Received-SPF: pass (google.com: domain of board-private-owner@ml.mageia.org designates 212.85.158.146 as permitted sender) client-ip=212.85.158.146;
Message-ID: <4FB7E0BD.7000000@iki.fi>
Date: Sat, 19 May 2012 21:04:45 +0300
From: Thomas Backlund <tmb@iki.fi>
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux x86_64; rv:10.0.4) Gecko/20120426 Thunderbird/10.0.4
MIME-Version: 1.0
To: board-private@ml.mageia.org
References: <CANa9xwtsY2iynMFMdhQjqxOfvd_aB0XqVKFX+HAB4iBtAwRhFA@mail.gmail.com>
In-Reply-To: <CANa9xwtsY2iynMFMdhQjqxOfvd_aB0XqVKFX+HAB4iBtAwRhFA@mail.gmail.com>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Subject: Re: [board-private] mandriva, foundation, business server
Errors-to: board-private-owner@ml.mageia.org
Precedence: list
Precedence: bulk
Sender: board-private-request@ml.mageia.org

18.05.2012 12:52, Romain d'Alverny skrev:
> Hi everyone,
> 
> so, Anne and me got in a conf call with JM Croset a few minutes ago to
> get a status.
> 
> He announced yesterday (Thursday, May 18)
> http://blog.mandriva.com/en/2012/05/17/mandriva-linux-will-return-to-the-community/
> . So several discussions are popping up here and there. Mageia's
> position has been transferred to some people inside Mandriva, among
> which Peroyvind (see
> https://forums.mageia.org/en/viewtopic.php?p=18041#p18041 - although
> he doesn't have the full story it seems).
> 

That has never stopped POK to fill out the blanks...

> He will announce early next Monday (22) that Mandriva SA will use
> Mageia as a tech platform for its business server line, and contribute
> back. Antoine Ginies (Mandriva engineer in chief for the business
> server) will get in touch with us to see how we do this technically.
> 

Shouldn't be a problem.

> He worries that trolls and discussions may damage Mageia in the coming
> days (for both news: Mandriva using Mageia as a tech platform for its
> Business Server line; and Mageia not following Mandriva in its
> foundation things) because he realizes that... community stuff
> sometimes goes out of hand; but he reassured us that, whatever is
> said, he does mean good for everyone; so it's important to play it
> cool and neutral on our side too.


Well, I still consider the so callen Mandriva foundation a "paper
launch" so I dont see much problem with it...

The "counter-weight" to Mageia not following Mdv foundation plans is
that mdv actually trust current Mageia.org and its structure more
than building on any current mdv based stuff so it means they think
we already have a strong functioning org and so on...


> 
> So, here's a suggested plan:
> 
>  * we announce/explicit both news on our side on Monday early morning
> (CEST) as well, in a single blog post embedding all Mandriva-related
> news:
>    - on one side, Mageia is not going to join Mandriva foundation
> project (and why, cold reasons as we gave him),
>    - on the other side, Mandriva is going to use Mageia as tech
> platform for its business server line (link) and contribute back.
>    - this double news should make it more obvious that things are not
> so simple as "Mageia is dumping Mandriva" or "Mandriva is rebasing on
> Mageia".
> 

Yep.

>  * this news being published Monday morning, it leaves two full days
> to propagate, before we push the Mageia 2 release news (Tuesday
> evening) - interest about Mageia will have raised a bit in the
> previous days, and this release news will hide partially the previous
> news.
> 

Yep. any news is good news :)

>  * until now, all this has been kept private in board-private: a)
> knowledge and decision about the foundation, and b) business server
> thing. Note that about a), people may question both the decision and
> the fact that it was private, without consulting the Council. We will
> mail privately Council members to inform them about both a) and b),
> but still. We won't need further arguments than what we explained to
> Mandriva, and what the governance says. 

Yep, we have that power to decide in cases like this.
And yes, it's better Council members gets fact from us before stuff hits
the blogs.

> But still again. In the case
> of things getting really ugly in the coming weeks, I'd suggest that we
> call for a vote of confidence to make things very clear (from Council,
> or from all registered contributors in LDAP).
> 

If really needed / requested yes.
But I dont think we will have problems.

> Sorry to make this quick, but we need to approve/reject/amend on this
> before tomorrow Saturday (even better, this evening) so we can discuss
> this with Council members in private too before Monday morning.
> .

I'm ok with it

--
Thomas