#57 Adds 2018 meeting minutes (unformatted) to git.
Merged 2 years ago by rbowen. Opened 2 years ago by rbowen.
centos/ rbowen/board master  into  master

@@ -0,0 +1,15 @@ 

+ * Update on ™ response …

+     * Peterson took the draft to Fontana, McBride, Jeff Kaufman

+         * https://docs.google.com/document/d/17m7RoDwdgm_3gisyAj5bnmqh1CUDimeHxMUyUvcsF1g/edit 

+     * Replies in from Fontana & McBride so far

+     * Peterson has asked if that last round is good enough?

+     * All of this is visible in the editing/history

+     * Also need to get opinion from Legal on if they think this needs a PR look.

+         * Not sure; BU is happy with it. We’ll confirm with Pacek on final version.

+     * When that all is done, we publish on … seven.centos.org?

+ * Merge of Fedora and CentOS infra teams

+     * Will get a bit more FTE by splitting

+     * Meaning of the change?

+         * Teams are still separate missions

+         * But can we combine back-end infra?

+ 

@@ -0,0 +1,69 @@ 

+ Attendees:

+ Karanbir Singh

+ Jim Perrin

+ Fabian Arrotin

+ Johnny Hughes

+ Ralph Angenendt

+ Karsten Wade

+ 

+ Actions:

+ Add a license field for every container entry

+ Develop list of all licenses in the distro + per repo

+ Add requirements for license field into the SIG guide

+ Add verification check

+ Messaging for unified git

+ Write up proposal & submit to Board for discussion / approval

+ 

+ 

+ Notes:

+ Registry.centos.org containers

+ Who is vetting that things match the correct rules?

+ Akin to SIGs -- they can go succeed but following the guidelines

+ Need guidelines for this

+ Containers may be more visible than other domains

+ Licensing guidelines are already in https://wiki.centos.org/SpecialInterestGroup

+ What is our response?

+ Containers are acting separately from what SIGs do?

+ Operate within Atomic SIG

+ Who is responsible for content going into registry?

+ BamaChrn Kundu & Container Eng team

+ Action: Need a ‘License:’ field for every container entry

+ Action: Make sure it is in the SIG guide & referenced from that SIG

+ What do we put in the license field?

+ License field should contain the license for the app that is the ‘purpose’ of the container

+ All licenses need to be included in the container viewable when examining the container

+ Make it clear to the SIGs what we are happy to host/not host

+ Issue of how we build containers

+ LIfecycle terms

+ OK to just consume content

+ Can take built binaries …

+ Requiring restriction to come from RPMs would be a very high barrier for the upstreams we are working from

+ Licenses we approve of …

+ Verification check post-build?

+ If we’re not checking / don’t have a way to check, we’re responsible.

+ Unified git (NDA topic)

+ Discussed at FOSDEM

+ Buildroot for RHEL8 likely larger than shipped OS

+ All source coming into CentOS

+ To make this work with need a unified git with Fedora

+ Result

+ Git.centos.org maintained by us, pulls from common place as git.fedoraproject.org

+ Effects

+ No appreciable negative effects?

+ Positive for certain type of maintainers

+ Makes our future lives easier as stuff is changing anyway

+ Modified packages

+ How is this going to work if CentOS & Fedora have a common upstream git repo -- where do our changes go?

+ Different branches - ‘f’ v ‘c’, so each group/hat worn pushes changes to their branches

+ Some packagers may wear both hats

+ How are the CentOS changes retained?

+ The official branches ‘c7’ are for debranding only -- workflow stays in place.

+ Johnny’s changes go through as they do currently

+ We need to be better updating patches in alt-src

+ E.g. c7-sig-altarch would be protected for project & SIG members via authentication, so no one from e.g. Fedora could step on something.

+ Ideally this is a minimal changes to current workflow

+ 

+ 

+ 

+ 

+ 

@@ -0,0 +1,100 @@ 

+ CentOS Board Meeting Minutes 2018-04-25

+ Attendees

+ Johnny Hughes

+ Michael McLean

+ Karsten Wade

+ Fabian Arrotin

+ Ralph Angenendt

+ Jim Perrin

+ Karanbir Singh

+ 

+ 

+ 

+ Agenda & Actions

+ Rich Bowen community action plan

+ ACTION: Rich to get presentation & to-do out to people for further discussion

+ ACTION: Board to discuss through & provide explicit approval to Rich

+ GDPR

+ ACTION: Jim has this for the Board in terms of action plan & assigning technical resources to make solutions, then write up all the bits & post them on centos.org

+ Using registered ® mark:

+ Required for graphic marks?

