[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next]
FDSCo Meeting 2009-01-21 IRC log
- From: Eric Christensen <eric christensenplace us>
- To: fedora-docs-list redhat com
- Subject: FDSCo Meeting 2009-01-21 IRC log
- Date: Wed, 21 Jan 2009 16:46:50 -0500
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
14:01 < quaid> <meeting id="Docs team">
14:02 * stickster here
14:02 * Sparks is present
14:02 * ke4qqq here
14:02 -!- quaid changed the topic of #fedora-meeting to: Docs mtg --
- -- calling of the role
14:02 * danielsmw will be more actine in 20-25 minutes.
14:02 * jjmcd is here
14:03 * quaid gives danielsmw some treatment options for his actine
14:03 < danielsmw> s/ine/ive
14:03 -!- DemonJester [n=DemonJes fedora/DemonJester] has quit ["leaving"]
14:04 -!- quaid changed the topic of #fedora-meeting to: Docs mtg --
- -- Status on release notes for F11 : lead and
14:05 < quaid> ke4qqq: you want to talk about doc lead?
14:06 < ke4qqq> we are looking for a lead for relnotes
14:06 < ke4qqq> decent organizational skills and preferably some
experience in cat herding
14:06 < stickster> There was a nibble from someone the other day, wasn't
14:06 < ke4qqq> we've had a few
14:06 < ke4qqq> no one who has wanted to jump in front of the bus yet though
14:07 < jjmcd> Isn't it more like under the bus
14:07 < ke4qqq> jjmcd: that isn't until after release
14:07 < stickster> When is the cutoff for a lead, and/or do we need a
contingency plan for that possibility?
14:08 < ke4qqq> FUDcon technically
14:08 < ke4qqq> we should have a contingency plan methinks
14:08 * jsmith sneaks in late
14:08 < Sparks> ke4qqq: Push comes to shove, I'll do it.
14:09 < stickster> I think the handoff is not as hard as people think
14:09 < Sparks> The beat writers from F10 have already been emailed with
a request to update their Beat assignments and I've already started to
activity on the page.
14:09 < quaid> we also need some "lieutenants", in that the work always
seems to require lots of hands closer we ge
14:09 * ke4qqq shoves Sparks
14:09 < stickster> Yes, it shouldn't all fall on one person
14:09 < ke4qqq> is that enough?
14:09 < quaid> ha!
14:10 < jjmcd> stickster: The whole conversion thing is still a total
mystery to a lot of us -- kinda scary
14:10 < quaid> how about this ....
14:10 < quaid> what if Sparks takes lead for _just_ F11
14:10 < quaid> and jjmcd and others who might be interested
14:10 < quaid> commit to a Lt. role
14:10 < quaid> and we rotate for F12
14:10 < stickster> It's really not a mystery, I think quaid has already
made up notes on how to do each page
14:10 < quaid> ?
14:10 < Sparks> quaid: Can we make it a mandatory rotation? :)
14:10 < stickster> Sparks: That's not a bad idea
14:10 * herlo is here today
14:10 < quaid> Sparks: +10
14:10 * jsmith agrees to be a "Wiki to DocBook leftenant"
14:10 * Sparks declares jsmith next.
14:11 < jjmcd> Sparks: If you/Paul are willing to agree to a little
conversion mentoring, I'll step up for 12
14:11 < Sparks> jjmcd: Works for me
14:11 < stickster> Honestly, the only thing that makes things difficult
at all is the transclusion people are using on the wiki pages. I think
we should do
away with all transclusions because they're too
confusing to deal with.
14:11 -!- DemonJester [n=DemonJes fedora/DemonJester] has joined
14:11 < ke4qqq> outstanding!
14:11 < stickster> If we just have N number of flat pages, the
conversion is a really simple (if slightly laborious) process.
14:11 < stickster> If we just have N number of flat pages, the
conversion is a really simple (if slightly laborious) process.
14:11 < stickster> oops, sorry
14:12 < Sparks> The page is at
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Documentation_Beats, by the way.
