Hi all,
I've published the first draft of the docs for the team directory in an attempt to address the questions raised in last week's meeting:
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/council/procedures/team_directory/
This incorporates the high points from the original discussion at the November 2019 face-to-face as well as the pre-Nest virtual face-to-face earlier this month.
Does this make the expectations and purpose more clear?
(Note that this is not yet linked from anywhere else. That will happen once we're relatively settled with the content)
Hi, Ben,
On Wed, Aug 26, 2020 at 7:43 PM Ben Cotton bcotton@redhat.com wrote:
Hi all,
I've published the first draft of the docs for the team directory in an attempt to address the questions raised in last week's meeting:
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/council/procedures/team_directory/
Thank you for writing it.
This incorporates the high points from the original discussion at the November 2019 face-to-face as well as the pre-Nest virtual face-to-face earlier this month.
Does this make the expectations and purpose more clear?
I would add a sentence to clarify that SIGs and Working Groups are also considered to be Teams in this doc. Because some people, like me, are used to thinking in terms of SIGs and may feel like the Team is something different.
Also I've recently realized that we have yet another place with a listing of some of the teams [1]
[1] https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/engineering/
This is a list of team docs rather than the teams themselves. But if we maintain a list of teams in council-docs repository, can we create a list of docs out of the Team Directory automatically?
(Note that this is not yet linked from anywhere else. That will happen once we're relatively settled with the content)
-- Ben Cotton He / Him / His Senior Program Manager, Fedora & CentOS Stream Red Hat TZ=America/Indiana/Indianapolis _______________________________________________ council-discuss mailing list -- council-discuss@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to council-discuss-leave@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/council-discuss@lists.fedorapr...
Hey Ben,
On 8/27/20 8:59 AM, Aleksandra Fedorova wrote:
Hi, Ben,
On Wed, Aug 26, 2020 at 7:43 PM Ben Cotton bcotton@redhat.com wrote:
Hi all,
I've published the first draft of the docs for the team directory in an attempt to address the questions raised in last week's meeting:
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/council/procedures/team_directory/
Thank you for writing it.
Thanks for leading this work!
Does this make the expectations and purpose more clear?
I am looking for clarity on the deliverable. The expectation for downstream teams is to create a file in a path like this:
`docs_repo_name/modules/ROOT/_partials/TEMPLATE_team_info.adoc`
And it has to be named exactly like that for it to be picked up?
If yes, this is a clever albeit non-obvious way of doing it. Additional wording about the path requirement in a downstream docs repo clears that up for me.
If no... need your help to explain another way. :)
I would add a sentence to clarify that SIGs and Working Groups are also considered to be Teams in this doc. Because some people, like me, are used to thinking in terms of SIGs and may feel like the Team is something different.
+1. Team, SIGs, Working Groups, Objective leads, Sub-Projects... we are a community of many names. :) With subtle, implicit meanings that are not understood the same way by every person.
Better to make inclusion explicit so folks don't read this and then self-select that they are not eligible to be listed.
On Thu, Aug 27, 2020 at 1:10 PM Justin W. Flory (he/him) jflory7@gmail.com wrote:
I am looking for clarity on the deliverable. The expectation for downstream teams is to create a file in a path like this:
`docs_repo_name/modules/ROOT/_partials/TEMPLATE_team_info.adoc`
And it has to be named exactly like that for it to be picked up?
It's not automatic. Looking at Adam's example[1], I don't think there's anything magical about the naming. It could be called whatever because it has to be manually added. I'll let him chime in on that, though.
+1. Team, SIGs, Working Groups, Objective leads, Sub-Projects... we are a community of many names. :) With subtle, implicit meanings that are not understood the same way by every person.
"Teams" was used (starting with the December 2018 Council meeting in Minneapolis, because that's where you go in December) to avoid some of the confusion around names (i.e. the difference between a SIG and a Working Group is not meaningful). It's an XKCD 927 situation. I'll add a clarification as to what "teams" means.
[1] https://pagure.io/Fedora-Council/council-docs/blob/master/f/engineering/modu... [2] https://communityblog.fedoraproject.org/fedora-strategy-faq-part-1-what-is-a... [3] https://xkcd.com/927/
On Thu, Aug 27, 2020 at 02:59:55PM +0200, Aleksandra Fedorova wrote:
I would add a sentence to clarify that SIGs and Working Groups are also considered to be Teams in this doc. Because some people, like me, are used to thinking in terms of SIGs and may feel like the Team is something different.
