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@xxxxxxxxx> 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
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ infrastructure mailing list -- infrastructure@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to infrastructure-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx 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/infrastructure@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
