Hi Tajh,
On 3/30/23 09:18, Tajh Taylor wrote:
For quite some time now, we have experienced issues
with the Technical
Decision Making Process (TDMP). Volunteer contributors and staff have
asked if we are still operating the Technical Decision Forum (TDF, the
member body that participates in the TDMP). Communication about it from
the Foundation has been inconsistent, and interest from the volunteer
community in joining has been low. Some of our most senior engineers on
Foundation staff have expressed that the process is flawed, doesn’t
create room for discussion about the technical issues surrounding a
decision, and doesn’t ensure participation by all stakeholders who may
be affected by the decision. Suffice it to say, the current state of
affairs leaves many participants wanting more.
I'm glad to see this stated in the open, I think your summary is a
decent starting point of why the TDF never worked. I do think a retro or
post-mortem of the TDF from this perspective is needed.
From the talk page:
The intention of the retrospective is to understand
the pain points
and the areas to improve the current process.
What from the TDF is worth salvaging to the point that it makes sense to
iterate on top of? More importantly, what is the value in putting in
this work when we already have a pending Movement Strategy
recommendation to establish a Technology Council[1]? Surely that's a
better base to start from?
As much as I respect the people listed on the "Core team", I'm pretty
concerned that they're all WMF staff, given that we're talking about
performing a retro on a body that explicitly excluded volunteers for
most of its lifetime and as you said, weren't interested in joining once
that option was given to them.
[1]
<https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Movement_Strategy/Initiatives/Technology_Council>
Thanks,
-- Kunal / Legoktm