| Time | Nick | Message |
|---|---|---|
| 10:02 | walterbender | remembered--no hyphen this time |
| 10:02 | #topic mailing lists | |
| 10:02 | SeanDaly | greetings from the OLPC France / Sugar Labs booth at Educatice Paris |
| 10:02 | mchua | #link http://wiki.sugarlabs.org/go/O[…]ng_Log-2009-11-13 |
| 10:03 | for last week's logs on the subject | |
| 10:03 | walterbender | we concluded last week's meeting with a motion regarding mailing lists, but we wanted to keep the discussion opne before the vote because three of you were absent |
| 10:03 | shall we restate the motion? | |
| 10:04 | <cjb> MOTION: close the slobs@ list to just SLOBs, move current slobs@ traffic to iaep@ with a [SLOBS] subject line tag where at all possible | |
| 10:04 | any further discussion? | |
| 10:04 | mchua | appreciated :) though I would also have been totally fine with the vote going forward (it's why we come up with the decision procedures, imo - because we trust SLOBs to do things in the absence of a few of us) |
| 10:04 | none from me | |
| 10:05 | walterbender | mchua: we could have voted, but we wanted the input... not a pressing issue |
| 10:05 | mchua | nods |
| 10:05 | walterbender | Adam, any thoughts? comments? |
| 10:05 | mchua | CanoeBerry: ^^ |
| 10:06 | walterbender | OK. the motion had been seconded, so let's bring it to vote. |
| 10:06 | says aye | |
| 10:06 | tomeu | +1 from me |
| 10:06 | mchua | aye |
| 10:06 | SeanDaly | aye |
| 10:07 | mchua | CanoeBerry, cjb, bernie: ^^? |
| 10:07 | walterbender | (is bernie actually awake?) |
| 10:08 | cjb | aye |
| 10:08 | mchua | (we do have a majority, enough to pass the motion) |
| 10:08 | walterbender | well, the motion passes and I'll make the changes this week (along with a notification to the current list members) |
| 10:09 | (If I can remember the admin password for SLOBS :) ) | |
| 10:09 | CanoeBerry | Ciao, just arrive late.. |
| 10:11 | Still there all? | |
| 10:11 | walterbender | CanoeBerry: we just voted on MOTION: close the slobs@ list to just SLOBs, move current slobs@ traffic to iaep@ with a [SLOBS] subject line tag where at all possible |
| 10:12 | While Adam is reading the backlog, perhaps we can move through the rest of the agenda. | |
| 10:12 | without Bernie, I think we cannot discuss the Teams list idea | |
| 10:12 | and I have heard nothing from the DP. | |
| 10:12 | sdziallas: is a report ready yet? | |
| 10:12 | sdziallas | walterbender: I'm not sure what the current state of it is. There's been some editing on the wiki going on. Side-noting that I didn't expected myself to be leading that thing (if only bias-wise) |
| 10:13 | walterbender | SeanDaly: you are on DP too. Do you know the status? |
| 10:14 | sdziallas | history page basically says nothing's been changed since October 9. |
| 10:14 | tomeu | mtd may know more? |
| 10:15 | walterbender | I had proposed (but we never ratified) a deadline for their report. |
| 10:15 | I suggest we give them one, as this seems to be stalled | |
| 10:15 | mchua | +1. Do we need anything other than a firm final recommendation from the DP (along with the vote from everyone on the DP on that report?) |
| 10:15 | sdziallas | tomeu: I haven't been able to catch mtd lately. :/ |
| 10:16 | cjb | walterbender: well, we came up with lots of policy about timing out DPs at a previous meeting, but I think we were aiming it mainly at future DPs rather than this one |
| 10:16 | yeah, we should offer them a timeout | |
| 10:16 | walterbender | mchua: I don't think we need more than their report |
| 10:16 | CanoeBerry | great, what deadline? |
| 10:16 | cjb | of course, then we get into the question of "what happens when you create a DP and it times out before giving you an answer; how do decisions get made?" |