14:12 < Sparks> If the beat writer doesn't have a * next to their name
that means they've accepted their beat for F11
14:13 < stickster> jjmcd: I'm willing to do that meeting, btw
14:13 < stickster> Have the beats now been scrubbed?
14:13 < stickster> Archived, or however we intend to put the old content
14:14 < Sparks> stickster: The scrubbing is in progress
14:14 < Sparks> stickster: quaid said archiving past information was not
necessary in most cases.
14:14 < Sparks> I'm pretty sure all I did was reset the table and change
F10 to F11 where applicable
14:15 < quaid> it is page renaming that has to happen next :)
14:15 < quaid> each beat needs to be assessed, either scrubbed clean or
left with some content, depending on each case.
14:15 < stickster> IYAM we should do page renaming, strip out all the
content, remove transclusions, and start fresh.
14:15 < stickster> +1 quaid, that some pages might need to retain some
14:15 < stickster> Good clarifications.
14:16 < stickster> But keep in mind that the page history holds on to
the old content so we should not be timid about getting rid of material.
14:16 < quaid> right
14:16 < stickster> It's time for some bold moves here.
14:16 -!- DemonJes1er [n=DemonJes mail thepcagroup com] has joined
14:16 -!- DemonJes1er [n=DemonJes mail thepcagroup com] has quit [Client
14:17 < stickster> To me, the most important questions are, (1) is it
clear to the community where and how they can write content into beats?
and (2) is the
process of producing the release notes as easy as
possible for the people trying now to shoulder that work?
14:17 < Sparks> Is it possible to have a template for all the beats to
work off of?
14:17 < quaid> on the first one ...
14:17 < quaid> I think we need the pages renamed and categorized first
14:17 < quaid> then we publicize like crazy
14:17 < stickster> Sparks: Probably not, because there are subdivisions
that are going to be particular to each beat's subject matter... just my
14:18 < quaid> as for 2 ...
14:18 < Sparks> I noticed that the Feature pages have a template with
embedded notes on completing the form. That would make it real easy.
14:18 < stickster> quaid: Clarification, renamed, categorized, and
flattened (removing transclusions)
14:18 < quaid> it could be easier, and we have time to work on that
before we need it to be easier.
14:18 < quaid> harveybetty was working on that, for example
14:18 -!- DemonJes1er [n=DemonJes rrcs-72-43-197-222 nys biz rr com] has
14:18 < stickster> Sparks: But the factors people have to document in
that process are set and well-bounded, which is not true about release
14:19 < Sparks> Okay
14:19 < jjmcd> It would be good, though, if we could somehow push the
RNs toward being a little more even, maybe a template would help but I'm
a little from
Missouri on that
14:19 < stickster> Sparks: In some cases, the contributor need to
provide a command for a temporary workaround. In others, they need to
explain a new
feature that's superseded an old one. Or indicating a
deprecation... it's pretty wide-open
14:19 < Sparks> So give them a sandbox and let them go.
14:20 -!- DemonJester [n=DemonJes fedora/DemonJester] has quit [Read
error: 60 (Operation timed out)]
14:20 < stickster> Sparks: Yup, all we need to provide is "Please start
your section with an == h2 == and go to town"
14:20 < quaid> yeah
14:20 < Sparks> stickster: Okay, well we can do that.
14:20 < quaid> that might be enough of a template :)
14:20 -!- danielsmw [n=danielsm user-24-214-179-165 knology net] has
quit ["Lost terminal"]
14:21 < Sparks> Okay, I'll look at that this evening and see what needs
to be done.
14:21 < ke4qqq> can we offload all of the feature stuff to the owners
(or their delegates) and remove that from our plate altogether?
14:21 < Sparks> We can also change the page names at the same time and
get them in the proper category and such.
