Hi,
+1 to this question.
If we learn that there are items where we are invited to the MediaWiki and some estimates how many e.g. developerdays we would need to finance so we know it is possible.
However, we should mind that most of the chapters are not really development houses and we are lacking experience in this area.
michał. 28 lipca 2013 5:41 Craig Franklin cfranklin@halonetwork.net napisał(a):
Hi Erik (and whomever from WMDE),
For the benefit of chapters that are interested in this space, can you offer any examples of projects that are of an appropriate size and type for a chapter to take on? I think that most chapters* would be willing to help out in the software development space if we got a bit of direction on how we could be the most useful.
Cheers, Craig Franklin
- Keeping in mind that my chapter probably wouldn't have the capacity to
start anything in this space for at least another twelve months.
On 27 July 2013 09:57, Erik Moeller erik@wikimedia.org wrote:
On Wed, Jul 24, 2013 at 2:39 PM, rupert THURNER rupert.thurner@gmail.com wrote:
If WMF is serious about letting development activities grow in other countries this might be taken into account in FDCs allocation policy.
For my part, I'm happy to offer feedback to the FDC on plans related to the development of engineering capacity in FDC-funded organizations. I'm sure Wikimedia Germany, too, would be happy to share its experiences growing the Wikidata development team. I'd love to find ways to bootstrap more engineering capacity across the movement, as so many of our shared challenges have a software engineering component. If any folks on-list want to touch base on these questions at Wikimania, drop me a note. :)
Erik
-- Erik Möller VP of Engineering and Product Development, Wikimedia Foundation
Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Wikimedia-l mailing list Wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikimedia-l, mailto:wikimedia-l-request@lists.wikimedia.org?subject=unsubscribe
Hi Erik (and whomever from WMDE),
For the benefit of chapters that are interested in this space, can you offer any examples of projects that are of an appropriate size and type for a chapter to take on? I think that most chapters* would be willing to help out in the software development space if we got a bit of direction on how we could be the most useful.
Cheers, Craig Franklin
Not exactly what you are asking for, but
http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Mentorship_programs/Possible_projects
are thought to be projects that an intern could develop in about three months. We use this list for Google Summer of Code and Outreach Program for Women. It *might* be also a source of inspiration for Individual Engagement Grants.
I don't see why the chapters couldn't consider this list as a source of inspiration for software projects they could sponsor. They don't even need to have the technical capacity in house: we can help finding the right mentors for each project and we can also help selecting the right developer(s) - like we do for GSoC / OPW.
Chapters "graduated" at this level could consider embarking in bigger software projects. Pulling out a Wikidata team (or even a Kiwix project) isn't trivial at all and I'm personally impressed by these success tech stories lead by chapters. We should have more! (or at least try) There is no lack of work to do.
Thanks for replying here.
Quim Gil, 23/08/2013 23:55:
Not exactly what you are asking for, but
http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Mentorship_programs/Possible_projects
are thought to be projects that an intern could develop in about three months. We use this list for Google Summer of Code and Outreach Program for Women. It *might* be also a source of inspiration for Individual Engagement Grants.
I don't see why the chapters couldn't consider this list as a source of inspiration for software projects they could sponsor.
Well, I see several possible reasons. 1) Some of them are definitely WMF-specific, like the bugzilla improvements. No reason for a chapter to even touch those. 2) Others rely heavily on WMF to be put in use, or interact/overlap heavily with current work by WMF. The list is very good because it provides a) proof of interest by WMF, b) a mentor who serves as contact with WMF to keep things on track and avoid clashes. However, several of those projects, if completed, could still sit on a dead end like many GSoC projects in the past. The WMF can afford that because some degree of failure in GSoC is part of the game and even a "failed" project is supposed to grow the developers community, but when you pick just a single project or two then as a chapter you just feel like wasting money. 3) In general, it's not obvious how to fit one such project in the plans/goals/strategy of a chapter. Projects benefiting the whole of Wikimedia projects (like e.g. VisualEditor or i18n do) have been declared to be in the WMF's scope rather than in the chapters'; that's been mentioned as a reason to kill the Toolserver, for instance. Typically, a chapter would be interested either because "its" language communities have a particular interest in something, or as a part of some other project of the chapter (Commons improvements are probably the easiest to fit in here).
They don't even need to have the technical capacity in house: we can help finding the right mentors for each project and we can also help selecting the right developer(s) - like we do for GSoC / OPW.
This is indeed helpful, however a chapter will still need some degree of technical competency to assess the project and its fitness to the chapter's goals, see (3).
Chapters "graduated" at this level could consider embarking in bigger software projects. Pulling out a Wikidata team (or even a Kiwix project) isn't trivial at all and I'm personally impressed by these success tech stories lead by chapters. We should have more! (or at least try) There is no lack of work to do.
