public ticket with a summary of the provenpackager revocation discussion

eseyman commented

2026-04-20 22:16:46 +00:00

Summary

A summary of FESCO's provenpackager revocation discussion should be published

Background

A little under 18 months ago, FESCO announced a decision they had taken through private discussions and a secret vote (this was over revoking someone's provenpackager status). When this was announced, we were told that a public ticket with a summary of the private discussion would be filed.

Shortly after, the Council involved themselves and reversed FESCO's decision. Since then, we have waited for the public ticket we were told would be created and we have had to vote for several FESCO elections without the full voting record of the people who voted then so that we can determine if we want them to stay on FESCO or not.

I exchanged emails with Fabio Valentini who explained to me that FESCO had made a summary of the discussion available to the Council but never gotten explicit approval to publish it. He recommended I file a ticket with the Council asking them to consider whether to publish the summary we sent them or not.

Details

Take the summary of FESCO's discussion that was made available to the Council
Ensure everything in it can be published
Ensure it contains the voting record for FESCO's decision
Publish the summary to the devel mailing-list (and maybe other places as well)

Summary

We will finally be able to vote for FESCO members being fully informed on their voting record

### Summary A summary of FESCO's provenpackager revocation discussion should be published ### Background A little under 18 months ago, FESCO announced a decision they had taken through private discussions and a secret vote (this was over revoking someone's provenpackager status). When this was announced, we were told that a public ticket with a summary of the private discussion would be filed. Shortly after, the Council involved themselves and reversed FESCO's decision. Since then, we have waited for the public ticket we were told would be created and we have had to vote for several FESCO elections without the full voting record of the people who voted then so that we can determine if we want them to stay on FESCO or not. I exchanged emails with Fabio Valentini who explained to me that FESCO had made a summary of the discussion available to the Council but never gotten explicit approval to publish it. He recommended I file a ticket with the Council asking them to consider whether to publish the summary we sent them or not. ### Details * Take the summary of FESCO's discussion that was made available to the Council * Ensure everything in it can be published * Ensure it contains the voting record for FESCO's decision * Publish the summary to the devel mailing-list (and maybe other places as well) ### Summary We will finally be able to vote for FESCO members being fully informed on their voting record

eseyman added the

?

needs triage

label

2026-04-20 22:16:46 +00:00

jflory7 added this to the Council Meeting Planner project

2026-04-22 14:10:23 +00:00

jflory7 commented

2026-05-06 17:17:21 +00:00

Owner

Discussed in 2026-05-06 Fedora Council meeting.

The Council briefly discussed the request to publish a summary and the FESCo voting record concerning the provenpackager revocation incident. Due to the sensitive nature of the topic involving the Code of Conduct, concerns about reopening old wounds, and debates over election transparency versus retroactive disclosure of private votes, the Council determined that an asynchronous text chat was insufficient for resolution. The discussion has been tabled for a dedicated, high-bandwidth video call later this week. The outcome of the public discussion will be summarized and shared in this ticket.

Follow-up Items

Next Steps: Hold a live video call to thoroughly discuss the request and determine the Council's official response.
Owner: @jflory7 to schedule the internal video call and report outcomes back to this ticket.

_Discussed in [2026-05-06 Fedora Council meeting](https://discussion.fedoraproject.org/t/fedora-council-meeting-2026-05-06-innovation-lifecycle-policy-f44-interviews-and-ai-desktop/190575)_. --- The Council briefly discussed the request to publish a summary and the FESCo voting record concerning the provenpackager revocation incident. Due to the sensitive nature of the topic involving the Code of Conduct, concerns about reopening old wounds, and debates over election transparency versus retroactive disclosure of private votes, the Council determined that an asynchronous text chat was insufficient for resolution. The discussion has been tabled for a dedicated, high-bandwidth video call later this week. The outcome of the public discussion will be summarized and shared in this ticket. ## Follow-up Items * **Next Steps**: Hold a live video call to thoroughly discuss the request and determine the Council's official response. * **Owner**: @jflory7 to schedule the internal video call and report outcomes back to this ticket.

jflory7 added

and removed

labels

2026-05-06 17:17:57 +00:00

jflory7 added this to the Flock 2026 milestone

2026-05-06 17:17:59 +00:00

jflory7 self-assigned this

2026-05-06 17:18:03 +00:00

jflory7 commented

2026-05-07 11:36:07 +00:00

Owner

Just acknowledging that five members of the Fedora Council met this morning to discuss the ticket. We have a draft resolution ready. Before posting it publicly here, I want to allow other Council members to have a chance to provide private input. Expect the summary by the end of the day today.

jflory7 referenced this issue

2026-05-07 11:38:39 +00:00

Conflict of Interest guidelines #513

amoloney commented

2026-06-05 13:57:29 +00:00

Owner

As per council meeting on Wednesday, June 3 (meeting minutes) it was agreed in a previous meeting that backtracking on the initial expectation of privacy under which those decisions were made in this incident would be disingenuous, and we lack the necessary context to form a retrospective opinion. @jflory7 has an action to draft this discussion that some of the council had on the proven packager incident and will post it to this ticket before closing.

Marking this ticket as in progress and removing the needs discussion tag.

As per council meeting on Wednesday, June 3 (meeting minutes) it was agreed in a previous meeting that backtracking on the initial expectation of privacy under which those decisions were made in this incident would be disingenuous, and we lack the necessary context to form a retrospective opinion. @jflory7 has an action to draft this discussion that some of the council had on the proven packager incident and will post it to this ticket before closing. Marking this ticket as in progress and removing the needs discussion tag.

amoloney removed the

Rows
Columns

public ticket with a summary of the provenpackager revocation discussion #563

Summary

Background

Details

Summary

Follow-up Items