-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
We intend to discuss this at tomorrow's meeting, so if you have any
comments/ideas, now would be a good idea to share them :)
On Tue, 2016-10-04 at 23:05 +0100, Ankur Sinha wrote:
So this is a follow up from the meeting we had. I've summarise some
it in a blog post that should hopefully show up on the planet.
During the meeting, we discussed how we need to ensure that the work
that CommOps is doing towards improving the different teams'
processes seems to overlap with the general goal of the Join SIG. So,
to make sure we don't have two teams doing the same thing, we should
come up with a set of specific goals and some example tasks that we
undertake to achieve these goals.
I'm starting with the goals here, and once we have them listed and
agreed to, we will begin working on ideas on how to achieve them.
so far, I hope?
OK. So, our aim is summarised on the wiki page here. As it says,
want to establish a set of communication channels that enable newbies
to speak to contributors and become part of the community socially
before they join a team and begin contributing.
The point being that the common philosophy we all believe in, and the
relationships we make because we share this view should bind us
together, not only the work we do together, which should be a
of our commitment to our philosophy. Does that make sense? :D
I'll explain this a little more - usually, someone turns up, after
surfing picks a team to join up, introduces themselves to the team
members, gets to know them, works, makes friends, maybe even finds a
mentor in the team, maybe begins to help another team later and then
makes friends there, and repeat.
What we think would be better is - someone turns up, finds us cool
contributors hanging around here, speaks to us, makes friends, gets
know how the community works, our philosophy (and finds it awesome)
what teams we have, finds a mentor (community mentor as opposed to
specific mentor), picks one or more teams to work in, becomes a part
the community, not just a specific team in the community.
The major differences in the two are the order in which things
We, or at least I think, that it is more beneficial for people to
become a social part of the community in general, build
and then jump into work. The advantages of this order of onboarding
but not limited to:
- newbies are not limited to team specific relationships
- newbies that join together can work together, even if they work in
different teams (we're all always closer to our classmates than to
- they get a much better overall idea of how the community functions
and are exposed to the workflows of different teams through us
(including tooling, admin, process, goals, tasks, ninjas)
- they go on to develop into contributors that also have a good idea
how the multiple arms of the community work to keep Fedora going
So, what do people think about this, does this reasoning appear
So, our goals would be on the lines of:
- advertise our channels (ML, IRC, something else) as the first stop
for prospective contributors
- act as a net to gather prospective contributors, help them
with the community and among themselves
- further, via our conversations with them, help them pick teams
they can contribute to
- further, keep a constant ongoing discussion about free software so
that our first foundation is regularly reinforced
Please do share your thoughts. If we can do this in the next few
we can then summarise it during next Monday's meeting and begin
on ideas for tasks. :)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----