Wikiedit FAS group and Fedora Join new workflow

Hello!

As you can read here[0], the Fedora Join SIG is experimenting a new way
to help people become part of the community.

This workflow includes also a temporary FAS group if required or asked
by the newcomer. Since this overlaps with the current "wikiedit"
system, we were wondering if it'd make sense to retire it and send
newcomers to the Fedora Join channels instead where they can speak to
community members and take their time learning/exploring the community
and it's projects.

It'll be one less responsibility for the infra team, and it'll help us
channel folks to the new workflow.

Please let us know if this sounds OK and we'll edit the wiki page here
accordingly [1].

We'll send out more posts announcing the new workflow to the community
this week. If you have the cycles, please hang out in the Fedora Join
channels[2].

[0] : 
https://communityblog.fedoraproject.org/fedora-join-is-trying-a-new-peopl...
[1] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Help:Editing#Gaining_Edit_Access
[2] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/SIGs/Join?rd=Fedora_Join_SIG

Thanks,
A.

[Ankur Sinha]

Hello,

On Tue, Oct 22, 2019 00:16:13 +0200, alciregi(a)gmail.com wrote:
>  Hello!
>  
>  As you can read here[0], the Fedora Join SIG is experimenting a new way
>  to help people become part of the community.
>  
>  This workflow includes also a temporary FAS group if required or asked
>  by the newcomer. Since this overlaps with the current "wikiedit"
>  system, we were wondering if it'd make sense to retire it and send
>  newcomers to the Fedora Join channels instead where they can speak to
>  community members and take their time learning/exploring the community
>  and it's projects.
>  
>  It'll be one less responsibility for the infra team, and it'll help us
>  channel folks to the new workflow.
>  
>  Please let us know if this sounds OK and we'll edit the wiki page here
>  accordingly [1].
>  
>  We'll send out more posts announcing the new workflow to the community
>  this week. If you have the cycles, please hang out in the Fedora Join
>  channels[2].
>  
>  [0] : 
>
> https://communityblog.fedoraproject.org/fedora-join-is-trying-a-new-peopl...
>  [1] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Help:Editing#Gaining_Edit_Access
>  [2] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/SIGs/Join?rd=Fedora_Join_SIG 

Any comments/concerns around this? Otherwise we'll start working on the
required changes:

- update wiki page(s) to remove mention of the wikiedit system

We don't need the wikiedit group to be removed/retired, but we can file
a ticket for that too if infra thinks that'll work better?

-- 
Thanks,
Regards,
Ankur Sinha "FranciscoD" (He / Him / His) |
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Ankursinha
Time zone: Europe/London

[Stephen John Smoogen]

On Mon, 28 Oct 2019 at 08:43, Ankur Sinha <sanjay.ankur(a)gmail.com&gt; wrote:
>  Hello,
>
>  On Tue, Oct 22, 2019 00:16:13 +0200, alciregi(a)gmail.com wrote:
>  > Hello!
>  >
>  > As you can read here[0], the Fedora Join SIG is experimenting a new way
>  > to help people become part of the community.
>  >
>  > This workflow includes also a temporary FAS group if required or asked
>  > by the newcomer. Since this overlaps with the current "wikiedit"
>  > system, we were wondering if it'd make sense to retire it and send
>  > newcomers to the Fedora Join channels instead where they can speak to
>  > community members and take their time learning/exploring the community
>  > and it's projects.
>  >
>  > It'll be one less responsibility for the infra team, and it'll help us
>  > channel folks to the new workflow.
>  >
>  > Please let us know if this sounds OK and we'll edit the wiki page here
>  > accordingly [1].
>  >
>  > We'll send out more posts announcing the new workflow to the community
>  > this week. If you have the cycles, please hang out in the Fedora Join
>  > channels[2].
>  >
>  > [0] :
>  >
> https://communityblog.fedoraproject.org/fedora-join-is-trying-a-new-peopl...
>  > [1] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Help:Editing#Gaining_Edit_Access
>  > [2] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/SIGs/Join?rd=Fedora_Join_SIG
>
>
>  Any comments/concerns around this? Otherwise we'll start working on the
>  required changes:
>
>  - update wiki page(s) to remove mention of the wikiedit system
>
>  We don't need the wikiedit group to be removed/retired, but we can file
>  a ticket for that too if infra thinks that'll work better?
>  
No comments or concerns. Thank you for doing this. I would like to
remove the people in the group and retire it when possible,


-- 
Stephen J Smoogen.

