https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Engineering/2013-14_Goals#Wikimedia...
The Engineering Community Team has some draft goals for what we'd like to achieve in the next 12 months. We'll still be running Bugzilla, putting out the monthly report, running GSoC and OPW, and doing those other continuous tasks (as you can follow at https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Platform_Engineering#Engineering_Co... ). But what else should we be concentrating on? This is a draft of what we'd like to focus on, quarter by quarter.
Some highlights: * Getting more volunteers trained in writing automated tests, especially so that we can fix problems quicker in more Wikimedia functionality (including important gadgets) * Growing Tech Ambassadors membership, to improve two-way communication between developers and users * Training more volunteers in JavaScript and security-related development and code review, to improve bottlenecks
I welcome your comments here or on the talk page.
Hi Sumanah,
On Fri, Jun 28, 2013 at 07:39:19PM -0400, Sumana Harihareswara wrote:
https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Engineering/2013-14_Goals#Wikimedia...
The Engineering Community Team has some draft goals for what we'd like to achieve in the next 12 months. We'll still be running Bugzilla, putting out the monthly report, running GSoC and OPW, and doing those other continuous tasks (as you can follow at https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Platform_Engineering#Engineering_Co... ). But what else should we be concentrating on? This is a draft of what we'd like to focus on, quarter by quarter.
<snip>
I welcome your comments here or on the talk page.
Back in April, Quim made a proposal on this list for a plan to attract new contributors that included a "deeper restructuring of our community spaces", including a reshuffling/repurposing of wikitech/mediawiki.org.
I think the outcome of that discussion was to run an experiment and reevaluate, but I might have lost track -- the Wikitech contributors RFC[1] shows no real updates since April though.
A deeper restructuring sounds like goal material. Is this under consideration for the coming year?
Personally, I'd love to see some movement in the wikitech/mediawiki split, I think it becomes increasingly important the further we invest into projects such as Wikimedia Labs/Tool Labs and bridging the gap between operations and software development.
Thanks, Faidon
1: https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Requests_for_comment/Wikitech_contributors
On 06/29/2013 02:31 AM, Faidon Liambotis wrote:
Hi Sumanah,
On Fri, Jun 28, 2013 at 07:39:19PM -0400, Sumana Harihareswara wrote:
https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Engineering/2013-14_Goals#Wikimedia...
Back in April, Quim made a proposal on this list for a plan to attract new contributors that included a "deeper restructuring of our community spaces", including a reshuffling/repurposing of wikitech/mediawiki.org.
I think the outcome of that discussion was to run an experiment and reevaluate, but I might have lost track -- the Wikitech contributors RFC[1] shows no real updates since April though.
Thank you Faidon for bringing up that discussion. There were several outcomes out of it:
* Let's improve the main runways for new contributors but let's not reshuffle wikitech/mediawiki.org right now.
* Let's focus on the onboarding & editor engagement tools to onboard and engage technical contributors.
* Let's find specific audiences and areas to get new contributors right now.
https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Project:New_contributors#The_solution
This is reflected in several points of the plan shared by Sumana:
* Focus on the area of automated browser testing to bring a new breed of Wikimedia contributors.
* Keeping the focus on mentorship programs like OPW and GSoC.
* Fluent connection with two pools of potential contributors: the Wikimedia communities we serve (involving Tech Ambassadors) and the upstream FLOSS communities we depend on.
* Introduction of community metrics to analyze our contribution workflows, where are the good practices and the bottlenecks.
In addition to this, in my (draft!) personal goals I'm proposing
* To improve web pages and documentation for new contributors.
* To promote DIY tasks for volunteers.
* To promote and streamline the conversion path from Wikimedia user to tech contributor.
A deeper restructuring sounds like goal material. Is this under consideration for the coming year?
A lesson (at least for me) from that discussion is that, even when the community agrees in deep restructuring, this must happen through small steps.
Absolutely personal opinion:
The release management of MediaWiki is planned to change, while tools like Echo API and Flow are also in the pipeline. These factors might lead to pragmatic ad-hoc restructuring steps in a way that no big plan discussed in advance could.
On 07/01/2013 08:10 PM, Quim Gil wrote:
On 06/29/2013 02:31 AM, Faidon Liambotis wrote:
Hi Sumanah,
On Fri, Jun 28, 2013 at 07:39:19PM -0400, Sumana Harihareswara wrote:
https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Engineering/2013-14_Goals#Wikimedia...
Back in April, Quim made a proposal on this list for a plan to attract new contributors that included a "deeper restructuring of our community spaces", including a reshuffling/repurposing of wikitech/mediawiki.org.
I think the outcome of that discussion was to run an experiment and reevaluate, but I might have lost track -- the Wikitech contributors RFC[1] shows no real updates since April though.
