Board > Meetings > 2006-06-06
Fedora Project Board Meeting (2006-06-06)
- MaxSpevack sent an agenda out for review, which generated a nice discussion thread.
We need to make some more tangible progress on the plans regarding what to do with version control, and we need to keep in mind that our proposal must be vetted by several groups -- Core, Extras, and Release Engineering.
Questions to answer:
- Do we need to switch?
- If so, what does that entail?
- Can we gather a list of requirements and circulate it for review?
- Can we make some conclusions about different options, and how they meet the requirements?
Some potential requirements to use as a starting point:
- We need a version control system that allows ACLs on particular branches.
- What sort of work will be required to make an existing tool fit our needs (if it doesn't already)?
- Do we have to restrict to one tool? Consensus is yes. Don't want to mirror commits, and moving things between two systems doesn't improve the current problems that we have between Core and Extras.
- WarrenTogami and ElliotLee are tasked with leading this effort, but it must involve consultation from many others in order for it to be successful.
Separately, what does it entail to support ACLs in our existing CVS model, in order to meet people's needs. This is something that Extras has been asking for, for example. Would the ACLs be on a per package basis, or a per package, per release basis.
ElliotLee is looking to recruit some new people into Fedora Infrastructure . He has been offered interns/contractors if he needs them. LukeMacken is going to be roped in ASAP.
Work needs to be done on rewriting the account system.
- ElliotLee will get in touch with LukeMacken and they will discuss what Luke can do on the infrastructure side.
First off, we all agreed that we're talking about this at the Board level, but the actual action on the issue of Extras Sponsorship needs to happen at the Fedora Extras Steering Committee (FESCO) level -- they are the ones with the decision making accountability in this case, to either act or not act.
We heard at the Red Hat Summit that the sponsorship process isn't as smooth or efficient as possible. When we started talking about it, these points were made, for consideration by anyone who enjoys the topic:
- Some people don't want to be sponsors, and as in all parts of Fedora, the number of people working on something is always a limiting factor.
- Are there major problems, or were there just a few folks grumbling? Is there a reasonable way for us to get meaningful data to help answer this question?
- Does the sponsorship process scale well enough?
- SethVidal will mention this topic in a FESCO meeting , and FESCO can do with it what they will.
We want to hold a FUDCon in Brazil. The nature/schedule of that FUDCon is going to depend on interest from the Brazilians, and from the local Ambassadors who will be responsible for a lot of the legwork.
Similarly, if GregDeKoenigsberg and MaxSpevack want to try out different models for FUDCon (code sprints, open conferences, etc.) they should work on organizing something like that in the US, where it is close to home for them and they can easily coordinate/lead it.
- MaxSpevack to begin FUDCon Brazil conversation with the Brazilian Ambassadors and ChristopherBlizzard.
JesseKeating sent an email about Fedora Legacy , and better integrating it into the existing Fedora infrastructure .
He laid out a list of things he wanted to do, and asked for the Board's ok. We say go for it!
Things to keep in mind:
- Short term, taking a copy of CVS and working from that might be the easiest way to get started, but we should plan for the long term, and think about how we can set up Legacy from an infrastructure perspective so that packages can make the conversion from the Supported Fedora Universe to Legacy as easily as possible.
- Don't be shy about specific things that you need, that the Board (or Advisory Board) can help get done.
At the Red Hat Summit, it was announced that the work that is going on internally to Red Hat on varoius testing tools would like to be integrated into Fedora. The Board supports this, provided that the efforts reach a critical point of success before it comes under the Fedora name.
- MaxSpevack to shephard this project along.
- MaxSpevack and PatrickBarnes to work on formalizing what it takes to be an official Fedora Project, a Fedora Incubator Project, etc.
fedora.redhat.com and plone discussion taking place on f-a-b list and in the Fedora Documentation Steering Committee meeting.
How does the Fedora Core schedule get created? Right now, it's basically JeremyKatz, BillNottingham, and JesseKeating making the calls, and informing the Board/Community of the decisions.