[Kevin Fenzi]

On Mon, Oct 28, 2019 at 11:11:07AM -0400, Stephen John Smoogen wrote:
>  On Mon, 28 Oct 2019 at 08:43, Ankur Sinha
> <sanjay.ankur(a)gmail.com&gt; wrote:
>  >
>  > Any comments/concerns around this? Otherwise we'll start working on the
>  > required changes:
>  >
>  > - update wiki page(s) to remove mention of the wikiedit system
>  >
>  > We don't need the wikiedit group to be removed/retired, but we can file
>  > a ticket for that too if infra thinks that'll work better?
>  >
>  
>  No comments or concerns. Thank you for doing this. I would like to
>  remove the people in the group and retire it when possible, 
Yeah, I meant to reply to this before I was out on PTO last week, but
ran out of time. ;( 

I'm happy to try this out and thanks for working on it! 

I am not sure we can retire the existing group unless we contact all of
the members and ask them to go through the new process thought right?

That may be more trouble than it's worth.

kevin

[Ben Cotton]

On Mon, Oct 28, 2019 at 1:38 PM Kevin Fenzi <kevin(a)scrye.com&gt; wrote:
>  I am not sure we can retire the existing group unless we contact all of
>  the members and ask them to go through the new process thought right?
>
>  That may be more trouble than it's worth.
>  
Thanks for bringing this up. Retiring the wikiedit group isn't a
technical decision, it's a community one. The wikiedit group says "if
you're just here to edit the wiki, you're still a valid member of our
community". Retiring it says we no longer consider that a valid role
and that we expect community members to participate in some other way.
That's a valid position for us to take, but it's one that should be
taken explicitly.

If we want to move forward on this, we should wait until the new FCAIC
is in place and give them the opportunity to weigh in.

-- 
Ben Cotton
He / Him / His
Fedora Program Manager
Red Hat
TZ=America/Indiana/Indianapolis

[Ankur Sinha]

On Mon, Oct 28, 2019 14:39:20 -0400, Ben Cotton wrote:
>  On Mon, Oct 28, 2019 at 1:38 PM Kevin Fenzi <kevin(a)scrye.com&gt;
> wrote:
>  >
>  > I am not sure we can retire the existing group unless we contact all of
>  > the members and ask them to go through the new process thought right? 
Yes. We'd have to send out an e-mail to wikiedit-members(a)fp.o on the
lines of "this group is being retired, if you are not part of another
group and still need membership to wikiedit to be CLA+1, please head
over to the Fedora Join SIG". The Fedora Join SIG can send this out and
let infra know.

>  >
>  > That may be more trouble than it's worth.
>  >
>  Thanks for bringing this up. Retiring the wikiedit group isn't a
>  technical decision, it's a community one. The wikiedit group says "if
>  you're just here to edit the wiki, you're still a valid member of our
>  community". Retiring it says we no longer consider that a valid role
>  and that we expect community members to participate in some other way. 
Is only editing the wiki a role nowadays?  There is no community group
around wiki-editing, no team, no SIG. Since our focus moved to docs, the
wiki has been deemed a scratch board for teams to use implying that one
would be a member of one of these teams already.  So, if someone wants
to only edit the wiki, they should ideally be pointed to editing/moving
the information to docs instead.

The most common case in which people request wikiedit access currently
appears to be to set up their user pages---hubs was supposed to host
user profiles and get rid of user pages on the wiki IIRC but that got
shelved, unfortunately.

By retiring "wikiedit", we do not take away that role should someone
come looking for it. We're switching who handles it, and what FAS group
is used. Instead of infra doing it, Fedora Join does it, and instead of
using "wikiedit", we use the fedora-join FAS group where we provide
users with temporary membership---if at all required for whatever
purpose (not just wiki editing). The difference here would be that the
Fedora Join SIG members would speak to these people to see why the CLA+1
requirement cropped up in the first place.