+ Written/docs?

+ Standard is first-usage, then drop

+ We specify

+ ACTION: Karsten to write up changes to the wiki based on email thread

+ Commercial distribution expectations around ™ guidelines

+ ACTION: Karsten to invite Richard Fontana to discuss how we 

+ ACTION: Another action for this item

+ CERN usage of “CentOS”

+ ACTION: Karsten to write up a response to CERN about how to refer to the CentOS Linux they rebuild since they cannot technically resolve their situation. This is more about how they market it anyway.

+ 7 release

+ No actions

+ Minutes / Notes

+ Rich notes

+ Presentation:

+ https://docs.google.com/presentation/d/1Rnkm_DXQN7MnEDqZ8Jh97muuble8JA8LwRw7q18A6d0/edit

+ Transition -- Moving now to advisory role for RDO, coming online for CentOS full time

+ Getting formal endorsement from Board for things Rich is doing

+ OSAS is promoting CentOS because it’s beneficial to product line

+ FOSS is a neat idea

+ Need to continue communicating to product side that we are not the enemy

+ Agreement on types of events to support

+ Moving Dojos to first priority

+ Bangalore & Singapore

+ Various degrees of success

+ Singapore was a good learning experience

+ Looking at CERN & ORNL

+ Let’s be pro-active on Dojos

+ Who is where

+ See a meetup group started first to create anchor community

+ What makes a Dojo

+ Improve on wiki approach, be consistent with the approach

+ Local meetup groups

+ Few found, non particularly active

+ Where is the activity here

+ Messaging agreement

+ CentOS as platform for innovation

+ 

+ 

+ Social media plan - there is one now

+ Adding people to blogging/planet

+ Enable Rich to have a working request process so he can promote/suggest folks

+ SIGs

+ Where the action is at

+ Rich is attending/lurking at meetings

+ Maybe do some write-ups about SIGs for all audiences

+ Fedora & RHEL

+ Message that celebrates the genealogy of Fedora & CentOS & RHEL.

+ 

+ 

+ Reboot newsletter

+ Need more delegation to the community

+ “Larger community” not feeling able to get involved because all the tasks are taken

+ Things in core infra

+ Can people be part of rebuilding RHEL release?

+ What blocks on internal side?

+ 

+ 

+ Some tasks owned by one or two people

+ Part of our mission is to bring on younger people

+ Promotion around releases

+ Release checklist to start in advance of a release

+ What we are talking about, where we’re sending the message, who did cool stuff to celebrate, make sure press knows it’s coming, etc. …

+ CentOS is more reactive to RHEL

+ But there is a window where we can build that message

+ Johnny notes:

+ Reactive, we don’t know what’s in it until after the RHEL release source gets to us.

+ Board meetings

+ Folks see -- Dark cabal that controls everything

+ Want to see meetings, agenda

+ SIG maybe attend?

+ Contributes to the notion that RHT runs everything when the decision process is not transparent.

+ GDPR

+ Paul & Jim working together to be POC for RHT on Fedora & CentOS

+ Not all is clear with RHT yet

+ We need to have an idea of what to do for forums, etc.

+ Difference between contributions & personal postings

+ Argument for using a single auth ACO(?) 

+ Usage of CentOS

+ Entities need to either change how they refer to their rebuild or they need to not make a rebuild or they need to make the rebuild via the SIG process

+ 

@@ -0,0 +1,37 @@ 

+ Attendees

+ Fabian Arrotin

+ Jim Perrin

+ Michael McLean

+ Tru Huynh

+ Karsten Wade

+ QUORUM

+ 

+ Actions

+ KB to talk with Carl

+ Karsten to write down the brief version of Board definition for “what being a member means” for all (and new members)

+ All agree to respond to more emails coming from Karsten on various topics

+ Agenda / notes

+ Board membership & activity

+ Carl membership?

+ KB: speak with Carl about if he wants to resign

+ New Board members?

+ Ansi

+ Thomas

+ Process for adding someone

+ What does Board membership mean?