14:21 < quaid> ke4qqq: I fear we'll not see the content then
14:21 -!- JSchmitt [n=s4504kr p4FDD1623 dip0 t-ipconnect de] has quit
[Remote closed the connection]
14:22 < quaid> ke4qqq: in reality, we do already to an important degree
14:22 < quaid> ke4qqq: the feature pages have a relese notes section
they need to fill out
14:22 < quaid> we just have to suck that in
14:22 < ke4qqq> surely the feature owners want their feature
covered....if not - perhaps we don't cover it.
14:22 < ke4qqq> ahhhh
14:22 < ke4qqq> that's a bit easier
14:22 < jjmcd> The problem, of course, is that "features" cover maybe
10% of the changes
14:23 -!- mdomsch [n=Matt_Dom cpe-70-124-62-55 austin res rr com] has
14:23 < jjmcd> Although maybe my perception is colored by having worked
14:23 < quaid> no, it's true
14:23 < Sparks> Okay, so let's set up the pages with proper names, put
all the pages in the proper category, and link those pages onto the main
14:23 < quaid> features are only highlighted groupings of changes
14:24 < quaid> but we cannot expect to get all changes in a release
14:24 < quaid> Sparks: +1
14:24 < jjmcd> Although for developers, even minor changes can be pretty
14:24 -!- danielsmw
[n=danielsm 130-127-20-68 mauldin resnet clemson edu] has joined
14:25 < Sparks> quaid: I can get those pages setup this evening.
Shouldn't take long. Then we'll be ready.
14:25 * danielsmw has upgraded from an ipod to a laptop, and can now
14:25 -!- DemonJes1er [n=DemonJes rrcs-72-43-197-222 nys biz rr com] has
quit [Read error: 60 (Operation timed out)]
14:25 < quaid> ok, ready to move on from release notes?
14:25 < Sparks> +1
14:25 < stickster> bam! pow!
14:25 < ke4qqq> +1
14:26 < jsmith> +0.98 (after inflation)
14:26 -!- DemonJester [n=DemonJes fedora/DemonJester] has joined
14:26 < herlo> +1
14:26 < jjmcd> lets go
14:26 * herlo points out that jsmith's version of inflation shows him
having less money rather than the prices going up :)
14:27 < jsmith> herlo: Well, it depends on whether you're a spender or a
14:27 -!- quaid changed the topic of #fedora-meeting to: docs mtg --
meeting time change proposal
14:27 * jsmith mumbles "meetings are *never* convenient"
14:27 < quaid> true dat
14:27 < herlo> it seems everyone is trying to change meeting times
14:27 < quaid> but this current time was made by a bunch of people who
are mainly no longer here :)
14:27 * jds2001 urges docs not to change to Friday's at 2PM :D
14:27 < quaid> heh
14:28 < Sparks> So I'm thinking Friday at... 2?
14:28 < jds2001> lol
14:28 < jjmcd> Would Friday at 4 be better?
14:28 < quaid> Sparks: one thing is, I think we cannot *fix* a new time
until we have a new steering committee to fix it for
14:28 < herlo> +1
14:28 < jds2001> unless you want FESCo clash :D
14:28 < herlo> okay not really ^^
14:28 < Sparks> quaid: True
14:28 < ke4qqq> FDSCo v. FESCo - on pay per view?
14:29 < jsmith> ke4qqq: But if we win, do we have to wear silly belts
with belt-buckles the size of dinner plates?
14:29 < Sparks> Just think about moving the meeting for a future discussion.
14:29 < ke4qqq> jsmith: no just larger gold-encrusted pocket protectors
14:30 < quaid> ok, so we're not against a new meeting time, per se, right?
14:30 < Sparks> +1
14:30 < jsmith> +1
14:30 < stickster> Not against, +1
14:30 < jjmcd> +1
14:31 < stickster> We can again use that standard wiki matrix to fix a time
14:31 < Sparks> stickster: Already got something in the works although
quaid might have a better solution.
14:32 < quaid> no you got the right thing
14:32 < quaid> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/FDSCo_meeting_matrix
14:32 < quaid> Sparks made that and we can start populating it
14:33 < stickster> awesome.