>  That's a valid position for us to take, but it's one that
> should be
>  taken explicitly. 
Sure, what can we do to make it more explicit? We've spread the word
using the commblog and an e-mail to -devel announce already:

-
https://communityblog.fedoraproject.org/fedora-join-is-trying-a-new-peopl...
-
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/[e-mail]...

>  If we want to move forward on this, we should wait until the new
> FCAIC
>  is in place and give them the opportunity to weigh in. 
Hrm, if Infra and Fedora-Join are in agreement over this change of
responsibility and process, I think we're OK to proceed.  It has taken
three months to get this far and it has been discussed with Mindshare in
detail[1].


[1] https://pagure.io/mindshare/issue/147

-- 
Thanks,
Regards,
Ankur Sinha "FranciscoD" (He / Him / His) |
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Ankursinha
Time zone: Europe/London

[Ben Cotton]

On Tue, Oct 29, 2019 at 5:42 AM Ankur Sinha <sanjay.ankur(a)gmail.com&gt; wrote:
>  Is only editing the wiki a role nowadays? 
Potentially.

>  There is no community group
>  around wiki-editing, no team, no SIG. 
So?

>  Since our focus moved to docs, the
>  wiki has been deemed a scratch board for teams to use implying that one
>  would be a member of one of these teams already.  So, if someone wants
>  to only edit the wiki, they should ideally be pointed to editing/moving
>  the information to docs instead.
>  
I agree, that's the ideal case. But there are still a lot of things
that live in the wiki. Change proposals, elections nominations, QA
policies, talking points, screenshot libraries, common bugs, etc. Plus
the fact that we use it for scratch space means we need to give people
the ability to edit it for that purpose, even if they're not active in
ways that require a FAS group membership.

>  The most common case in which people request wikiedit access
> currently
>  appears to be to set up their user pages---hubs was supposed to host
>  user profiles and get rid of user pages on the wiki IIRC but that got
>  shelved, unfortunately.
>  
Which is, by itself, a good argument for keeping the group.

>  By retiring "wikiedit", we do not take away that role
> should someone
>  come looking for it. We're switching who handles it, and what FAS group
>  is used. Instead of infra doing it, Fedora Join does it, and instead of
>  using "wikiedit", we use the fedora-join FAS group where we provide
>  users with temporary membership---if at all required for whatever
>  purpose (not just wiki editing). The difference here would be that the
>  Fedora Join SIG members would speak to these people to see why the CLA+1
>  requirement cropped up in the first place.
>  
I have no objection to Fedora Join handling this. I think that's a big
benefit. But the temporary membership aspect is what concerns me. What
if someone just wants to have the ability to edit a few wiki pages?

>  Sure, what can we do to make it more explicit? We've spread the
> word
>  using the commblog and an e-mail to -devel announce already:
>  
It's not about communication, it's about agreeing that this form of
contribution is no longer one we'll account for.

>  Hrm, if Infra and Fedora-Join are in agreement over this change of
>  responsibility and process, I think we're OK to proceed.  It has taken
>  three months to get this far and it has been discussed with Mindshare in
>  detail[1].
>  
But it's not a technical decision, so whether infra is in agreement or
not is irrelevant. Why do we need to retire the group? Why not hand it
over to Join and let it exist as-is? Join can audit the group over
time and remove people who have membership in other groups, then they
can work with the people who don't and help them find a new home if
they want it. But I think the *existence* of this group is still
valid.

-- 
Ben Cotton
He / Him / His
Fedora Program Manager
Red Hat
TZ=America/Indiana/Indianapolis

[Ankur Sinha]

On Tue, Oct 29, 2019 10:42:49 -0400, Ben Cotton wrote:
>  On Tue, Oct 29, 2019 at 5:42 AM Ankur Sinha
> <sanjay.ankur(a)gmail.com&gt; wrote:
>  >
>  > Is only editing the wiki a role nowadays?
>  
>  Potentially.
>  
>  > There is no community group
>  > around wiki-editing, no team, no SIG.
>  
>  So? 
So who provides resources to audit/manage the wikiedit group?