+ More work

+ HIgh-level, strategic

+ Influential

+ High-level of trust with Board relationship to RH

+ Mailing list activity

+ What needs to happen on the mailing list?

+ Where should work be tracked? (Kanboard?)

+ IBM topics

+ How does this affect us (hopefully not negatively)?

+ Wait and see

+ Should be make a blog post about it?

+ No

+ Karsten has a small pile of items to talk through on the mailing list

+ All on call agree to respond to at least this groups’ emails to keep things moving.

+ Items to be discussed via list include trademark guidelines review, governance review, GDPR update, trademark enforcement, trademark permissions

+ 

@@ -0,0 +1,167 @@ 

+ CentOS Board - meeting minutes - 2020-01-08

+ CentOS Board - meeting minutes - YYYY-MM-DD

+ Attendees

+ Actions

+ Decisions, resolutions, and agreements

+ Agenda + Minutes

+ Public minutes

+ Attendees

+ Brian Exelbierd (guest)

+ Rich Bowen (guest)

+ Karsten Wade (Secretary)

+ Jim Perrin

+ Mike McLean

+ Ralph Angenendt

+ Tru Huynh

+ Karanbir Singh (Chair)

+ Actions

+ ACTION: Karsten to work out a vid conf call process so we can start even if the Chair or Secretary are delayed.

+ ACTION: Rich to generate a draft statement for us on what is happening with C8.

+ ACTION: Rich to work with Aoife on what is being reported out of CPE for CentOS to highlight what is happening on an ongoing basis -- a lot is happening, how do we highlight it?

+ ACTION: Karsten and Rich to arrange space of some kind at Dojo for open discussions

+ Decisions, resolutions, and agreements

+ AGREED: have Bex, Rich, Karsten work on audience surveys to generate data into the spreadsheet that has actual meaning. Rich to be the face of this, Board has oversight. Starting with “friends and families” information as most accessible and likely to be accurate/trustworthy.

+ AGREED: Holding some open discussions/work session at Dojo

+ Agenda + Minutes

+ Adopt minutes from 2019-12-18

+ Introduction of Brian Exelbeird (bex) and his relationship to CentOS and Red Hat. Rich Bowen to join for this first part of the meeting

+ Recording: BlueJeans (RH account), Google Drive (shared to personal gmail accounts)

+ Discussion of how Bex is helping track CentOS Stream for the business.

+ Being the conduit into the business and for the GM (Stephanie Chiras) of the Platform BU.

+ Work with Board as a representative for Stefanie et al.

+ Help coordinate quarterly meetings between BU and BOD.

+ ASAP meeting with Stefanie, February?

+ Resource for the Board

+ Able to help Red Hat folks craft answers for us before we meet with them so the experience is more crisp and productive.

+ Reflect accurately into Red Hat, and make sure the connections are happening outward to the Board. Part of keeping a tighter feedback loop with the business.

+ Has a community-centric viewpoint.

+ Available to care about things the BOD cares about, and to coordinate with other people the BOD might want to hear from, talk to, etc.

+ KB: what does RHEL’s community look like in relation to Stream?

+ Note - it’s a single stream in Stream -- not a multiple, not related to SIGs built on codebases and what those look like, but note that it is a pre-RHEL stream, not a multi-faceted concept, it’s focused on what RHEL will become.

+ RHEL community is similar to CentOS, largely users who haven’t found a path to contribution. There are a large amount of contributors, e.g. via partner programs and other classic engineer-to-engineer relationships.

+ What does it mean to contribute to RHEL? It used to be “go to Fedora and pray” or “look at this best-effort side thing in CentOS that sort feeds back in”. Bex has been asked to make a clear picture, and Stream is a clear picture.

+ Sees that Stream will takeover some but not all of that community function for RHEL. RHEL maintaining own relationship with folks who need own different types of relationships -- NDA, etc. so it ends up getting routed through 

+ What do successful successful dev and prod look like for these audience segments so we’re all working from the same context so we don’t forget about someone and turn off their use case accidentally; or say ‘no’ and shut off a big use case benefit.

+ Each component of the project may not be all things for all people.

+ If we wanted to build The Thing that would fit for each use case, what would that look like in each?

+ KB: what are the sample sets we’re going to bring on board to help us answer these questions?

+ Bex: happy to have those discussions but need to have a Board directive to do so -- not his place to define who are the marquee user groups to talk to.