14:33 < quaid> we can choose to later weed out anyone who is not on a
steering committee, although I think getting the widest group regardless
is the goal
14:33 < Sparks> yes
14:33 < quaid> ok, then ...
14:33 < quaid> anything else on this 'un?
14:34 < Sparks> nope
14:34 -!- quaid changed the topic of #fedora-meeting to: docs mtg --
14:34 < quaid> anyone not read my email to the list?
14:34 < quaid> if you have ... any reason you haven't commented on it? ;-D
14:34 < jjmcd> which email to which list?
14:34 < quaid> jjmcd: "Leadership (re)fresh" to f-docs-l
14:34 < jjmcd> ahhhhh
14:35 * Sparks commented on it
14:35 < quaid>
14:35 * jjmcd wondered whether it was moot if there weren't candidates
14:36 < quaid> oh, interesting viewpoint
14:36 < quaid> I think we have at least a half-dozen people who have
clearly showed leadership ability/skills and could be the Chair
14:36 < quaid> and that means at least that many who could be steering
14:36 < quaid> in fact, many of you _are_ steering without the formal
14:36 -!- J5 [n=quintice nat/redhat/x-4b4a82606c3ac184] has joined
14:36 -!- knurd is now known as knurd_afk
14:37 < jjmcd> Certainly if we can have a meaningful election that is
the best course
14:37 < quaid> we have to be honest -- voter turnout may still suck
14:37 < ke4qqq> voter turnout in general does
14:37 < jjmcd> Perhaps we could lock up the swamp water supplier
14:38 < jsmith> Even if voter turnout is low... it's better to at least
go through the motions of having an election
14:38 < jjmcd> We seem to have a lot of marketing issues - I wonder if
we can identify some new outlets
14:38 < jjmcd> Roger that jsmith
14:38 -!- kital [n=Joerg_Si fedora/kital] has joined #fedora-meeting
14:39 < ke4qqq> I don't think there is really any alternative
14:39 < Sparks> jjmcd: That should be the first thing the new chair does.
14:40 < quaid> yeah, we need elections regardless of voter turnout :)
14:41 < stickster> I'm not for a steering committee, as much as I am for
an accountable Docs leader.
14:41 * stickster sent overdue response to list
14:41 < ke4qqq> stickster: will you explain why?
14:41 -!- QuickStart
[n=QUICKSTA pool-72-88-190-6 nwrknj east verizon net] has joined
14:41 < ke4qqq> or should I read that in your email?
14:42 < stickster> ke4qqq: Either way is fine! :-)
14:42 < stickster> I simply think that our core group that participates
on a regular basis are the obvious choices for a steering committee.
14:42 < stickster> The number of votes is likely to be very small.
14:42 < quaid> hmm
14:42 < quaid> we could elect a leader who appoints a steering committee?
14:43 < Sparks> How many in the committee?
14:43 < stickster> I think there's no point in appointments, when the
choices could just as easily be "Would you help me by being responsible
for Task X?".
14:43 < ke4qqq> at the same time, what SPOF does that introduce??
14:43 < Sparks> I don't think we need more than a handful of people.
14:43 < ke4qqq> I tend to agree with that logic
14:43 < ke4qqq> but understand there is arequirement for us to have some
14:44 < stickster> Yes, there should be someone leading the Docs team,
to be certain. I compare this to the Artwork team or the BugZappers,
where there is
no SCo, but plenty is getting done.
14:44 -!- nphilipp [n=nils nat/redhat/x-940142e42e036d9a] has joined
14:44 < stickster> FESCo on the other hand is in charge of an
exceptionally large slice of strategy.
14:44 < Sparks> What is the election requirement? Just a leader or what?
14:45 < stickster> Consensus is good enough in this case, as long as
it's obtained through the list and not just the people who showed up
here for the IRC
14:45 < stickster> Again, this is all my opinion as a Docs contributor.