>  > Since our focus moved to docs, the
>  > wiki has been deemed a scratch board for teams to use implying that one
>  > would be a member of one of these teams already.  So, if someone wants
>  > to only edit the wiki, they should ideally be pointed to editing/moving
>  > the information to docs instead.
>  >
>  I agree, that's the ideal case. But there are still a lot of things
>  that live in the wiki. Change proposals, elections nominations, QA
>  policies, talking points, screenshot libraries, common bugs, etc.  
All of these are related to various Fedora teams. None of these are
isolated.

>  Plus the fact that we use it for scratch space means we need to give
>  people the ability to edit it for that purpose, even if they're not
>  active in ways that require a FAS group membership. 
But scratch work related to something or the other that's happening
somewhere in Fedora. I'm yet to come across a team/sub team that does
not link to a FAS group in some way.

>  > The most common case in which people request wikiedit access
> currently
>  > appears to be to set up their user pages---hubs was supposed to host
>  > user profiles and get rid of user pages on the wiki IIRC but that got
>  > shelved, unfortunately.
>  >
>  Which is, by itself, a good argument for keeping the group. 
I agree that user pages are good to have, but I do not agree that
wikiedit should be used for this. CLA+1 was set intentionally as the
lowest possible bar to gain wiki-access. For newcomers, the new Fedora
Join process will hopefully remove the need for them to get into
wikiedit to gain wiki-access---they'll get CLA+1 by getting sponsored to
some team or the other.

>  > By retiring "wikiedit", we do not take away that role
> should someone
>  > come looking for it. We're switching who handles it, and what FAS group
>  > is used. Instead of infra doing it, Fedora Join does it, and instead of
>  > using "wikiedit", we use the fedora-join FAS group where we provide
>  > users with temporary membership---if at all required for whatever
>  > purpose (not just wiki editing). The difference here would be that the
>  > Fedora Join SIG members would speak to these people to see why the CLA+1
>  > requirement cropped up in the first place.
>  >
>  I have no objection to Fedora Join handling this. I think that's a big
>  benefit. But the temporary membership aspect is what concerns me. What
>  if someone just wants to have the ability to edit a few wiki pages? 
Then we ask them what it is that they're looking to edit on the wiki. If
its docs, we direct them to docs; if it's QA material, we help them get
familiar with the QA team and get approved there and so on.

>  > Sure, what can we do to make it more explicit? We've spread
> the word
>  > using the commblog and an e-mail to -devel announce already:
>  >
>  It's not about communication, it's about agreeing that this form of
>  contribution is no longer one we'll account for. 
I don't think I understand. What do you mean by "account for"? Is it
being "accounted for" now?


>  > Hrm, if Infra and Fedora-Join are in agreement over this change
> of
>  > responsibility and process, I think we're OK to proceed.  It has taken
>  > three months to get this far and it has been discussed with Mindshare in
>  > detail[1].
>  >
>  But it's not a technical decision, so whether infra is in agreement or
>  not is irrelevant. Why do we need to retire the group? Why not hand it
>  over to Join and let it exist as-is? Join can audit the group over
>  time and remove people who have membership in other groups, then they
>  can work with the people who don't and help them find a new home if
>  they want it.  

"Join can audit.." That's where it gets technical---where do the
resources to do the required work come from? Whether volunteers agree to
take on the task or not is not irrelevant.

Anyway, we went ahead and discussed this in the #fedora-join channel
earlier today. While we agree that wikiedit may be useful in principle
to provide access in a few scenarios, it's not related to helping
newcomers integrate with the community, which is the main goal/mission
of the Fedora Join SIG.  In fact, the wikiedit use case specifically
addresses people who need wiki access *without* having to join other
teams.

So, in its current form wikiedit does not fit the new plan that we are
working on, and Fedora Join will not currently take on the
responsibility of managing/auditing the wikiedit group as a result. As
the team grows, maybe we will revisit this, but at the moment we don't
have the resources.