+ Ralph: these seem to represent where someone had examples in mind based on how these audiences are written.

+ KB: interesting to hear about what RHEL thinks about these groups.

+ Bex: yes, interested in hearing who are the marquee users from the BOD and other perspectives, not just his or the RHEL BU.

+ RHEL has people who do market intelligence, if we have something we need from them.

+ But let’s not have the Project look from the product perspective but rather think what is the sizing relative to what fits the project.

+ There is some influence from the RHEL BU in this list, for sure.

+ These needs to be a useful instrument for the project to help inform e.g. SIGs and what is in them.

+ KB: let’s be careful not to use a list such as this to filter what the community brings as possibilities or for correctness of consumption, that would be an anti-pattern and anti-open source.

+ Shouldn’t confuse CentOS Board, CentOS Project, CentOS Linux, and CentOS Stream.

+ Creating this and getting the data for it is going to be a lot of work.

+ Segmenting helps us make sure that resource burn is going toward where the project feels the foci should be.

+ KB: Let’s convert this into a user survey we can talk to people we know, as a first iteration to seed things. Have Rich own getting this data. Get folks to contribute this data back in to be part of the process around goals, etc. as well.

+ 

+ 

+ Audience segments -- a few more requests for this Spreadsheet

+ What is our best guess of relative size of the various market segments? XS, S, M, L, XL

+ For “Definition of Dev” & “Definition of Production”, what comments do we have?

+ What would be the “Definitions of Dev/Prod” we’d put for the new segments we identified: Gov, Mil, National Labs, and Academia?

+ Long discussion about the value and meaning of this data for the project.

+ What does success look like? What does that mean for all our constituencies? Making sure we’re thinking more broadly than what the business-myopic might be.

+ As we start saying yes to things, what are the tradeoffs for audiences we care about?

+ Good opportunity to become a contributor-centric community, as a position between Fedora and Red Hat.

+ 

+ 

+ AGREED: have Bex, Rich, Karsten work on audience surveys to generate data into the spreadsheet that has actual meaning. Rich to be the face of this, Board has oversight. Starting with “friends and families” information as most accessible and likely to be accurate/trustworthy.

+ Build pipeline changes - Joined by Rich Bowen

+ Update from Jim/KB

+ Having to make realtime changes to build systems due to the differences in how EL8 and Stream 8 need to be built. Part of this is coordinating back to RCM.

+ 8.1 looking to seeding this weekend, release next week

+ CBS is next on the list

+ Need to discuss what the buildroot looks like

+ SIGs are asking for full access to buildroot; seeing it as a first class citizen rather than a last-place accumulation point.

+ Looking for the balance of the buildroot packages that are held back, causing things working/not working in the EL 8 environments that should be similar.

+ Discussions on buildroot coming soon; team has been heads down

+ KB: leaving users badly exposed leaving open CVEs

+ Jim: some are missing buildroot packages, tickets to RCM, time to turn around, etc. Tooling around it is improving by force.

+ ACTION: Rich to generate a draft statement for us on what is happening with C8.

+ ACTION: Rich to work with Aoife on what is being reported out of CPE for CentOS to highlight what is happening on an ongoing basis -- a lot is happening, how do we highlight it?

+ CPE improvements are slower than community, but expect more resources ongoing; Carl George first example.

+ Non-public information as there is no way currently to explain best the direction of resourcing and how that helps various project users and contributors

+ Everyone is hearing a lot of risky reactions around the obvious delays with C8; need to hit the mark with 8.2 certainly 8.3?

+ 

+ 

+ Project goals refresh

+ Working session with the draft process doc

+ Begin public segment 13 Jan?

+ No objections to timeline so far.

+ AGREED: Holding some open discussions/work session at Dojo

+ ACTION: Karsten and Rich to arrange space of some kind at Dojo for open discussions

+ Rolling (last from 2019-12-18, new items to the rolling agenda highlighted as [NEW]):

+ [NEW] Reporting on and better understanding the build process for CentOS Linux 8 and the update lag / point release challenges

+ “But I hope we don't have to wait for all that to happen before we get C8 buildroots in CBS for the SIGs to build packages.”

+ AGREED: Rich will draft a statement about the ongoing challenges to C8 builds.

+ [NEW] Trademark Guidelines review:

+ What works & what does not.

+ What do we want to get fixed; who wants to work on that.

