-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 8
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Initial Website working group proposal #10
base: main
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Conversation
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Thank you for giving this a go @ronnzw! I can’t review this fully now but:
- It’s really cool to see this happen 😎
- You’ve marked this as a draft PR, are you already looking for reviews or not?
- Please see Initial proposal for social media working group. #6 for an example of the process in action
@thibaudcolas agreed to take this to the board for approval as per the conversation
I’ll only be able to take this to the board once the proposal is completed and there’s a sense it’s "approved enough" here in the pull request. The next opportunity for a vote is the February 8th board meeting, in about 3 weeks – I think it’d be useful for you to decide whether you want to try to make that date or not. If so, please get your proposal completed and informally approved by the group’s proposed members at least 3-5 days ahead of that date so I can raise this with the board and they can review ahead of the meeting.
Could you:
- Fill in all TBA sections, even if just with draft information
- Think of how you want to coordinate with members to pick a chair and co-chair
I didn't have visibility of the Ops-Team and their responsibilities but we might need to add the team as members, @thibaudcolas perhaps you can help
I’ve raised the idea of this group (shared #2) with the Ops team on January 4th. I see we have two Ops team members in discussions on #2. So I think this will be something they can advise on, and I wouldn’t presume their involvement with the WG otherwise. We can ask them for review perhaps, once the proposal has more details.
TBA | ||
|
||
## Comms | ||
- A mailing list that we'll create, `[email protected]` |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Could you explain why you’re proposing a mailing list? They tend to run slow in my experience and are prone to spam. Django has a Discord server where we could have a private channel. The DSF has a Slack workspace. Could we use either of those?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Well this is open to discussion, maintainers can decided where they want comms to be. I just remembered that l got involved on the site through the DSF individual members mailing list so i just assumed.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
IMO, it would be better to use Django discord or DSF slack, discussion would be easier than email.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Is there a DSF slack?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I see we now have both the Slack channel and a mailing list. @ronnzw I think you need to define how each of those would be used, or if it’s open to discussion then explicitly write it here.
Keep in mind the more clear-cut the group charter is, the easier it is for people to consider joining and for the board to review. So if discussions need to happen, now is the best time to raise this question with interested members.
@jcjudkins yes, the DSF has a Slack Workspace for internal matters. Largely this has been used for paid employees, the board of directors, and a few working groups now.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
IMHO slack works fine for the working group. Mailing list can be for discussion among larger audience.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
@ronnzw I think this one is the only missing update from your part according Thibaud's message
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I see "DSF slack" is now there so I’d just recommend removing the point about the mailing list and that’s it :)
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Is everyone happy with me removing the mailing list? Despite a mailing list being included in the WG guidelines?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I can see a mailing list being useful as a way of making announcements and interacting with the wider audience. But if we feel that might not be as necessary for Website WG, then removing the point about mailing list makes sense.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
This all looks super good, thanks for getting it started!
active/website.md
Outdated
Members join the group for a 2 year term. At the end of this term, they need to opt into staying involved to keep being | ||
a member of the group. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
This is an interesting idea, I hadn't seen it before! What was the reasoning here? Is this something that maybe is a good enough idea we should adopt more broadly?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
As time goes on people get new commitments and it's not always easy to give feedback on their intentions, especially for people that contribute on multiple projects. Not sure if it applies to all working groups.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Could we have a shorter term? 2 years feels like a long time to me, if people don’t want to be involved anymore it’d be better for them to be able to head off after 6-12 months.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
i feel two years is ample time for this type of groups, maybe we can add that individuals can leave at anytime. The idea here is not to keep individuals that aren't interested in the group anymore but haven't found time to notify the team. This is not to stop members from leaving the group.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I also think we could have shorter terms.
One general note for everyone to be aware of: 20tab has been working on some research towards a potential refresh/refactor/redesign/re-something of the website, so they should, in some way, be included/consulted here -- let's avoid duplicating work. @cgl has been leading that work, she might be able to say more. |
Co-authored-by: Thibaud Colas <[email protected]>
Co-authored-by: Thibaud Colas <[email protected]>
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Thank you @ronnzw for your work on the proposal, I add some comments, happy to have any feedback
TBA | ||
|
||
## Comms | ||
- A mailing list that we'll create, `[email protected]` |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
IMO, it would be better to use Django discord or DSF slack, discussion would be easier than email.
