I just want to point out that this wasn't "handed down by a CTO", it was a RFC [1] that and was open for discussion to everyone and was discussed extensively (and the RFC changed because of these discussions, look at the history of the page), then had an IRC meeting that was also open to everyone, then had a "last call" period for raising any objections which was open to everyone too. That passed with no objection being raised and then it also got approved by the CTO.
I might be wrong, but if I understand the structure of TechCom correctly (correct me if I'm wrong), it's open and transparent, the CTO can veto changes (which hasn't happened so far), but it's not like a CTO would just implement a new policy without discussion. This process is more open and transparent than most companies and non-profits.
[1]: https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T216295 Best
On Sat, Mar 16, 2019 at 9:22 PM Yuri Astrakhan yuriastrakhan@gmail.com wrote:
I agree that while possibly made with good intentions, policy changes like these should go through dev community discussion + vote, not be handed down from a CTO. Wikipedia as a movement started that way, and many people participated in it because of its transparency and community-driven process. Just because now there is a large split between "community" and "WMF staff who gets +2 automatically", we should try to keep the original values.
On Sat, Mar 16, 2019 at 3:33 PM Zppix megadev44s.mail@gmail.com wrote:
Andre, from what im gathering from this thread thats not what I understand, so i redact the part of my last email about toolforge,
however
my point on this policy change should of been put to a community vote/consensus is valid.
-- Devin “Zppix” CCENT Volunteer Wikimedia Developer Africa Wikimedia Developers Member and Mentor Volunteer Mozilla Support Team Member (SUMO) Quora.com Partner Program Member enwp.org/User:Zppix **Note: I do not work for Wikimedia Foundation, or any of its chapters. I also do not work for Mozilla, or any of its projects. **
On Mar 16, 2019, at 1:13 PM, Andre Klapper aklapper@wikimedia.org
wrote:
On Sat, 2019-03-16 at 12:40 -0500, Zppix wrote: So your basically telling me, I can’t decide who gets the power to +2 on for example a toolforge tool I actively am the primary maintainer of? Instead it has to be requested. I do not disagree with a lot of the changes to technical policies, but with this change it seems to restrict ability to scale projects. I also do believe that this change should of be taken under RfC or some sort of consensus-gaining measure. I respect the intentions, but I absolutely think the change needs reverted then voted on by the technical community.
Did you read https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Gerrit/Privilege_policy ?
It says "For extensions (and other projects) not deployed to the Wikimedia cluster, the code review policy is up to the maintainer or author of the extension."
andre
Andre Klapper | Bugwrangler / Developer Advocate https://blogs.gnome.org/aklapper/
Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l