Proposed policy: Fedora Chat namespaces, servers, and channels

Draft doc and policy:

Servers and Usernames

The Fedora Chat service consists of two separate namespaces, and All Fedora Project members can log into using their Fedora Account credentials, and get Matrix account in the space. For example,

The space is reserved, and used for administrative accounts only.

Official Rooms and Spaces

Rooms in the space are official Fedora communications channels. These are organized into various categories by consensus of the Fedora Matrix SIG – these categories are “Spaces” in Matrix terminology.

If you want a new official room for your Fedora team, group, or project please follow [procedure to be developed]. Teams may also ask for a new official Space to group multiple related channels.

Unofficial Rooms and Spaces

Any Fedora member may create unofficial spaces in the space.

  • These rooms and spaces cannot overlap with the names of official spaces, and we reserve the right to replace any unofficial space with an official one if the need arises.
  • These rooms and spaces should relate to Fedora activities and the Fedora Project’s mission.
  • All activity in such rooms and spaces is still subject to the Fedora Code of Conduct, and our general principles of being excellent to each other.
  • Along those lines, remember that these rooms are “federated” — that is, shared to other servers and users in the Matrix network. When creating a name in our name space, even the “unofficial” one, or communicating in such a room, your choices reflect on all of us.
  • When choosing room names, please be aware of the flat namespace; don’t pick something too generic. We may reserve particular names, either in advance or later.
  • The Fedora Matrix Team may decide to remove unofficial rooms and spaces for a variety of reasons, including but not limited to non-compliance with the above.

An unoffical room can be a good way to start toward having an official one! [Procedure to be developed.]

Fedora members may also create private Spaces to organize their own view. See [doc link to come when spaces exits beta] for more about this feature.

Fedora Rooms on Other Matrix Servers

We can’t control what rooms people create on or other Matrix servers. Rooms on these servers are not official, but must follow the Fedora Trademark Guidelines for Community Sites and Accounts in order to use “Fedora” in their names.


Policies related to bridging are still to be determined. It may be that we end up with a policy distinction between and If so, that distinction will be documented here.

What do you think?


Should the policies here come from the Council? I’m a little leery of a SIG that just sprung into existence and lacking any charter or governance structure setting policies project-wide.

Similarly, I’d like to know how the SIG functions first.

The suspense is killing me. :popcorn: :smiley:

At the risk of being called an IRC killer, I’m not sure we want to require all channels to have an IRC bridge.

With the exception of the above points, this seems good.

How would you feel about “until we have a formal charter, drafts will be ratified by the Council after we come to general agreement here”?

Finished thought in edited version :slight_smile:

Especially because I already created two which I intend to not be bridged (#info and #news). I think that we do want to make it the default, because I’d like this move to help unify comms rather than split them further, and for various reasons we’re not going to get everyone over to Matrix in a month. See edit for new proposal.

I’m good with that.

Better, but I still disagree with the general principle. I’m fine with bridging existing rooms, but I don’t know that any new rooms should require a bridge. Let’s be more like Python 2.7 EOL and less like the switch to IPv6. :slight_smile:

Edit to add: My analogy is bad, but that’s okay because bad analogies are part of my personal brand.


I’ve removed the bridging bit; we can work that out separately.

Adding a bit about and etc…

This seems fine to me for a first stab. Do we want to say anything about enforcement? ie, “disruptive people will be asked to stop then removed by moderators” or save that for later/leave it open for now?

I think that should go in a different document. I think we would want something like the (lawyer-vetted) statement from this site’s “terms of service” page:

Community moderators, forum leaders, and site administrators are here to help keep the discussion positive, constructive, and on-topic. They may choose to move, hide, edit, or delete posts in service of this goal, even if that post does not necessarily rise to the level of a Code of Conduct violation. If you see a post which may need moderator attention, please do not hesitate to flag it. If you notice something which may violate the Code of Conduct, please file a report in the Fedora Project Code of Conduct issue tracker.

I’ve added a couple of things, including a note about federation. Does anyone have any concerns or comments?

I like it. In the unofficial room/spaces, how should moderation be implemented? Should there be a bot that autojoins to allow things like emergency moderation if needed?

Note to self for later:

  1. answer @mjenkins’s questions :slight_smile:
  2. write up a thing about project team subspaces under the Project Teams space (like, Websites and Apps team)