to all of our candidates, and to those who participated in asking questions.
02:31:08 <kaio> gd luck to everyone
02:31:09 <kaio> :)
02:31:12 <jsmith> Now, please tell your friends and neighbors about the upcoming Fedora elections, and encourage people to vote for those who will best represent their interests
02:31:29 <cwickert> +1
02:31:33 <tuanta> +1
02:31:41 <herlo> +2
02:31:47 <yn1v> +3
02:31:51 <herlo> lol, typo
02:31:55 <cwickert> herlo: cheater ;)
02:31:56 <kaio> everyone is cheating XD
02:32:02 <herlo> lol
02:32:06 <jsmith> #endmeeting