Please see the calendar invite for the Zoom link.
Tammy AllgoodWolf Wolf
- Melissa Anez
- Chris Awre
- Danny Bernstein
Robert Cartolano Sayeed Choudhury(Aaron Birkland will represent JHU) Stefano Cossu Dan Coughlin
- Jon Dunn
- Raman Ganguly
- Jennifer Gilbert
- Babak Hamidzadeh
Neil Jefferies Mark Jordan
- Danny Lamb
- Rosalyn Metz
- Este Pope
- Scott Prater
- Robin Ruggaber
- Tim Shearer
- Andrew Woods
- Dustin Slater
- Jennifer Vinopal
- David Wilcox
- Maurice York
- Laurie Arp
- Robert Miller
Reflection of current situation is that current Fedora funding model isn't working as well as it has and will need to change, with some urgency to identify the path forward. This isn't just Fedora, other communities are experiencing the same. Lyrasis is more generally looking at funding opportunities where it can.
Exercise for the Leadership Group to look at and discuss two alternative funding models using Zoom breakout rooms, with Steering Group facilitators.Rosy, Este and David as facilitators. Each group is asked to make some brief notes for inclusion on this page.
- Licensing model - 10 mins discussion
- Centralised model - 10 mins discussion
Question about DSpace - this is more global in its community, hence has had greater resilience. But they also do not have a dedicated program managerfmanager, which is impacting on their ability to grow during the pandemic.
* - preferred model to give focus to in each of the breakout rooms
NB. breakout groups worked well.
Rosy's breakout room:
Licensing model pros and cons*:
How many people even know they are using Fedora (Islandora, Hyrax...)
Are there other open source licensing models out there that work?
Easier to make a business case to license a thing, rather purchase a membership
-- Risk: may cause people to drop out
Timing is critical (now not the best time to shift?)
What would be the incentive to switch to a license model?
-- The software itself: the alternative is a future with no support?
Opportunity with 6: move to new financing model for that version
-- generate income: migration consultancy to 6
Licensing also a commitment to long-term sustainability
Looking ahead - the ghost of Christmas Future!
Apache License, as currently written, is not compulsory (anyone can use Fedora without license), so license would need to change if we followed this route.
What advantages come along with a license model, financially -- at what point would a license be cheaper for a license than a membership model? What would be the optimal price point?
Meta-questions: do people use Fedora because it's free? Do people value Fedora enough to pay for it?
-- if people were to stop using Fedora, what would they use?
-- what are the alternatives to Fedora?
-- what is the total cost of ownership for Fedora (staff expertise, etc.)
Didn't have time to consider centralised model
Robin: Brought up the Samvera example: if you are an institution of a certain size and you are using Samvera, you are expected to become a partner.
“Licensing” fee may not be a palatable way of framing the requirement to pay; Mark suggested that “Sustaining” fee may be better - to pay for staff time and organisational activity. Framing should be transparent about the necessity for contributing more funds.
Maurice wondered if a fee should be only applicable to Fedora 6 and not earlier versions.
Make Fedora nagware? Have a reminder about contribution every now and again.
Raman thinks that institutions in Europe won’t pay a fee, since there are alternatives to Fedora in some platform domains, e.g. Zenodo.
- Allows organizations to pay one invoice rather than many
- Coordination of roadmaps and interoperability between projects
- Pivoting the membership model in a way that allows the academy to continue owning its own software and services
- Funding for innovation
- Risk of the software you use being sunsetted if it cannot be sustained
Robin: Need to make sure senior managers (who make funding decisions) stay engaged, as they need to continue to understand what they are getting to understand the value it offers.
Tim: Pay for ArchiveSpace, and has been able to do so going forward as not reviewed alongside 'memberships'. Depends on what 'membership' encompasses (Emory has taken a different view in considering what is paid for)
David: Looking for ways of making the budget 'sticky', so it stays in budget
Jon: Bundling community costs as a package so it can be defined more easily for investment. Use of this word, 'investment', helps convey a specific type of message.
Strategic Subgroup Reports
See the quarterly report for written updates. Membership of subgroups is encouraged for Leadership Group members, with more time made by moving Leadership Groups meetings less often.
Product Technology (David)
- Focus on Fedora 6 rollout
- Testing schedule developed, reaching out to those who can help with trying this out
- Steering suggested a 'phone home' feature to help understand usage
Communication, Outreach, Marketing and Community (Este)
- Looking at producing. 1-2 page brochure for circulation/download as useful
- Blog post focusing on use of Fedora at a time of COVID, another on the global reach of Fedora
- Shout out for contribution to the information about uses of Fedora
- Convey messaging about challenges to funding and highlight ways of tackling this in a transparent and constructive way
Governance and Business Model (Rosy)
- Recently voted change from 1-year to 2-year terms to help maintain continuity of activity
- Need to consider who gets extended and who doesn't - those who are NOT looking to extend should let Rosy know
Technology - see written report in quarterly update
Lots of engagement on testing side, plan is on target
Effort is going to bringing everyone to Fedora 6 (from 3, 4, and 5)
Reminder about online user groups this week (US timezones) and September (European timezones)