To clarify, the temporary group membership that we've included in the
new plan to replace the wikiedit group was meant to do something
different. We would work on helping people get their CLA+1 through the
teams/SIGs that they become part of, thus negating the need for
temporary membership. Only if, in spite of this, the unlikely scenario
did crop up where access to resources via CLA+1 were required, we'd
provide temporary membership with the view that it would be undone once
the person had been sponsored to other team(s). The message would always
be that this is not the final stop; that they've got all of Fedora to
explore and work with.

>  But I think the *existence* of this group is still
>  valid. 
Sure, so we leave things as they are now as far as wikiedit is
concerned.

The Fedora Join process should help reduce the number of wikiedit
membership requests, but please feel free to direct folks to us directly
also.

-- 
Thanks,
Regards,
Ankur Sinha "FranciscoD" (He / Him / His) |
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Ankursinha
Time zone: Europe/London

[Stephen John Smoogen]

On Tue, 29 Oct 2019 at 14:37, Ankur Sinha <sanjay.ankur(a)gmail.com&gt; wrote:
>  
> > But I think the *existence* of this group is still
> > valid.
>  
> Sure, so we leave things as they are now as far as
wikiedit is
> concerned.
>  
> The Fedora Join process should help reduce the number of
wikiedit
> membership requests, but please feel free to direct folks to us directly
> also.
>  
To short cut some steps.. should we set you or someone else as the
admin for this group? You can either add people if ever needed.


>  --
>  Thanks,
>  Regards,
>  Ankur Sinha "FranciscoD" (He / Him / His) |
> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Ankursinha
>  Time zone: Europe/London
>  _______________________________________________
>  infrastructure mailing list -- infrastructure(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
>  To unsubscribe send an email to infrastructure-leave(a)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/[e-mail]...


-- 
Stephen J Smoogen.

[Ankur Sinha]

On Tue, Oct 29, 2019 14:51:04 -0400, Stephen John Smoogen wrote:
>  On Tue, 29 Oct 2019 at 14:37, Ankur Sinha
> <sanjay.ankur(a)gmail.com&gt; wrote:
>  >
>  
>  > > But I think the *existence* of this group is still
>  > > valid.
>  >
>  > Sure, so we leave things as they are now as far as wikiedit is
>  > concerned.
>  >
>  > The Fedora Join process should help reduce the number of wikiedit
>  > membership requests, but please feel free to direct folks to us directly
>  > also.
>  >
>  
>  To short cut some steps.. should we set you or someone else as the
>  admin for this group? You can either add people if ever needed. 
Sure, alciregi (Alessio[1]) and ankursinha (me[2]) are managing Join at
the moment.

If the plan works, we won't need to use the wikiedit group too much.
Fingers crossed :)


[1] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Alciregi
[2] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Ankursinha

-- 
Thanks,
Regards,
Ankur Sinha "FranciscoD" (He / Him / His) |
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Ankursinha
Time zone: Europe/London

[Stephen John Smoogen]

On Tue, 29 Oct 2019 at 16:16, Ankur Sinha <sanjay.ankur(a)gmail.com&gt; wrote:
>  On Tue, Oct 29, 2019 14:51:04 -0400, Stephen John Smoogen wrote:
>  > On Tue, 29 Oct 2019 at 14:37, Ankur Sinha <sanjay.ankur(a)gmail.com&gt; wrote:
>  > >
>  >
>  > > > But I think the *existence* of this group is still
>  > > > valid.
>  > >
>  > > Sure, so we leave things as they are now as far as wikiedit is
>  > > concerned.
>  > >
>  > > The Fedora Join process should help reduce the number of wikiedit
>  > > membership requests, but please feel free to direct folks to us directly
>  > > also.
>  > >
>  >
>  > To short cut some steps.. should we set you or someone else as the
>  > admin for this group? You can either add people if ever needed.
>
>  Sure, alciregi (Alessio[1]) and ankursinha (me[2]) are managing Join at
>  the moment.
>
>  If the plan works, we won't need to use the wikiedit group too much.
>  Fingers crossed :)
>
>
>  [1] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Alciregi
>  [2] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Ankursinha
>  
You and Alessio have been added as administrators. There are 233
people in the group

-- 
Stephen J Smoogen.

