Summary

We need to have a policy and a content guide to publish content on the YouTube Channel.

Proposal

Content

For the content we should follow the same guidelines that follows the Fedora Magazine:

1. Do not edit system files: Processes should not involve editing files under system folders like /usr or /lib*. Edit /etc or a user-specific configuration in the home directory.
2. Prefer free software and officially packaged software: In the YouTube channel can still cover non-FOSS software to be used on Fedora, where we know or suspect that software is very popular and useful to Fedora users (Google Chrome is a good example)
3. Use libvirt/KVM in tips: The KVM hypervisor and libvirt in Fedora are FOSS and part of the platform.
4. Use Fedora family distributions: The Fedora Magazine promotes Fedora. Unless the point of your article is to specifically explain a cross-distribution mechanism, use installations, containers, or distributions within its family (Fedora, CentOS, RHEL). If you're going to cover installation of packages, please use a clean fresh installed VM (or only with updates).
5. Copr software must be accompanied by a caveat: The Copr build system is not managed by the Fedora release team and does not provide official software builds. If you cover some software from Copr, ensure there’s no official build. If not, include a statement like this: COPR is not officially supported by Fedora infrastructure. Use packages at your own risk.
6. Avoid exclusionary or problematic language: These are examples of terminology to avoid wherever possible in articles:
   • blacklist/whitelist: Use allowlist/denylist instead, which is more directly descriptive of the purpose.
   • master/slave: Use primary/secondary, primary/replica, active/passive, active/standby, or another similar construct.
7. Test your process: If possible, use a fresh guest VM, or at least a brand-new user account. Run your process from beginning to end to ensure it works. Fix, rinse, and repeat.
8. Name the third parties: In Fedora we respect the works of everyone, so please name people and companies when necessary, and do it with respect.
9. Do not use copyrighted material: If you want to include any media, video, images, audio and specially music, please use sources with free licences, and DO NOT USE COPYRIGHTED MATERIAL
10. Create your description and title: Part of the process of create content include video description that can include links to fedora sites, other content or blogs. Videos without titles and descriptions won't be uploaded.

Format

Video is special in terms of quality. In the case of YouTube, you need tu use the supported formats. There are also some recommendations about containers, codecs, bitrate and more. We recommend to upload HDR videos only, and an aspect ratio of 16:9 with a 720p resolution or higher.

Process

The video that will be upload should be revised by the Marketing team, to check content and format via a issue in the Marketing pagure. The mktg team will work on create a template of this tickets.

Once the video is approved, it will be shared with the social media team and/or with the people that have access to upload videos in the channel.

If content is considered controversial or video is rejected, a ticket with Mindshare can be filed to discuss the content. Mindhsare will have the final decision about if the video should be upload.

Discussed in 2020-10-01 meeting.

The proposal generally had positive feedback in the meeting today. Using the Fedora Magazine definition for content is clever and helps us avoid maintaining multiple definitions of the same thing.

I suggested we make the default license of CC BY explicit in the guidelines. YouTube has an option of two licenses for uploaded content: whatever the proprietary YouTube license is, and CC BY. On the Fedora YouTube, all videos have CC BY metadata by default. Since we already define a default license in the FPCA, this is technically OK. But I think it is a good idea to be explicit here since it might NOT be the first thought someone has when uploading to YouTube.

The plan is to start the feedback process next Monday (5 October). @bcotton will write the announcement post, kicking off the Policy Change Policy process.

I think that was all the highlights here!

Just to clarify, @x3mboy said he would write the announcement post: https://meetbot.fedoraproject.org/fedora-meeting/2020-10-01/council.2020-10-01-17.00.log.html#l-221

I will write the draft today. Sorry for the delay

Community Blog article posted and council-discuss thread opened. By policy, we will begin a vote on this in two weeks.

By policy, we will begin a vote on this in two weeks.

Or....4. Oops.

Anyway, Council members are asked to vote on this proposal.

+1

+1

+1

What exactly are you voting for? There was a PR that I gave feedback for but which is now broken due to the branch change from master to main: https://pagure.io/Fedora-Council/council-docs/pull-request/92# and does not show any changes.

-1.

I feel bad to have waited this long to weigh in here, but I have two ideas for paths forward. I want to explain my vote though.