14:45 < jjmcd> I wonder how many nascent leaders are out there on the
list but don't join the meetings because IRC is too old-fashioned, or
14:45 < quaid> it's fair view, though
14:45 < stickster> I'm perfectly willing to be shouted down if a lot of
14:45 < quaid> we did steering committee back then because that was the
14:45 < quaid> things have evolved in the overall project, here too
14:45 < stickster> (or even a few people, for that matter)
14:45 < quaid> the main reason
14:45 < stickster> quaid: Right.
14:45 < quaid> for a steering committee formality
14:46 < quaid> is to give people "authority" to speak "for docs"
14:46 < quaid> and I think we have shown that people don't need that
title to speak authoritatively
14:46 < stickster> I agree with that. The point of a meritocracy is that
the authority comes from experience and accomplishment.
14:46 < quaid> otoh, the "one leader" does benefit from the title.
14:46 < stickster> Except in my case, where someone was fool enough to
hire me instead.
14:46 < quaid> cf. ianweller before and after "wiki czar" title -- he
sounds more authoritative, etc.
14:47 < quaid> (IMO)
14:47 * jsmith adds to what quaid just said, by saying "... and then
jsmith joined the steering committee, and it went to pot"
14:47 < jjmcd> yeah, good point. To a degree, doesn't the doc lead do that
14:47 < quaid> stickster: actually, not to belabor, but I think your
hiring was a perfect example of meritocracy in action
14:47 < stickster> Right, and Ian got that title through consensus and
the recognition that he was putting a lot of energy into making the wiki
14:47 < stickster> quaid: Stop with the flattery! (your check's in the
14:48 < quaid> hmmm ... good stuff this
14:48 < quaid> so where to next?
14:48 < stickster> So again, my point is just that as long as Docs has
an accountable leader, selected by consensus of people who participate
in the work, I
think the potential is to create less of an
artificial barrier between "we who decide" and "we who do li'l tasks"
14:49 < quaid> stickster: so you are saying consensus is ok rather than
hold an election?
14:49 < stickster> Yes.
14:49 * quaid is concerned about how we do that and draw the line, etc.
14:49 < jjmcd> Concensus can be kind of mushy
14:49 -!- chitlesh_ [n=chitlesh 217 136 58 241] has joined #fedora-meeting
14:49 < ke4qqq> stickster: is that ok with the sub-project guidelines
14:49 < ke4qqq> I though election was a must?
14:50 < stickster> ke4qqq: I'm talking specifically about *not*
continuing as a subproject
14:50 < stickster> Oops, scratch that.
14:50 < stickster> That was the mistaken thought I had in the shower
14:50 < stickster> this morning... then I realized I was thinking about
it the wrong way.
14:50 -!- kital [n=Joerg_Si fedora/kital] has quit [Remote closed the
14:50 < stickster> A subproject has to have clear governance. Not "this
particular governance model X."
14:51 < jjmcd> Are there other distros that do docs better that we can
14:51 < stickster>
14:51 < quaid> jjmcd: heh, yeah, RHEL, but I don't want to learn from
that model :)
14:51 < stickster> jjmcd: A question asked since time immemorial... we
should constantly be looking at other projects and learning something
(good or bad)
14:52 < jjmcd> Admittedly, I haven't looked very hard
14:52 * stickster has a hard stop in a few minutes, so I'm shutting up now
14:52 * stickster waits for the market to devalue his $0.02
14:52 < quaid> ok, so the deal is ...
14:52 < quaid> we have a current suspension of the existing Docs rules
14:52 < quaid> Docs defined for itself how to fulfill the governance
14:52 -!- stickster is now known as stickster_mtg
14:53 < quaid> we are free to decide how to proceed, within the
guidelines of having a clear governance for the rest of the world to see.
14:53 < quaid> what I'd like to do ...
14:53 < quaid> is decide _on_list_ how to proceed:
14:53 < quaid> * elections or no
14:53 < quaid> * steering or no
14:53 < quaid> * sig or sub-proj
14:53 < quaid> etc.
14:54 < quaid> does that make sense?
