On Thu, 2008-01-24 at 22:46 -0900, Jeff Spaleta wrote: > On Jan 8, 2008 12:53 PM, David Woodhouse <dwmw2@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > Perhaps one option would be for non-programmer packagers to team up with > > a programmer/sponsor to take on the task of package maintenance? Where > > currently a package has one 'owner', there would instead be two rôles -- > > a 'packager' and potentially a separate 'hacker'. Those wanting to > > package software which they can't fully maintain for themselves would > > have to recruit a programmer-type to sign up for the job with them. > > > I wanted to follow-up on this with a little strawman diagram of how I > would want to incorporate David's idea into a larger role-based team > concept.. where the SIGs are the main organizational structure. > > Take a look at this diagram of how I would like to see SIGs generally > structured in terms of team roles: > > http://fedorapeople.org/~jspaleta/role-based-sigs/sig-teams.png > > Generally speaking, I'd like to see Packaging SIG have people in place > for each of the 5 roles identified. The connections between those > roles in the diagram represent generally normal role interactions that > would be expected between team members in a SIG. > > Outside of that, there are Interaction Specialists who act as a > resource for all SIGs to deal with common tasks in certain areas. > I've populated the colored rectangles around the diagram with examples > of types of specialists for different tasks. David would fall into > the arch-guru or programming-language-guru category and would most > likely be called on to help maintainers and developers who make up a > SIG to help with specific problems. But on the other side of things, > artists and video experts would be resources for documenters and > user-helpers who wanted to create user facing materials like tours and > task howtos. > > In this diagram the colored role circles are things we could > internally develop some sort of baseline training and recruitment > program for. The colored specialist rectangles are things that would > be more difficult to provide training for internally..and we are > relying on expert skills that people have developed outside the > project. Okay well feature wrangler is the exception to the rule > here...but you get the idea. > > Thoughts? Initial reaction is +1^2. Good inspiration there. There was a post from Greg a while back that describes me: "Oh, right. I'm not actually an engineer."[1] So, any idea that helps us better help each other is a good thing. Also, I like circles and squares and diagrams. And rainbows. I'm particularly fond of rainbows. - Karsten [1] http://gregdek.livejournal.com/19843.html > -jef > > _______________________________________________ > fedora-advisory-board mailing list > fedora-advisory-board@xxxxxxxxxx > http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-advisory-board -- Karsten Wade, Developer Community Mgr. Dev Fu : http://developer.redhatmagazine.com Fedora : http://quaid.fedorapeople.org gpg key : AD0E0C41
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
_______________________________________________ fedora-advisory-board mailing list fedora-advisory-board@xxxxxxxxxx http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-advisory-board