Some background on this:
https://communityblog.fedoraproject.org/fedora-strategy-faq-part-1-what-is-a...
Am 27.08.20 um 19:34 schrieb Matthew Miller:
On Thu, Aug 27, 2020 at 02:59:55PM +0200, Aleksandra Fedorova wrote:
I would add a sentence to clarify that SIGs and Working Groups are also considered to be Teams in this doc. Because some people, like me, are used to thinking in terms of SIGs and may feel like the Team is something different.
Some background on this:
https://communityblog.fedoraproject.org/fedora-strategy-faq-part-1-what-is-a...
not sure if this is the right place asking this question: "We’re going to set up a hosted Taiga instance" this was in 1/2019
is this still current? Or is this already created?
or is now docs the way for this?
cheers JOerg
a
Am 27.08.20 um 19:34 schrieb Matthew Miller:
On Thu, Aug 27, 2020 at 02:59:55PM +0200, Aleksandra Fedorova wrote:
I would add a sentence to clarify that SIGs and Working Groups are also considered to be Teams in this doc. Because some people, like me, are used to thinking in terms of SIGs and may feel like the Team is something different.
Some background on this:
https://communityblog.fedoraproject.org/fedora-strategy-faq-part-1-what-is-a...
not sure if this is the right place asking this question: "We’re going to set up a hosted Taiga instance" this was in 1/2019
is this still current? Or is this already created?
or is now docs the way for this?
cheers JOerg
-- Joerg (kital) Simon jsimon@fedoraproject.org https://about.me/joerg.simon Key Fingerprint: 3691 0989 2DCA 58A2 8D1F 2CAC C823 558E 5B5B 5688
Call trans opt: received. 2-19-98 13:24:18 REC:Loc
Trace program: running wake up, Neo... the matrix has you follow the white rabbit. knock, knock, Neo. (`. ,-, ` `. ,;' / `. ,'/ .' `. X /.' .-;--''--.._` ` ( .' / ` , ` ' Q ' , , `._ \ ,.| ' `-.;_' : . ` ; ` ` --,.._; ' ` , ) .' `._ , ' /_ ; ,''-,;' ``- ``-..__``--`___________________:.fedoraproject.org council-discuss@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to council-discuss-leave@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: aa
On Fri, Aug 28, 2020 at 4:49 AM Joerg Simon jsimon@fedoraproject.org wrote:
not sure if this is the right place asking this question: "We’re going to set up a hosted Taiga instance" this was in 1/2019
is this still current? Or is this already created?
Taiga won't do what we hoped it would in terms of a team directory. However, it is available for use as a project management tool at teams.fedoraproject.org.
Hello,
On Wed, Aug 26, 2020 13:43:02 -0400, Ben Cotton wrote:
(Note that this is not yet linked from anywhere else. That will happen once we're relatively settled with the content)
Like the "subprojects documentation" link on the org-chart page?
https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/orgchart/
I like the idea of having a central location for information on teams, but I'm always wary of the usual issue with lots of documentation: the same information being written on multiple pages without a clear indication of which copy is considered the authoritative copy. Consider:
- someone searches for $team on $searchsite - they get as their results: wiki page for the team, perhaps docs pages, and the council teams page.
If any of these pages have different information, the individual must decide on which information to follow. So, we need to do something to indicate that the council teams page (and docs in general?) is to be trusted more than other pages. Whether this is through SEO to ensure that it is listed before other results, or through notes on wiki pages saying "trust the docs more than you trust the wiki", or another method needs to be decided.
On a loosely related note, having search on docs would be really nice. It's still a major usability issue: https://pagure.io/fedora-docs/docs-fp-o/issue/2
On Fri, Aug 28, 2020 at 5:34 AM Ankur Sinha sanjay.ankur@gmail.com wrote:
I like the idea of having a central location for information on teams, but I'm always wary of the usual issue with lots of documentation:
Yes. This will supplant the out-of-date wiki page that sort of does this. For the rest of your points, those are managed by the team. This is intended to be a pointer to that information, so if the teams docs and wiki pages disagree, then there's not much we can do about that. Teams are responsible for their own documentation. One benefit to the way Adam designed this is that the information can be displayed in multiple places from a single source of truth.
On a loosely related note, having search on docs would be really nice. It's still a major usability issue: https://pagure.io/fedora-docs/docs-fp-o/issue/2
I couldn't agree more.