| 10:16 | walterbender | cjb: I'd perhaps use a strong word than offer :) |
| 10:16 | cjb | walterbender: so the reason I say offer, is that there are two possible outcomes |
| 10:16 | one is that they finish everything within a week (say) | |
| 10:17 | if they can't do that, that's okay, and we should just cancel the DP | |
| 10:17 | walterbender | cjb: I think it if times out, Slobs will have to table it or reconvene a new panel |
| 10:17 | cjb | so the offer is between the two outcomes |
| 10:17 | ah. that would suck. | |
| 10:17 | walterbender | cjb: agreed. It would suck. |
| 10:17 | cjb | will spare you all from grumping about Decision Panels this week. |
| 10:18 | sdziallas | notes that there are still people not having put their opinion down. |
| 10:18 | SeanDaly | walterbender: no i don't my impression was that SJ was working toward the consensus positions |
| 10:18 | mchua | It would suck, but it would also unblock us. |
| 10:18 | walterbender | cjb: but the work they did is recorded, so we can use it as input. |
| 10:18 | cjb | mchua: no. |
| 10:18 | the community is still as blocked. | |
| 10:18 | we get to pretend that it's unblocked, but it's just pretend. | |
| 10:18 | CanoeBerry | a deadline would greatly help -- I happened to run into Caryl (on DP) in Dallas here and she'd love to bring this to an end. |
| 10:19 | SeanDaly | I am very concerned about sugaronastick.com situation, threatens Blueberry launch |
| 10:19 | walterbender | Let's try a deadline. |
| 10:19 | tomeu | cjb: well, the bigger we get, the harder it will be to reach consensus. I don't think we should say that our community is blocked when it doesn't reach consensus on something |
| 10:19 | walterbender | SeanDaly: that is a different topic |
| 10:20 | SeanDaly | walterbender: yes I'm changing subject, beg pardon |
| 10:20 | cjb | tomeu: mm. I guess I don't always think it's wrong to make a decision in the face of lack of consensus. |
| 10:20 | tomeu | cjb: sure, slobs is there for that |
| 10:21 | cjb | if I'm in a meeting, and half the room wants to do one thing and half the other, and talking isn't helping, I'm likely to say "okay, let's just flip a coin so we can move on" |
| 10:21 | tomeu: ... | |
| 10:21 | tomeu: but we're obviously not. | |
| 10:21 | tomeu | cjb: we were hoping that this DP will help us reach the best decision |
| 10:21 | and it may help us even if they aren't presenting a report | |
| 10:21 | cjb | help us to do what? |
| 10:21 | tomeu | because of what walterbender said: they have produced some kind of results |
| 10:21 | cjb | form a new panel afterwards? |
| 10:22 | tomeu | cjb: take a decision |
| 10:22 | cjb: or not | |
| 10:22 | cjb | walter just said we can't do that, |
| 10:22 | AIUI | |
| 10:22 | tomeu | (I would say no in this case) |
| 10:22 | cjb | 10:12 <walterbender> cjb: I think it if times out, Slobs will have to table it |
| 10:22 | or reconvene a new panel | |
| 10:22 | (note the lack of "or use their input to make a decision") | |
| 10:22 | tomeu | what means to table it? |
| 10:22 | walterbender | motion: give a two-week deadline to the DP |
| 10:22 | cjb | tomeu: the drop the subject without deciding anything |
| 10:22 | walterbender | (two weeks because of the Thanksgiving Holiday) |
| 10:22 | cjb: I am not sure we need a new panel | |
| 10:22 | I think we have learned a lot and I think there are some other ways to approach the issues | |
| 10:23 | cjb | walterbender: yes, hopefully they'll come through with the deadline |
| 10:23 | walterbender | cjb: SLOBs can decide things based on the input, whether the DP reached consensus or not |
| 10:23 | tomeu | oh, in my view of DPs as helper instruments, I don't think slobs are bound to wait for them to decide something |