[Ben Cotton]

On Tue, Oct 29, 2019 at 2:38 PM Ankur Sinha <sanjay.ankur(a)gmail.com&gt; wrote:
>  Sure, so we leave things as they are now as far as wikiedit is
>  concerned.
>
>  The Fedora Join process should help reduce the number of wikiedit
>  membership requests, but please feel free to direct folks to us directly
>  also.
>  
Thank you. I'd be willing to help with auditing the wikiedit group, so
I shouldn't have worded it like "I'm asking you to eat this pizza you
didn't order." And I'm certainly not advocating adding new users to it
(except in rare cases), I *love* the new workflow you've come up with.
If managing the wikiedit group becomes a burden on your team, feel
free to throw it back at me.

-- 
Ben Cotton
He / Him / His
Fedora Program Manager
Red Hat
TZ=America/Indiana/Indianapolis

[Ankur Sinha]

On Wed, Oct 30, 2019 08:28:12 -0400, Ben Cotton wrote:
>  On Tue, Oct 29, 2019 at 2:38 PM Ankur Sinha
> <sanjay.ankur(a)gmail.com&gt; wrote:
>  >
>  > Sure, so we leave things as they are now as far as wikiedit is
>  > concerned.
>  >
>  > The Fedora Join process should help reduce the number of wikiedit
>  > membership requests, but please feel free to direct folks to us directly
>  > also.
>  >
>  Thank you. I'd be willing to help with auditing the wikiedit group, so
>  I shouldn't have worded it like "I'm asking you to eat this pizza you
>  didn't order." And I'm certainly not advocating adding new users to it
>  (except in rare cases), I *love* the new workflow you've come up with.
>  If managing the wikiedit group becomes a burden on your team, feel
>  free to throw it back at me. 
No worries :)

Sure---we're not going to actively manage it so it should be OK.

-- 
Thanks,
Regards,
Ankur Sinha "FranciscoD" (He / Him / His) |
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Ankursinha
Time zone: Europe/London

On Tue, 2019-10-29 at 16:36 -0400, Stephen John Smoogen wrote:
>  
>  There are 233 people in the group 
Are you sure?
I can count 118.
Maybe it is due to some privacy setting?

Thanks.
Ciao,
A.

[Stephen John Smoogen]

On Mon, 4 Nov 2019 at 11:04, <alciregi(a)gmail.com&gt; wrote:
>  On Tue, 2019-10-29 at 16:36 -0400, Stephen John Smoogen wrote:
>  >
>  > There are 233 people in the group
>
>  Are you sure?
>  I can count 118.
>  Maybe it is due to some privacy setting?
>  
I must have double counted.



-- 
Stephen J Smoogen.

Out of curiosity, here's some data about wikiedit FAS group.

118 members
4 administrators
4 sponsors

83 members aren't members of any other FAS group
11 are members of 1 additional FAS group
24 are members of more than 1 additional FAS group

74 members last_seen FAS value is dated 2019
44 members didn't login to FAS in 2019


From 2016 to 2018 membership approvals were 84

In 2019 there are 34 new memberships 
Of these new members, 22 aren't members of any other FAS group
3 members have 1 additional group membership
9 are members of 2 or more additional FAS groups 


Considering wikiedit members last seen in 2019
 
Total activities tracked in datagrepper since wikiedit membership
approval:
0 activities: 6 members
from 1 to 10 activities: 10 members
from 11 to 40 activities: 22 members
more than 40 activities: 36 members

Total activities in 2019:
0 activities: 4 members
from 1 to 10 activities: 25 members
from 11 to 40 activities: 22 members
more than 40 activities: 23 members

wiki activities since membership approval:
0 activities: 24 members
from 1 to 10 activities: 33 members
from 11 to 40 activities: 7 members
more than 40 activities: 10 members

wiki activities this year:
0 activities: 46 members
from 1 to 10: 18
from 11 to 40: 6
more than 40 activities: 4


Disclaimer: I'm not a data scientist :-)
The tool used to get such data can be found here: 
https://pagure.io/wikieditstats


Ciao,
A.

