Let's re-start a discussion about role-based SIGs

On Wed, 2008-05-21 at 10:27 -0700, Karsten 'quaid' Wade wrote:
> On Mon, 2008-05-19 at 12:11 -0800, Jeff Spaleta wrote:
> > > Right, as in every other subproject, the key is finding enough process
> > > to make sure we can scale this effort meaningfully, without creating so
> > > much that people are bogged down to the point they can't do the work.
> > > Interestingly, I think the recent reorientation of the Docs Project[1]
> > > fits neatly into the role-based organization.
> >
> > I wish I could make it to fudcon to have a pizza and beer session with
> > SIG and subproject reps concerning this. There really isn't a lot
> > here in terms of mandates or policies. I don't even need all of
> > projects to get on board initially for this to be profitable. I just
> > need enough people to be willing to try to work this way. And if its
> > beneficial then I expect other groups to try the role based idea.
>
> My prediction -- you'll be surprised how many people will like the idea.
>
> As much as we'd love to see ya at FUDCon, I don't think this is a
> requirement for the role-based SIGs idea to move ahead.
>
> People are always interested in making less mess and more grokking from
> the chaos.

I'd like to think I'm helping in my own way to bring Jef's idea one step
closer to reality, by hooking up ("embedding") a few Docs people with
Will Woods and Jon Stanley for QA and Triage process documentation.
These folks, who are somewhat newer contributors, are in a GREAT
position to accurately judge how much needs to be documented from the
perspective of a new QA contributor. ("How do I do X?" --> becomes a
note to add more documentation on subject X.)

I intend to keep a watchful eye on this and help where I can as well.
In this particular case, I know that building this community out is
important to all the principals, and now they have some extra people
resources with which to do it.

I'd also like to get some of the Seneca students involved who are coming
into Fedora. I would bet software QA/QE in a volunteer community would
make a tasty thesis for some intrepid student out there....

--
Paul W. Frields http://paul.frields.org/
gpg fingerprint: 3DA6 A0AC 6D58 FEC4 0233 5906 ACDB C937 BD11 3717
http://redhat.com/ - - - - http://pfrields.fedorapeople.org/
irc.freenode.net: stickster @ #fedora-docs, #fedora-devel, #fredlug
_______________________________________________
fedora-advisory-board mailing list
fedora-advisory-board@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-advisory-board

Docs subProject is on-board:

"Governance, direction of project -- please read"
http://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-docs-list/2008-May/msg00126.html

... and ...

"FDSCo Meeting 2008-05-28 Summary"
http://www.redhat.com/archives/fedora-docs-list/2008-May/msg00125.html

Jeff, I think your scheme is just a natural progression from what has
been going on. I cannot imagine anyone objecting to formalizing it into
some processes and such, since everyone says that is FP's weakest
point.

- Karsten
--
Karsten Wade, Sr. Developer Community Mgr.
Dev Fu : http://developer.redhatmagazine.com
Fedora : http://quaid.fedorapeople.org
gpg key : AD0E0C41
_______________________________________________
fedora-advisory-board mailing list
fedora-advisory-board@redhat.com
http://www.redhat.com/mailman/listinfo/fedora-advisory-board