+ [NEW] Advisory Council - discussion toward a proposal - discussion draft

+ On hold while goals discussion is held, which includes a review and update of governance. We’ll figure out what model we want from that and how this idea might fit.

+ Any other topics aka What other things do you want on our key initiatives list?

+ New branding work underway

+ Website update work: https://github.com/areguera/centos-style-websites

+ Framework proposed into logo discussion: https://git.centos.org/centos/Artwork/issue/1#comment-62 

+ Stepping-up our meeting norms

+ Announcing Fabian …

+ New Board members

+ Transparency initiatives

+ Public agenda + minutes

+ Public agenda

+ On Wednesday 08 January 2020, the CentOS Board of Directors will hold its first meeting of the decade and 2020 calendar year. Below is the agenda for that meeting that can be shared with the community and wider public.

+ 

+ Adopt minutes from 2019-12-18

+ Build pipeline changes

+ Update from Jim/KB

+ Project goals refresh

+ Working session with the draft process doc

+ Planning to announce and begin process in coming weeks

+ Rolling (last from 2019-12-18, new items to the rolling agenda highlighted as [NEW]):

+ [NEW] Reporting on and better understanding the build process for CentOS Linux 8 and the update lag / point release challenges

+ [NEW] Trademark Guidelines review:

+ What works & what does not.

+ What do we want to get fixed; who wants to work on that.

+ [NEW] Looking at new Board membership and structure (ongoing)

+ On hold while goals discussion is held, which includes a review and update of governance. We’ll figure out what model we want from that and how this idea might fit.

+ Any other topics aka What other things do you want on our key initiatives list?

+ New branding work underway

+ Website update work: https://github.com/areguera/centos-style-websites

+ Framework proposed into logo discussion: https://git.centos.org/centos/Artwork/issue/1#comment-62 

+ Stepping-up our meeting norms (ongoing)

+ Transparency initiatives (ongoing)

+ Public minutes

+ On 2020-01-08 the CentOS Board of Directors held the first meeting of 2020, welcoming guest Rich Bowen, Community Architect for the CentOS Project.

+ 

+ The group talked through some background for each-other as part of the framework for updating the project goals. The Board is drafting a process that is for refreshing the project's goals openly and transparently. More details including a timeline should start rolling out in the middle of January to the centos-devel mailing list and announced on blog.centos.org.

+ 

+ The Board then heard from Jim Perrin as head of Community Platform Engineering (CPE) about the ongoing work around the EL 8 rebuild, SIG needs, and what the path forward might look like. He covered how the teams have been making realtime changes to build systems due to the differences in how CentOS Linux 8 and CentOS Stream need to be built. Regarding some open requests, discussions on the build root are coming soon, as the team raises their heads from work that has been underway. In general, Jim reported that tooling around the build systems are improving by force. He identified Aofie Maloney as a key contact to work with Rich Bowen on highlighting the ongoing work from CPE that affects various CentOS Project constituencies. We’re all hoping this communication helps raise visibility and focus questions about work to keep everyone better informed.

+ 

+ As a participant in the discussion, Rich Bowen agreed to write up a post for the community that covers the current situation of CentOS Linux 8 builds. This has been subsequently been posted:

+ 

+ https://blog.centos.org/2020/01/update-state-of-centos-linux-8-and-centos-stream/

+ 

+ In support of these efforts, the Board came to the following decisions, resolutions, and agreements:

+ 

+ CentOS Project five-year goals refresh:

+ AGREED: Available co-authors of the goals will be present to discuss the effort, conduct reviews, and create works during the CentOS Dojo before FOSDEM on 31 Jan 2020.

+ ACTION: Karsten and Rich to arrange space of some kind at Dojo for open discussions around goals setting.

+ ACTION: Karsten driving goals process document through current pre-draft phase.

+ Project build systems discussion:

+ ACTION: Rich to publish a statement/status for what is happening with CentOS Linux 8.

+ ACTION: Rich to work with Aoife Moloney on what is being reported out of CPE for CentOS portion to highlight what is happening on an ongoing basis--a lot is happening, how do we highlight it?

+ 

+ Present at the meeting:

+ Jim Perrin

+ Karsten Wade (Secretary)

+ Mike McLean

+ Ralph Angenendt

+ Tru Huynh [quorum]

+ Karanbir Singh (Chair)

+ Rich Bowen (guest)

+