On Fri, 02 Dec 2011 19:24:15 -0800
warren <warren(a)fedoraos.org> wrote:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
Kevin,
Here's where I'm currently at (and I will try to make it as crystal
clear as possible) before we even go any further.
1. This is a large undertaking, not a one man task and definitely not
something only I see. It's *going* to ruffle feathers because things
*will* change if this path is taken. You know as well as I do that
change is most often not well accepted, regardless of intent or need.
Agreed. People like status quo. Hopefully we can look beyond that
though and see things that would help improve.
I do however agree that everything should be put to a vote, each
item
clearly stated, understood and voted for in a peer-viewable and
organized manner. i.e. not hidden, obfuscated or obscured in any way.
I'm not convinced voting is the way to go. I prefer reaching some kind
of consensus with a rough majority. With voting you get into: Who can
vote, how long do they need to consider items, what items can be put up
for a vote by whom, should votes be public or private, etc.
I would like to think that we could craft items such that at least a
rough majority of people would see the advantage in doing
them/switching to them.
2. You seem to be the only with with enough interest to even reply,
Well, give it time. Some folks are busy... I'd say we should also
discuss this next week at the sig meeting as well. Perhaps in IRC some
folks who can't be bothered to subscribe here would chime in.
save Thomasj who misread, misinterpreted and simply fired back
negatively based on who I am, and not the content or context of the
original email to this thread without the benefit of doubt or
clarification that he understood what he thought he did. Granted, I
should not have replied at all to him based on that alone. It seems we
were both ignorant and still have work to do.
3. There are some issues with both
FedoraProject.org and
FedoraUnity.org pertaining directly to #fedora* IRC channels (I'll be
reading the links you sent me later this evening, however I think I
may have been the original author of at least one of them although
Sonar_Guy posted it on my behalf).
Yes, you wrote up at least the initial version of what became the faq I
think. :) Thanks!
a. FedoraProject - Who is in control of #fedora* it's
policies,
procedures and direction?
My understanding (and hopefully someone will correct me if I am wrong)
is that #fedora* on freenode is a official "group". meaning the
policies at:
http://freenode.net/group_registration.shtml
Apply. So, ultimately, the Fedora group contact has control. In
practice I think the Board would be the ultimate aribiter and they seem
quite happy to allow this SIG to organize and setup policies and
process for #fedora as they see fit. For other #fedora* channels, such
policies (if any) are governed by the operators for those channels.
b. FedoraUnity - Sadly, this project/group has never been well
organized in any sane or official fashion, has only one person in
control of the domains / structure & organization of content /
top-level website CMS configuration which has caused friction between
many (who I will not name but let them make their own statements), is
not an official part of the FedoraProject and therefore can do
"whatever" without any direct oversight or consequence by the
FedoraProject. I've heard before on multiple occasions "No one can
make any top level changes because it's been so highly customized none
of us even know where to begin." Which I've seen myself having paid
the hosting bill for a few years and helping manage aspects of the
Zope/Plone website which is now horribly out of date.
I think this is beyond the scope of this list/group.
4. The "good ol' boy" club attitude, looking the other
way at bad
behavior simply based on who offender is, what feet might be stepped
on, who might be offended, etc rather than the actual behavior itself
and whether it's acceptable. People concerned with maintaining power,
driving the direction of things or stunting changes simply to control
them have questionable intentions in my opinion. It should not matter
if it's a channel op or someone who's just come in for the first time.
Yes, agreed.
5. Anyone not currently active on such a regular basis as required
by
the task they are in control of should be required to hand over the
reigns to someone who is active and qualified for the task. You don't
take on tasks or responsibilities that require ongoing attention then
neglect or abandon them and perform them whenever it suits your fancy.
This goes for everyone from ops to website maintainers, program
coordinators, etc, really any job that requires regular attention.
This is how things fall this badly into disrepair in the first place.
Also agreed, however: This is a volunteer group. Peoples time
commitment varies as their other dayjob or life presses in. Also, some
tasks are not easy to define. To be an operator should someone police
the channel for 20 hours a week? 5? 1? 10min? And would they 'clock in'
or how do you keep track?
If you are unable to help out in the channel at all for 2 weeks, but
then can help out a lot the next, should you have been removed?
I think this sort of thing works much more when there are specific
deliverables: You must send a TPS report every friday or we fire you.
Instead of: you must help out as much as you are able to.
6. As for dealing with users posting outdated, false, misleading or
outright bad info, this is why I propose a unified help front that is
100% in control of the FedoraProject. Sending people to the
FedoraProject Wiki for one thing, FedoraSolved for another,
FedoraForum for yet another.. It's confusing and shows discontinuity
to the new and existing users whether they realize it consciously or
subconsciously. If there was a unified front and the channel policy
was only to send people to these help resources it would flow much
more smoothly. Please see #wordpress
wordpress.org and/or talk to
Freenode IRC operator Sivel for examples on how this might be
accomplished.
Well, I think this is again good in principal... but what if there is a
great other resource not on those sites that would really help the
user? Ignore it and tell them we have no info?
Again, I have lots of valid ideas and possible solutions for much
of
the above but yelling in an empty auditorium won't get anyone
anywhere. If Fedora is to be the "best" in its product offering,
support and general appeal then the work to this end never stops. The
above items are clear indications to me and others in the community
where change is badly needed. It's certainly possible, the only real
question is if anyone else is willing to do the heavy lifting.
Sure, lets see if others chime in...
kevin