Indeed. I offer myself as example of bad responsible for a small technical project by a chapter (WMIT) some years ago. We managed to help Kiwix a bit but we miserably failed with (Wikisource/Wikibooks) books management improvements: at some point I no longer had the time and mental strength to discuss and make decisions about the money the board had trusted me with; when I finally got the board to replace me, we failed to get the new responsible begin and restart/complete the job, till the board/assembly removed it from the annual budget.
Nemo
Let me skip the complex topic of decentralization of the WMF and let me focus on the quite simpler topic of chapters and other orgs assuming progressively more tech responsibilities:
On 08/24/2013 01:19 AM, Federico Leva (Nemo) wrote:
http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Mentorship_programs/Possible_projects
I don't see why the chapters couldn't consider this list as a source of inspiration for software projects they could sponsor.
Well, I see several possible reasons.
- Some of them are definitely WMF-specific, like the bugzilla
improvements. No reason for a chapter to even touch those.
office.wikimedia.org is WMF-specific. bugzilla.wikimedia.org is not. These projects list features that would benefit the whole community, not just the WMF.
Wikidata and Kiwix are mentioned as success stories of tech projects driven by chapters. Is Wikidata Germany-specific? Does Switzerland really need offine Wikipedia? No, these chapters decided to go beyond their strict duties and make a technical contribution just as useful to the rest of us.
- Others rely heavily on WMF to be put in use, or interact/overlap
heavily with current work by WMF. The list is very good because it provides a) proof of interest by WMF, b) a mentor who serves as contact with WMF to keep things on track and avoid clashes. However, several of those projects, if completed, could still sit on a dead end like many GSoC projects in the past.
From the 20 ongoing projects, all of them are generating code that has a place in the Wikimedia servers. This is no coincidence: we set strong filters during the selection process to avoid all these problems you are mentioning.
To anybody willing to take a tech project: just ask or share your plans in advance to make sure your contributions will be as useful for the community as you expect.
Typically, a chapter would be interested either because "its" language communities have a particular interest in something, or as a part of some other project of the chapter (Commons improvements are probably the easiest to fit in here).
Sure, I'm just trying to encourage chapters and other orgs to ask their communities about tech projects they would like to help developing. And to consider budget, grants, hackathons etc to complete those projects. If these orgs don't do this then any tech decentralization will be harder.
Quim Gil, 26/08/2013 20:02:
On 08/24/2013 01:19 AM, Federico Leva (Nemo) wrote:
http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Mentorship_programs/Possible_projects
I don't see why the chapters couldn't consider this list as a source of inspiration for software projects they could sponsor.
Well, I see several possible reasons.
- Some of them are definitely WMF-specific, like the bugzilla
improvements. No reason for a chapter to even touch those.
office.wikimedia.org is WMF-specific. bugzilla.wikimedia.org is not. These projects list features that would benefit the whole community, not just the WMF.
I didn't say bugzilla is WMF-specific, but maintaining and curating bugzilla is very clearly in the exclusive scope of WMF as of now. Even the most minuscule changes like adding a keyword (stupid example) are decided by WMF (for a reason).
Wikidata and Kiwix are mentioned as success stories of tech projects driven by chapters. Is Wikidata Germany-specific? Does Switzerland really need offine Wikipedia?
The answer to these questions is actually "yes" in part, but I agree we can ignore it.
No, these chapters decided to go beyond their strict duties and make a technical contribution just as useful to the rest of us.
It's not about will but about feasibility.
- Others rely heavily on WMF to be put in use, or interact/overlap
heavily with current work by WMF. The list is very good because it provides a) proof of interest by WMF, b) a mentor who serves as contact with WMF to keep things on track and avoid clashes. However, several of those projects, if completed, could still sit on a dead end like many GSoC projects in the past.
From the 20 ongoing projects, all of them are generating code that has a place in the Wikimedia servers. This is no coincidence: we set strong filters during the selection process to avoid all these problems you are mentioning.
You can't eliminate them, only reduce the risks. So this is only tangential to what I was saying (i.e. all the parts you cut out of your quote).
Nemo
To anybody willing to take a tech project: just ask or share your plans in advance to make sure your contributions will be as useful for the community as you expect.
Typically, a chapter would be interested either because "its" language communities have a particular interest in something, or as a part of some other project of the chapter (Commons improvements are probably the easiest to fit in here).
Sure, I'm just trying to encourage chapters and other orgs to ask their communities about tech projects they would like to help developing. And to consider budget, grants, hackathons etc to complete those projects. If these orgs don't do this then any tech decentralization will be harder.
wikimedia-l@lists.wikimedia.org