Hi @ronnzw, just wanted to follow up on my initial message:
The board meeting is now in 2 weeks, so if you want this to be added to the agenda for that meeting, I’d recommend getting this proposal finished and informally approved by group participants by the end of January. It’s also completely fine if this proposal needs more time – after February 8th, the next board meeting is on the 14th of March. Let us know what you think. |
Co-authored-by: Sarah Abderemane <[email protected]>
Co-authored-by: Thibaud Colas <[email protected]>
Thanks for the reminder @thibaudcolas. l would prefer to get this done ASAP(meaning February 8th). Any ideas of how l can get this approved by group participants? Is it just getting their feedback on the issue: #2 ? |
@ronnzw yes. I would recommend getting at least "looks good to me" feedback from everyone who you added to the list of members, and you’ll also need to identify a Chair and Co-Chair by coordinating with those participants. |
Members must have interest in Django and should be able to work with Django. Most importantly members must be willing to adhere to Django's [Code of Conduct](https://www.djangoproject.com/conduct/) . Members must be well versed with the process of contributing to **djangoproject.com** or at least willing to be guide. We welcome all experience levels, we also welcome first time contributors. | ||
|
||
### How do people who want to join sign up / volunteer / express interest? | ||
Individuals can express interest by emailing to the working group mailing list at `[email protected]` |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Could we set up a Google Form instead? From my experience with DSF mailing lists, it’s 99% spam that we receive on those emails.
It’d be nice for you to define here what kind of information people should provide when applying, rather than just expect applicants will figure it out.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
@django/djangoproject-com-maintainters what questions must we ask if we are to build the form?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
To be a part of this group, I think there should be a criterion to be a contributor to any project within the Django organization OR a member of DSF. I think then it makes sense to be part of the working group. Thoughts?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I’d recommend "has to be a DSF member" as this is a clearly-defined status.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I second the suggestion to be a DSF member to join.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I agree with "has to be a DSF member"
active/website.md
Outdated
Members join the group for a 2 year term. At the end of this term, they need to opt into staying involved to keep being | ||
a member of the group. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Could we have a shorter term? 2 years feels like a long time to me, if people don’t want to be involved anymore it’d be better for them to be able to head off after 6-12 months.
TBA | ||
|
||
## Comms | ||
- A mailing list that we'll create, `[email protected]` |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I see we now have both the Slack channel and a mailing list. @ronnzw I think you need to define how each of those would be used, or if it’s open to discussion then explicitly write it here.
Keep in mind the more clear-cut the group charter is, the easier it is for people to consider joining and for the board to review. So if discussions need to happen, now is the best time to raise this question with interested members.
@jcjudkins yes, the DSF has a Slack Workspace for internal matters. Largely this has been used for paid employees, the board of directors, and a few working groups now.
Co-authored-by: Thibaud Colas <[email protected]>
Co-authored-by: Thibaud Colas <[email protected]>
Co-authored-by: Thibaud Colas <[email protected]>
active/website.md
Outdated
Members join the group for a 2 year term. At the end of this term, they need to opt into staying involved to keep being | ||
a member of the group. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I also think we could have shorter terms.
Co-authored-by: Thibaud Colas <[email protected]>
Co-authored-by: Thibaud Colas <[email protected]>
@ronnzw from private discussions, @cgl has volunteered to be the group’s board liaison. You can add @sabderemane and I as regular members. Please liaise with @cgl as far as when this is ready for the board to review per the proposal process. The board meeting is in 7 days, so my personal recommendation would be to have the proposal completed at least by next Monday. To pick the group’s Chair and Co-Chair, you could organise an online form where people who are interested in joining the group submit some information / preferences about how the group runs. This is what happened for #6. So for example you could have the following questions:
Once you’ve collected everyone’s answers, you could organise a vote to determine who would be chair/co-chair. |
I 'd like to see some details on turnover too. What is the desired team size and how people drop from the team? |
Co-authored-by: Çağıl Uluşahin <[email protected]>
@thibaudcolas we will only be able to create the form once the wg is setup because we will need to attach the form to a specific wg email. For #6 my understanding is that the form is not there as yet, i think for the same reason. Also the guide clearly mention that the information can be updated at a later stage. |
From conservations on slack it seems like between 7 - 9 members is the proposed size. Do you have problems with this number @cgl @jacobian @thibaudcolas @CuriousLearner @sabderemane |
@ronnzw we had enough people interested in this at DjangoCon Europe 2024 to have a good discussion about the website. Based on those discussions, we have the following people interested in stepping up to run this group:
Could you update the proposal accordingly? Or otherwise I can take over your draft and address remaining feedback so we can move forward. cc also @bmispelon who was around during those discussions, and who we tasked with producing documentation on the site’s infrastructure ahead of the working group getting started. |
Adding chair, co-chair and Board liason
Sorry folks for the delay. I missed this reply. I have updated accordingly. @sabderemane @thibaudcolas |
@jacobian I'm answering late but @pauloxnet has followed the research (internally) and he is part of the members of the working group. I have also been involved on the results of the research. I believe I would be still able to ask any relevant details if necessary to @cgl even if she is not part of the working group 😄 |
Removing Sarah from other members Co-authored-by: Sarah Abderemane <[email protected]>
Based on the conversation on issue #2. I have created the initial proposal for the website working group.