14:54 < Sparks> +1
14:54 < jjmcd> Yes, let's suck in some other voices
14:54 < Sparks> quaid: I think you already asked those questions in your
email to the list. Maybe a poke to the community would help get some
14:55 < jjmcd> This clear enumeration of the issues is helpful
14:55 < quaid> can someone else ..
14:55 < quaid> take a stab at explaining this via the list?
14:55 < ke4qqq> lets just say if there are no objections we are
appointing Jono Bacon head of the docs project......would that get a
response? that said I
like the clear delination - though I think the no
answers are messier than no - because then something else must be defined
14:55 < Sparks> quaid: On it
14:55 < quaid> Sparks: thx
14:57 < Sparks> ke4qqq: Who is going to say that?
14:58 < quaid> ok, time runneth short
14:58 < ke4qqq> you can - didn't you say you were on it?
14:58 < quaid> I think we have what we need on this topic, yes?
14:58 < Sparks> +1
14:58 -!- mxcarron [n=maxime fedora/Pingoomax] has quit [Read error: 110
(Connection timed out)]
14:58 < ke4qqq> yes
14:58 < jjmcd> yep
14:59 -!- quaid changed the topic of #fedora-meeting to: docs mtg - cms
update real quick like
14:59 < quaid> two voices so far:
14:59 < quaid> King_InuYasha has been talking with us on list and in IRC
14:59 < quaid> and danielsmw (iirc) and basil (via list) have expressed
14:59 < quaid> in supporting any PHP solution.
14:59 < danielsmw> yup.
15:00 < quaid> (with Drupal up on the list somewhere.)
15:00 * herlo thinks Drupal is a fine choice if someone knows it well
15:00 < quaid> herlo: just duck when jsmith and ianweller are in the
15:00 -!- bpepple|lt [email@example.com]
has joined #fedora-meeting
15:00 < quaid> the eyeballs popping from forks is pretty gross.
15:01 < jsmith> herlo: I refuse to use Drupal. If we go with Drupal, I
promise not to touch it.
15:01 * jjmcd doesn't much care for drupal but is all for it if someone
is excited about it
15:01 < danielsmw> i've expressed interest in drupal before
15:01 -!- DemonJester [n=DemonJes fedora/DemonJester] has quit ["leaving"]
15:01 < quaid> ok, that's the status :)
15:01 < jsmith> herlo: Can I be more clear? I'd rather lick a toilet
seat than use Drupal for the CMS
15:01 < danielsmw> but never really for a good reason
15:01 < danielsmw> so i'm wondering
15:01 < danielsmw> while we have some people here
15:02 < herlo> jsmith: start licking
15:02 < danielsmw> what reasons should we avoid drupal, so that we can
add these to a list of characteristics we _should_ look for?
15:02 < quaid> ok
15:02 < danielsmw> s/should/shouldn't/
15:02 < quaid> since we are over our hour ...
15:02 < quaid> can we take the CMS discussion
15:02 < quaid> to #fedora-docs
15:02 < danielsmw> +1
15:02 < quaid> with the note for the record that ..
15:02 < quaid> "more discussion on list"
15:02 < jjmcd> R
15:02 < quaid> ok then
15:02 < quaid> R?
15:02 < herlo> I've stated my preference for WordPress and argue that
it's a good CMS, but Drupal can work. I will take this offline, and
jsmith, I love
15:02 < jjmcd> Roger
15:02 < quaid> cool
15:03 < jsmith> danielsmw: Security record, security record, and it's a
15:03 < jsmith> danielsmw: Also, it doesn't play nicely with PostgreSQL
15:03 < jjmcd> Pefformance is my main beef
15:03 < quaid> ok, discussion continues on #fedora-docs s'il vous plait
15:03 < herlo> moving along?
15:03 < jjmcd> Oui
15:03 < quaid> closing I think yes
15:03 < quaid> 5
15:03 < quaid> 4
15:03 < quaid> 3
15:03 < quaid> 2
15:03 < quaid> 1
15:03 < quaid> </meeting>
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Fedora - http://enigmail.mozdev.org
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next]