| 10:23 | walterbender | but we are jumping the gun. |
| 10:23 | let's discuss my motion please | |
| 10:23 | cjb | ok. let's wait two weeks, then; seconded. |
| 10:24 | tomeu | +1 if nobody needs it more irgently |
| 10:24 | walterbender | any further discussion about the deadline motion? |
| 10:24 | mchua | With the consequences of hitting the timeout as mentioned above? |
| 10:24 | cjb | mchua: which ones? |
| 10:24 | walterbender | mchua: yes. as those are general consequences of DPs |
| 10:24 | CanoeBerry | +1 on 2 week deadline |
| 10:25 | SeanDaly | aye to 2-week deadline |
| 10:25 | cjb | consequences: reconvene, or table the decision, or have SLOBs make a decision? |
| 10:25 | walterbender | cjb: and SLOBs will decide which of those options to take. |
| 10:26 | cjb | understood |
| 10:26 | walterbender | shall we vote? |
| 10:26 | mchua | nods |
| 10:26 | walterbender | aye |
| 10:27 | cjb | aye |
| 10:27 | mchua | aye |
| 10:27 | SeanDaly | aye |
| 10:27 | CanoeBerry | yea |
| 10:28 | tomeu | aye |
| 10:28 | walterbender | #action walter to inform the DP |
| 10:28 | #action (forgot to say earlier) walter to update sobs list and inform communioty | |
| 10:28 | #topic trademark | |
| 10:29 | did everyone (anyone) see the questions I posted in the wiki? | |
| 10:29 | cjb | I don't think so |
| 10:29 | walterbender | http://wiki.sugarlabs.org/go/O[…]utes#Agenda_items |
| 10:29 | cjb | thanks |
| 10:30 | CanoeBerry | Aside: plz buzz yr NYC Sugar folk show up Saturday afternoon in Manhattan for our Community Summit.. |
| 10:30 | http://www.olpcnews.com/countr[…]unity_summit.html | |
| 10:30 | walterbender | I thin that if we sort these questions out, we'll have made a lot of progress re the DP questions and the soas.com questions |
| 10:31 | CanoeBerry: I loved the graphic... | |
| 10:31 | SeanDaly | agreed |
| 10:31 | CanoeBerry | I've asked everyone to call it "OLPC-Sugar Community Summit" but some anonymous losers keep dropping "Sugar" |
| 10:31 | :) | |
| 10:31 | tomeu | CanoeBerry: we are used to it :p |
| 10:31 | walterbender | Personally, I think the Fedora guidelines are very good. |
| 10:31 | It is not restrictive except in the use of the name to ensure there is no implicit endorsement | |
| 10:32 | It is about being free but also being clear | |
| 10:32 | cjb | walterbender: the Fedora Remix label (which OLPC uses) is interesting |
| 10:32 | you don't have to pass any of their technical standards, AIUI | |
| 10:32 | walterbender | cjb: yes |
| 10:32 | tomeu | yeah, would be great if we can have such a escape valve |
| 10:32 | walterbender | cjb: As long as there is no suggestion of endorsement from SL, I am comfortable |
| 10:33 | cjb | ok |
| 10:33 | so perhaps we have a proto-motion to create Sugar Remixes | |
| 10:33 | walterbender | if someone wants such an endorsement or affiliation, then there would be higher standards |
| 10:33 | e.g., Free | |
| 10:33 | SeanDaly | cjb: still a problem if Sugar is in the name |
| 10:34 | cjb | SeanDaly: not for Fedora, so you need to tell me why. |
| 10:34 | tomeu | anybody knows what ubuntu does about this? |
| 10:34 | walterbender | SeanDaly: see http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/[…]usiness_web_sites |
| 10:34 | SeanDaly | cjb: Fedora is a weak brand. So is Sugar, but the plan is to grow it |
| 10:35 | cjb | SeanDaly: I don't think I'm going to like a policy that says that what our community really needs is more legal protection than Fedora |
| 10:35 | Fedora's been going for many years. We should walk before we run. | |
| 10:36 | SeanDaly | walterbender: I will look at that (not easy now greeting visitors to booth) |
| 10:36 | cjb: not a question of legal protection, a question of protecting a trademark so it can grow | |