[Kevin Fenzi]

On Mon, Nov 04, 2019 at 11:16:17PM +0100, alciregi(a)gmail.com wrote:
>  Out of curiosity, here's some data about wikiedit FAS group.
....snip....
>  
>  Disclaimer: I'm not a data scientist :-)
>  The tool used to get such data can be found here: 
>  https://pagure.io/wikieditstats 
Cool. Some interesting stats there. Thanks for sharing them with us. 

kevin

[Ankur Sinha]

Hello,

I think we've managed to create a bit of confusion here, so I thought
I'd clarify it.

For cases where an individual requests wikiedit access only to edit the
wiki (as in the recent case of @abolgna[1]), will infra please continue
to give them the necessary access as before? Fedora-join only comes into
the picture if wikiedit access is requested as a way of joining the
community. (This wasn't the case here---they're explicitly looking to
edit the wiki only.)

The Fedora Join SIG does not have the resources to administer wikiedit
as well and we didn't take up this responsibility as a result[2].
@alciregi and I took on sponsor privileges for wikiedit only to
short-cut some steps[3]---so that we can add people to the group if they
come via the join-process without having to send them to infra, for
example (unlikely but not impossible).

In this specific case @alciregi provided them with the required
access, since we didn't want to bounce them back to infra. So, this one
is "closed: fixed".

[1] https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/issue/8388
[2]
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/[e-mail]...
[3]
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/[e-mail]...

-- 
Thanks,
Regards,
Ankur Sinha "FranciscoD" (He / Him / His) |
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Ankursinha
Time zone: Europe/London

[Stephen John Smoogen]

On Mon, 18 Nov 2019 at 05:08, Ankur Sinha <sanjay.ankur(a)gmail.com&gt; wrote:
>  Hello,
>
>  I think we've managed to create a bit of confusion here, so I thought
>  I'd clarify it.
>
>  For cases where an individual requests wikiedit access only to edit the
>  wiki (as in the recent case of @abolgna[1]), will infra please continue
>  to give them the necessary access as before? Fedora-join only comes into
>  the picture if wikiedit access is requested as a way of joining the
>  community. (This wasn't the case here---they're explicitly looking to
>  edit the wiki only.)
>
>  The Fedora Join SIG does not have the resources to administer wikiedit
>  as well and we didn't take up this responsibility as a result[2].
>  @alciregi and I took on sponsor privileges for wikiedit only to
>  short-cut some steps[3]---so that we can add people to the group if they
>  come via the join-process without having to send them to infra, for
>  example (unlikely but not impossible).
>  
Then there has been a lot of confusion because we also don't really
have the resources to administer wikiedit and thought this was what
this group was to help us with. I guess we need to start over here
because I don't know what the solution is.


>  In this specific case @alciregi provided them with the required
>  access, since we didn't want to bounce them back to infra. So, this one
>  is "closed: fixed".
>
>  [1] https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/issue/8388
>  [2]
> https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/[e-mail]...
>  [3]
> https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/[e-mail]...
>
>  --
>  Thanks,
>  Regards,
>  Ankur Sinha "FranciscoD" (He / Him / His) |
> https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Ankursinha
>  Time zone: Europe/London
>  _______________________________________________
>  infrastructure mailing list -- infrastructure(a)lists.fedoraproject.org
>  To unsubscribe send an email to infrastructure-leave(a)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/[e-mail]...


-- 
Stephen J Smoogen.

[Kevin Fenzi]

