Web   ·   Wiki   ·   Activities   ·   Blog   ·   Lists   ·   Chat   ·   Meeting   ·   Bugs   ·   Git   ·   Translate   ·   Archive   ·   People   ·   Donate

#sugar-meeting, 2009-11-20

Index | Today     Channels | Search | Join

All times shown according to UTC.

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

Index | Today     Channels | Search | Join

Powered by ilbot/Modified.