Late reply. Doesn't matter much, probably, since this topic has not seen more than a single reply so far anyway. I've read this mail a first time some days ago. Now I've read it once more, following a link from somewhere else. It is the type of message which creates a fascinating emptiness in my brain. It makes me ask myself: "So what? He [Bill] doesn't have the answers, but does he raise any clear questions?" I've thought about this on my bicycle, at 34 degrees Celsius. I don't give answers, because I still have only a fuzzy picture in my head. Hence I only throw in some comments. Since the Fedora Project had been announced and merged officially with the fedora.us people, I've seen repeated attempts at trying to make Fedora Extras grow faster, removing "artificial hurdles", being less selective about _who_ may contribute and _what_ may be contributed. I've seen blanket approvals of new contributors, usually lazy attempts at trying to fill the boat more quickly, making the existing "sponsors" wonder about their responsibilities and whether maybe they are taking their role too serious. Usually, this created more problems than it helped. Suddenly, contributors, who didn't have any sponsors assigned to themselves, showed up in need of hand-holding (some more, some less). At that point it gave the impression that we had reached a critical mass for a first time, since existing contributors needed to jump in and help out. And of course, the more help is needed inside FE, the more contributors are occupied with trying to help each-other (and keep the FE repositories in good shape) instead of being at the front door, where new contributors are waiting to enter. On Sat, 17 Jun 2006 01:39:03 -0400, Bill Nottingham wrote: > Let's look at some of our example projects. Don't take this the wrong way, > but I'm going to use Extras as an example. After all, we're touting it > as one of our most successful projects. > > First, on the Help Wanted page. It lists as required skills (emphasis mine): > > - RPM packaging > - General Linux OS knowledge > - Familiarity with Fedora Core as a user, sysadmin, and *developer* > ... > - Programming skills are helpful but *not required* > > Contradictions are fun. :) Even more funny (to me) is that I've found myself unable to quickly locate the page you refer to. Browsing the pages multiple times I arrive here: http://fedora.redhat.com/Contribute/ -> http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Extras/Contributors With quite some more time spent browsing the (IMO too many pages), I finally found a reference in the FAQ: http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/FAQ -> http://fedoraproject.org/wiki/HelpWanted One thing that bugs me when discovering this, is that a project instance like FESCO has not been involved in this section, which covers _requirements for Fedora Extras contributors_. Hello? IMO, this asks for even more restrictive access to public documentation pages like this as it could be _this_ page where potential contributors stop reading, because they believe they are not competent enough. We do have the possibility to create _links_ between pages. Hence it is beyond my comprehension why existing pages from Fedora Extras have not been linked. Surely documentation writers should not take over the recruiting for Fedora Extras. This is a case of over-ambitious filling of web pages with superfluous content. Excuse me. Less is more in this case. > If you go to see 'How to become an Extras contributor', you find an 18-step > process. Apparently it's 50% more complicated than controlling addictions. Would you mind going back in time to learn (or to imagine) what the process had looked like before this new step-by-step process has been created? Input and experience has lead to this process. I'm all for a tree-like Wiki structure, where _interested_ people can start at the top and climb down the tree the more they show interest in details about packaging guidelines and so on. Unfortunately, a good percentage of the existing contributors (and potential contributors) ask for such details. You see? We have those, who complain about the brevity of a Quick-Start guide, and those, who find that 18 small (!) steps are too much. > Included in this process are: > - 7 *other* documents that are described as should-read, > - 2 other things that are listed as useful to review > - 2 accounts that are required to be created > - One account that's required that isn't listed at all (wiki account) > - 3 mailing lists that are required > - 1 mailing list that's listed as optional Do you see any movement that the number of mailing-lists gets reduced? I don't. Instead, lists like fedora-devel-list and fedora-maintainers compete with each-other. To get announcements for test updates for _stable_ releases, Joe User must subscribe to a list about Test Releases. Further, I fail to see how it would ever be possible to contribute without staying in contact with the others at Fedora Extras through at least one mailing-list. So, what's wrong about highlighting a small selection of relevant mailing-lists? Nothing. You could point them to the full list of mailing-lists, and I assure, many readers would be turned off immediately. As a Fedora User _or_ Contributor, not only am I asked to create an account at bugzilla.redhat.com, there is an increasing trend among packagers that accounts at many upstream project web sites are needed to submit bug reports there instead. Requirements increase everywhere inside the Fedora Project. On top of that, a new ticketing system has been created, but not communicated to the various sub-projects. We should improve efficiency of communication inside the project, because that is where you lose contributors. > Now, if you're coming in, and want to contribute to Extras, is this an inviting > environment? Is it welcoming to those who may feel unsure of themselves, or > come from cultures where asking lots of questions is not the norm? > > Compare it to something like the Ambassadors project, which reads: > > The Fedora Project is always looking for representatives and participants for > upcoming Events. Fedora Ambassadors are are people like you and me, who go to > places where other Linux users and potential converts gather and tell them > about Fedora — the project and the distribution. You can be one too. > > Which one of these is more likely to garner contributors? Apples and oranges. A month ago on fedora-list-de we have had somebody who disagreed strongly with the requirements for Fedora Ambassadors. With a bit of fantasy, somebody can come up with a similarly small paragraph on the top FE Wiki page. Make it read like marketing. It won't get rid of the actual requirements for anybody, who wants to contribute and maintain packages. We cannot lie and hide the fact that a packager must know how to use cvs and various other tools. You can make it much more easy to sign up, "One-Click-Access". And then? Have you heard some contributors asking about a more detailed Welcome Mail? How short would you want to keep such a mail without linking to the increasingly complex Wiki? > Moreover, every time someone has a bad experience trying the first steps > to contribute, that consists of a lost opportunity. How many potential > contributors have gone away because they were intimidated by our process? How many existing contributors have dropped off because they found out that maintaining packages painstakingly requires more efforts than expected? > Because they were flamed, or told to go RTFM? How many potential contributors > are out there that we don't even know how to reach? How many existing contributors don't ask because they would find it embarrassing? How many, on the contrary, are happy about learning something new every day and use the opportunity to ask their sponsors? Communication is vital. Showing interest is vital. Mind you, this is about volunteers. Either there is interest or not. If you want more half-hearted contributions, reconsider opening up the "Infamous Dumping Ground for Poorly Maintained Packages"(TM). And no, I'm not in a bad mood. ;) _______________________________________________ fedora-advisory-board mailing list fedora-advisory-board@xxxxxxxxxx http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-advisory-board _______________________________________________ fedora-advisory-board-readonly mailing list fedora-advisory-board-readonly@xxxxxxxxxx http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-advisory-board-readonly