This is a useful set of information about best practices for publishing content related to Fedora. It provides a clear list of items to consider in order to get content published on YouTube. It helps that it is documented and endorsed by the Council. But I think this sets an unusual precedent for Council policies. I think we either need to think bigger, or relocate this somewhere else.

Here are my two ideas:

• Idea 1. Expand policy from just being about YouTube to publishing media content, generally speaking, on all official Fedora platforms.
  • Avoids duplicating the standard already in place with the Magazine team.
  • Encourages people on other platforms where Fedora exists to understand how to get their content published.
  • Provides a framework for other decentralized pockets of Fedora to use (e.g. the Fedora Llama Farmers can adopt the same standard for their community Vimeo profile).

Or…

• Idea 2. Rehome this content in Mindshare documentation.
  • If we keep it specific to YouTube, the Council should not own this as a policy; I believe it will be more effective if Mindshare owns this, since they already take responsibility for our official social media channels.
  • Let's not make modifications to this proposal require weeks of discussion and voting to change. If we are keeping it simple, let's make the docs simple and put them somewhere where we can update with best practices as the times go on.

Does this make sense @x3mboy? What do you think?

-1.

:'-(

I feel bad to have waited this long to weigh in here, but I have two ideas for paths forward. I want to explain my vote though.

It's always welcome!

This is a useful set of information about best practices for publishing content related to Fedora. It provides a clear list of items to consider in order to get content published on YouTube. It helps that it is documented and endorsed by the Council. But I think this sets an unusual precedent for Council policies. I think we either need to think bigger, or relocate this somewhere else.

Here are my two ideas:

• Idea 1. Expand policy from just being about YouTube to publishing media content, generally speaking, on all official Fedora platforms.
• Avoids duplicating the standard already in place with the Magazine team.
• Encourages people on other platforms where Fedora exists to understand how to get their content published.
• Provides a framework for other decentralized pockets of Fedora to use (e.g. the Fedora Llama Farmers can adopt the same standard for their community Vimeo profile).
  

I thought that too, but in the moment I stopped to think that every platform is different, so there should be then 2 groups of policies (rules, frameworks or how you decided to call it):

1. A generic set of rules related to content, like the magazine one, that doesn't specify anything related to the format:
2. A per type of media when it can be combined (vimeo and Youtube, probably twitter and Facebook, a separate one to Instagram, another for blogs [including magazine]) where we set the minimum quality expected for the material.

• Idea 2. Rehome this content in Mindshare documentation.
• If we keep it specific to YouTube, the Council should not own this as a policy; I believe it will be more effective if Mindshare owns this, since they already take responsibility for our official social media channels.
• Let's not make modifications to this proposal require weeks of discussion and voting to change. If we are keeping it simple, let's make the docs simple and put them somewhere where we can update with best practices as the times go on.

I like this a bit better, I created this policy in Council's Pagure, because I didn't found another place where it fits, but even the process as I'm proposing it involves Mindshare and not the Council.

Does this make sense @x3mboy? What do you think?

I've answered above in an in-line format

Justin, I see your point here. A proposal:

"The Fedora Council approves of this draft, but doesn't think it belongs as a Council policy. We recommend it to the Mindshare committee as a policy for that group as part of their stewardship of official social media channels."

@x3mboy wrote:
I like this a bit better, I created this policy in Council's Pagure, because I didn't found another place where it fits, but even the process as I'm proposing it involves Mindshare and not the Council.

Understood! Then re-homing sounds like the right option to me.

@mattdm wrote:
"The Fedora Council approves of this draft, but doesn't think it belongs as a Council policy. We recommend it to the Mindshare committee as a policy for that group as part of their stewardship of official social media channels."

This makes sense to me. I definitely want this content more widely circulated and visible!

The Fedora Council approves of this draft, but doesn't think it belongs as a Council policy. We recommend it to the Mindshare committee as a policy for that group as part of their stewardship of official social media channels.

The Council approved this proposal in yesterday's meeting.

Since this got approved, but the document got lost in the change of branch's name, I need to know how to proceed:

Should I write this again?

It's still in the repo:
https://pagure.io/Fedora-Council/council-docs/c/c30653e30478908daf26b779944f7cd697354ce6?branch=youtube_proposal