| 10:37 | cjb | trademarks aren't legal protection? :) |
| 10:37 | walterbender | SeanDaly: I don't expect we decide anything today, but I want to get the discussion going. |
| 10:37 | SeanDaly | The Firefox fork controversy more appropriate analogy |
| 10:37 | cjb | tomeu: I found https://wiki.ubuntu.com/Deriva[…]cs/DerivativeSpec |
| 10:37 | tomeu: but I think it's not very useful | |
| 10:38 | walterbender | hi erikos |
| 10:38 | tomeu | looks like ubuntu will learn from us :p |
| 10:38 | walterbender | erikos: feeling better? |
| 10:38 | SeanDaly | waves to erikos |
| 10:38 | erikos | hi walterbender - yes thanks ;p |
| 10:38 | waves back to SeanDaly | |
| 10:39 | walterbender | in any case, if we sort this out, many of the other decisions will be much easier to make |
| 10:40 | SeanDaly | important to find workable policy and not have to improvise |
| 10:40 | walterbender | on a related note, I was speaking with sdziallas about Carlo's recommendation re SoaS remixes |
| 10:40 | cjb | yeah, we should probably adopt the policy of another project |
| 10:40 | sdziallas | looks up |
| 10:41 | tomeu | the questions that walter put in the wiki look like quite hard to me |
| 10:41 | cjb | that's true, we haven't answered those properly yet |
| 10:43 | tomeu | but I guess that fedora's policy would be an answer to all them? |
| 10:43 | walterbender | cjb: we can avoid answering some of them with the remix idea |
| 10:43 | but we have to face up to all of them if someone wants an affiliation with SL | |
| 10:44 | cjb | that's right |
| 10:45 | walterbender | But if we can decide on a process, we are in much better shape than our ad hoc methods to date. |
| 10:45 | SeanDaly | agreed |
| 10:45 | walterbender | It is only fair to potential partners that we have clear guidelines |
| 10:45 | cjb | I think we could start with "anyone who wants to ship a Sugar distribution is a Sugar Remix, and they can talk to us to get a technical review that would lead to them becoming part of the brand officially" |
| 10:46 | the questions that we ask and problems that we find aren't going to be very predictable ahead of time | |
| 10:46 | walterbender | cjb: seems like a good place to start |
| 10:46 | some questions are predictable, e.g., inclusion of non-Free packages | |
| 10:46 | SeanDaly | cjb: I would hope if they wanted to help us grow the Sugar brand that they would contribute to marketing, within our guidelines |
| 10:46 | cjb | we'd want to decide, like Fedora, on which items of artwork and so on are brandable only to the Sugar brand |
| 10:47 | walterbender | and having some structure: where to put things, makes the process easier for everyone |
| 10:47 | cjb | SeanDaly: yes, that sounds necessary |
| 10:47 | walterbender | (Carlo's suggestion) |
| 10:47 | mchua | for reference: |
| 10:47 | #link https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Remix | |
| 10:47 | tomeu | btw, I'm not sure if the question of the derivatives is more a quality one or a community one |
| 10:47 | mchua | #link https://fedoraproject.org/wiki[…]egal_requirements.3F |
| 10:47 | and the trademark guidelines in | |
| 10:47 | #link https://fedoraproject.org/wiki[…]ng_other_software | |
| 10:48 | walterbender | tomeu: probably both--in terms of branding and support |
| 10:48 | cjb | mchua: thanks |
| 10:48 | tomeu | as in, if I will be the one maintaining the contribution, I will apply my quality standard to it. but if it's someone else who will maintain it, I do'nt care so much as there's some guarantees that that someone else will do a good enough job |
| 10:48 | cjb | we should probably go off and read everything linked from /Remix as homework |
| 10:48 | walterbender | mchua: can you add those links to the wiki? |