-- Ben Cotton He / Him / His Senior Program Manager, Fedora & CentOS Stream Red Hat TZ=America/Indiana/Indianapolis
On Fri, Aug 28, 2020 12:55:06 -0400, Ben Cotton wrote:
On Fri, Aug 28, 2020 at 5:34 AM Ankur Sinha sanjay.ankur@gmail.com wrote:
I like the idea of having a central location for information on teams, but I'm always wary of the usual issue with lots of documentation:
Yes. This will supplant the out-of-date wiki page that sort of does this. For the rest of your points, those are managed by the team. This is intended to be a pointer to that information, so if the teams docs and wiki pages disagree, then there's not much we can do about that. Teams are responsible for their own documentation. One benefit to the way Adam designed this is that the information can be displayed in multiple places from a single source of truth.
Yes, as long as the change is publicised enough and everyone is aware of it, we'll hopefully have all pages in sync.
I was wondering if this would be a good candidate for the "community wide change process" that Mindshare has in place now? This change has already gone through the vetting stages, and publicising it as a community wide change will greatly increase its visibility. I'll be happy to help with the dissemination related tasks to help out there.
https://pagure.io/mindshare/issue/197
On Tue, Sep 01, 2020 at 03:43:46PM +0100, Ankur Sinha wrote:
Yes, as long as the change is publicised enough and everyone is aware of it, we'll hopefully have all pages in sync.
I was wondering if this would be a good candidate for the "community wide change process" that Mindshare has in place now? This change has already gone through the vetting stages, and publicising it as a community wide change will greatly increase its visibility. I'll be happy to help with the dissemination related tasks to help out there.
This would just be for communicating out the new directory when it's ready?
On Tue, Sep 01, 2020 11:17:55 -0400, Matthew Miller wrote:
On Tue, Sep 01, 2020 at 03:43:46PM +0100, Ankur Sinha wrote:
Yes, as long as the change is publicised enough and everyone is aware of it, we'll hopefully have all pages in sync.
I was wondering if this would be a good candidate for the "community wide change process" that Mindshare has in place now? This change has already gone through the vetting stages, and publicising it as a community wide change will greatly increase its visibility. I'll be happy to help with the dissemination related tasks to help out there.
This would just be for communicating out the new directory when it's ready?
Yeh, we could wait for the first iteration of the directory to be ready to publicise it as a community wide change, or we could publicise it now as one and say something on the lines of "hey this is ready, and here's what's needed to get the first version set up.."?
I've seen the team directory mentioned in CommBlog posts, but I'm not certain that it is common knowledge in the community yet. I think it being announced as an accepted community wide change would give it lots of visibility.
PS: I've not gone through all the council meeting logs where this was discussed so I may be missing critical information. So, please shut me down if I'm uttering gibberish.
On Tue, Sep 01, 2020 at 05:02:23PM +0100, Ankur Sinha wrote:
I've seen the team directory mentioned in CommBlog posts, but I'm not certain that it is common knowledge in the community yet. I think it being announced as an accepted community wide change would give it lots of visibility.
PS: I've not gone through all the council meeting logs where this was discussed so I may be missing critical information. So, please shut me down if I'm uttering gibberish.
I'm up for trying it. The thing I want to avoid is a bunch of suggestions for doing things a different way which aren't backed by anyone signed up to do the work. I'm all for improvements, but I'd like to get _something_ in place first.
On Tue, Sep 01, 2020 12:25:51 -0400, Matthew Miller wrote:
On Tue, Sep 01, 2020 at 05:02:23PM +0100, Ankur Sinha wrote:
I've seen the team directory mentioned in CommBlog posts, but I'm not certain that it is common knowledge in the community yet. I think it being announced as an accepted community wide change would give it lots of visibility.
PS: I've not gone through all the council meeting logs where this was discussed so I may be missing critical information. So, please shut me down if I'm uttering gibberish.
I'm up for trying it. The thing I want to avoid is a bunch of suggestions for doing things a different way which aren't backed by anyone signed up to do the work. I'm all for improvements, but I'd like to get _something_ in place first.
Sounds good. We'll wait for the initial version to be up and then use the relevant bits of the change process to publicise it.
council-discuss@lists.fedoraproject.org
-
Aleksandra Fedorova -
Ankur Sinha -
Ben Cotton -
Joerg Simon -
Justin W. Flory (he/him) -
Matthew Miller -
Robert 'Bob' Jensen