On Mon, Nov 18, 2019 at 08:21:57AM -0500, Stephen John Smoogen wrote:
>  On Mon, 18 Nov 2019 at 05:08, Ankur Sinha
> <sanjay.ankur(a)gmail.com&gt; wrote:
>  >
>  > Hello,
>  >
>  > I think we've managed to create a bit of confusion here, so I thought
>  > I'd clarify it.
>  >
>  > For cases where an individual requests wikiedit access only to edit the
>  > wiki (as in the recent case of @abolgna[1]), will infra please continue
>  > to give them the necessary access as before? Fedora-join only comes into
>  > the picture if wikiedit access is requested as a way of joining the
>  > community. (This wasn't the case here---they're explicitly looking to
>  > edit the wiki only.)
>  >
>  > The Fedora Join SIG does not have the resources to administer wikiedit
>  > as well and we didn't take up this responsibility as a result[2].
>  > @alciregi and I took on sponsor privileges for wikiedit only to
>  > short-cut some steps[3]---so that we can add people to the group if they
>  > come via the join-process without having to send them to infra, for
>  > example (unlikely but not impossible).
>  >
>  
>  Then there has been a lot of confusion because we also don't really
>  have the resources to administer wikiedit and thought this was what
>  this group was to help us with. I guess we need to start over here
>  because I don't know what the solution is. 
ok, that was not clear to me at least... if you want us to keep
processing wikiedit requests we can do that, but then that doesn't
really change much for us?

kevin

[Ankur Sinha]

On Mon, Nov 18, 2019 08:21:57 -0500, Stephen John Smoogen wrote:
>  Then there has been a lot of confusion because we also don't
> really
>  have the resources to administer wikiedit and thought this was what
>  this group was to help us with.  
The Join SIG's plan was to remove the wikiedit group altogether, not
take it on as an additional group to manage.

The Join SIG helps newbies join/integrate with the community. They get
sponsored to a team when they're ready and thereby gain the required
privileges.  So, the use case for wikiedit that Ben pointed
out---community members who are not new, not part of any Fedora teams
(and thus, FAS groups) but require wiki access for tasks---doesn't fit
with the Join SIG's ideas/target audience/plans/workflows.

So, if there are newbies who request wikiedit for user pages, for
example, please send them to us---we are the right people for them to
speak to. For other cases, we aren't.

I thought I'd said all this stuff in my previous replies. I'm sorry if I
was not clear enough.

>  I guess we need to start over here
>  because I don't know what the solution is. 
Maybe infra could give wikiedit away to the community like the other
web-apps?

-- 
Thanks,
Regards,
Ankur Sinha "FranciscoD" (He / Him / His) |
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Ankursinha
Time zone: Europe/London

[Ankur Sinha]

On Mon, Nov 18, 2019 08:21:51 -0800, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
>  <snip>
>  
>  ok, that was not clear to me at least... if you want us to keep
>  processing wikiedit requests we can do that, but then that doesn't
>  really change much for us? 
No, it doesn't (please see the end of this e-mail[1]). The idea was to
remove wikiedit altogether, but since there's a need to keep it around,
that plan got shelved.

[1]
https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/[e-mail]...

-- 
Thanks,
Regards,
Ankur Sinha "FranciscoD" (He / Him / His) |
https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Ankursinha
Time zone: Europe/London

[Kevin Fenzi]

On Mon, Nov 18, 2019 at 05:40:06PM +0000, Ankur Sinha wrote:
>  On Mon, Nov 18, 2019 08:21:51 -0800, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
>  > <snip>
>  > 
>  > ok, that was not clear to me at least... if you want us to keep
>  > processing wikiedit requests we can do that, but then that doesn't
>  > really change much for us?
>  
>  No, it doesn't (please see the end of this e-mail[1]). The idea was to
>  remove wikiedit altogether, but since there's a need to keep it around,
>  that plan got shelved. 
Ah, ok. I misread then. Sorry about that... 

we can keep doing the wikiedit requests that are just wiki and point
people who want to contribute more (Or don't know where they want to
contibute) to join sig. :) 

thanks for the clarification. 

kevin

[Ben Cotton]

On Mon, Nov 18, 2019 at 1:57 PM Kevin Fenzi <kevin(a)scrye.com&gt; wrote:
>  we can keep doing the wikiedit requests that are just wiki and point
>  people who want to contribute more (Or don't know where they want to
>  contibute) to join sig. :)
>  
As the person who argued in favor of keeping wikiedit, I'm happy to
own that group if it's a burden for others. I'm a sponsor now, which
is probably fine, but if someone wants to make me an admin and drop
their own privs, I'm okay with that too.


-- 
Ben Cotton
He / Him / His
Fedora Program Manager
Red Hat
TZ=America/Indiana/Indianapolis