| 10:48 | tomeu | that's why accepting patches is a maintainer matter, and not a community one |
| 10:48 | mchua | do we want to get iaep discussion on the trademark questions on today's agenda? |
| 10:48 | walterbender | cjb: agreed. |
| 10:49 | mchua | walterbender: will do that now |
| 10:49 | walterbender | mchua: not sure I understand the question |
| 10:49 | mchua: I was planning that we open this entire discussion up to iaep | |
| 10:50 | tomeu: re Sugar core, you are correct, but we also have the activities... a free-for-all... | |
| 10:51 | tomeu | walterbender: hmm, how is different for activities? |
| 10:51 | mchua | walterbender: sorry, should rephrase - "at what point in our discusion today do we need to say 'ok, we need to take this to iaep now'? i.e. how much further SLOBs meeting discussion is helpful?" |
| 10:51 | walterbender | tomeu: each activity has a maintainer (at least in theory) |
| 10:51 | CanoeBerry | Just to confirm we're ending in 10min? |
| 10:51 | mchua | thinks this is in fact quite helpful, but we've got 10m left |
| 10:51 | CanoeBerry: jinx :) | |
| 10:51 | tomeu | ok, I guess this is better discussed in the ml |
| 10:52 | any actions coming out from this? | |
| 10:52 | walterbender | mchua: I think we have gotten a good start--enough to seed a community discussion |
| 10:52 | mchua | In addition to asking iaep, I'd like to see if folks both here and there can talk with other projects about how they do this |
| 10:52 | walterbender | #action: walter will seed a community discussion on the topic |
| 10:52 | mchua: good idea. maybe we can each be responsible for one community | |
| 10:53 | and report back next time | |
| 10:53 | mchua: can I volunteer you for Fedora :) | |
| 10:53 | tomeu: you want to talk to GNOME? | |
| 10:53 | mchua | walterbender: yes, and one other project we'd like to check in on, since Fedora's policies are pretty copiously documented :) |
| 10:54 | tomeu | walterbender: ok, will try to find someone |
| 10:54 | walterbender | SeanDaly: you want to look at Mozilla? |
| 10:54 | anyone wanna talk to Debian? | |
| 10:54 | Ubuntu? | |
| 10:54 | Other projects that come to mind? | |
| 10:55 | tomeu | opensolaris? |
| 10:55 | walterbender | cjb: wanna to talk to OLPC about how they do it? |
| 10:55 | tomeu | fortunately, foss projects use to have their guidelines in quite public places |
| 10:55 | walterbender | and openSUSE |
| 10:55 | tomeu | http://live.gnome.org/Trademark |
| 10:55 | cjb | walterbender: ok |
| 10:55 | walterbender | I will talk to the openSUSE folks |
| 10:56 | maybe we can assign Debian to Bernie :) | |
| 10:56 | mchua | We can also ask for volunteers on iaep for other projects - I'm sure folks iwll have more they'd like to hear from, or that they can talk to. |
| 10:56 | walterbender | +1 |
| 10:57 | Time is about up. Shall we skip next Friday and go for the following Friday? | |
| 10:57 | (Thanksgiving) | |
| 10:57 | tomeu | gnome's is very drafty :/ |
| 10:57 | cjb | makes sense. |
| 10:58 | walterbender | tomeu has already finished his homework? :) |
| 10:58 | tomeu | I won't be able to report much ;) |
| 10:58 | guess projects backed by big companies will have more developed trademark guidelines | |
| 10:59 | but they may not apply so well to us, dunno | |
| 10:59 | walterbender | OK. any last comments before we close the formal meeting? |
| 10:59 | CanoeBerry | Thanks All. Apologies our "Honduras Church" in NYC has poor bandwidth tomorrow afternoon. |
| 10:59 | But Mike Lee will provide partial workaround.. | |
| 11:00 | walterbender | See you all here on 4 Dec? and in #sugar daily :) |
| 11:00 | mchua | Nice forward progress this meeting :) |
| 11:00 | 4 dec! | |
| 11:00 | CanoeBerry | Bye! |
| 11:00 | walterbender | thanks everyone. |
| 11:00 | #endmeeting |