Thank you Faidon for bringing up that discussion. There were several outcomes out of it:
- Let's improve the main runways for new contributors but let's not
reshuffle wikitech/mediawiki.org right now.
- Let's focus on the onboarding & editor engagement tools to onboard and
engage technical contributors.
- Let's find specific audiences and areas to get new contributors right now.
https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Project:New_contributors#The_solution
This is reflected in several points of the plan shared by Sumana:
- Focus on the area of automated browser testing to bring a new breed of
Wikimedia contributors.
Keeping the focus on mentorship programs like OPW and GSoC.
Fluent connection with two pools of potential contributors: the
Wikimedia communities we serve (involving Tech Ambassadors) and the upstream FLOSS communities we depend on.
- Introduction of community metrics to analyze our contribution
workflows, where are the good practices and the bottlenecks.
In addition to this, in my (draft!) personal goals I'm proposing
To improve web pages and documentation for new contributors.
To promote DIY tasks for volunteers.
To promote and streamline the conversion path from Wikimedia user to
tech contributor.
A deeper restructuring sounds like goal material. Is this under consideration for the coming year?
A lesson (at least for me) from that discussion is that, even when the community agrees in deep restructuring, this must happen through small steps.
Absolutely personal opinion:
The release management of MediaWiki is planned to change, while tools like Echo API and Flow are also in the pipeline. These factors might lead to pragmatic ad-hoc restructuring steps in a way that no big plan discussed in advance could.
Basically, I think Quim represented well what Engineering Community Team learned from the discussion about the new tech contributor funnel, and how we're using those lessons and ideas in our 2013-2014 goals. Thanks, Quim!
Faidon wrote:
Personally, I'd love to see some movement in the wikitech/mediawiki split, I think it becomes increasingly important the further we invest into projects such as Wikimedia Labs/Tool Labs and bridging the gap between operations and software development.
That's an good point, and I would like to hear from more people to understand how many people think "yes, this is a crucial thing that Engineering Community ought to work on in [time period]".
Silke, Coren, Ryan and I are tentatively planning on a Tool Labs doc sprint July 23-25. I think that, as we update and consolidate relevant documentation during that sprint, we'll better understand what specific "missing manual" or "oops, wrong wiki" problems are blocking people, and we'll better see where transclusion, merging, and other technical solutions can help.
Thank you for the feedback, Faidon!
On Sat, Jun 29, 2013 at 5:09 AM, Sumana Harihareswara sumanah@wikimedia.org wrote:
- Growing Tech Ambassadors membership, to improve two-way communication
between developers and users
Where is the overlap in goals and activities to achieving the goals when put in context of regional efforts like CIS/A2K in India (as an example)?
-- sankarshan mukhopadhyay https://twitter.com/#!/sankarshan
On Sat, Jun 29, 2013 at 3:09 PM, sankarshan foss.mailinglists@gmail.com wrote:
On Sat, Jun 29, 2013 at 5:09 AM, Sumana Harihareswara sumanah@wikimedia.org wrote:
- Growing Tech Ambassadors membership, to improve two-way communication
between developers and users
Where is the overlap in goals and activities to achieving the goals when put in context of regional efforts like CIS/A2K in India (as an example)?
And, my question was in context of http://cis-india.org/openness/resources/access-to-knowledge-work-plan and, the goals that you've mentioned.
-- sankarshan mukhopadhyay https://twitter.com/#!/sankarshan
On 06/29/2013 10:23 PM, sankarshan wrote:
On Sat, Jun 29, 2013 at 3:09 PM, sankarshan foss.mailinglists@gmail.com wrote:
On Sat, Jun 29, 2013 at 5:09 AM, Sumana Harihareswara sumanah@wikimedia.org wrote:
- Growing Tech Ambassadors membership, to improve two-way communication
between developers and users
Where is the overlap in goals and activities to achieving the goals when put in context of regional efforts like CIS/A2K in India (as an example)?
And, my question was in context of http://cis-india.org/openness/resources/access-to-knowledge-work-plan and, the goals that you've mentioned.
-- sankarshan mukhopadhyay https://twitter.com/#!/sankarshan
Sankarshan, thanks for the question, and my apologies on the delay in reply.
As I see it, there are two main ways that our group's goals interact with the efforts of other movement bodies and regional efforts: *capacity-building* and *helping fulfill specific aims*.
We all want to improve the capacity of the movement as a whole to understand technical questions, contribute requests for features and bugfixes, translate among languages and between geekspeak and accessible language, and so on. So, for instance, we might ask CIS and other movement bodies whether the weekly "Tech News" summary https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Tech/News is useful to them, ask them how it could be made more useful, and so on. I also hope that the Wikimedia Chapters Association will be helpful in this kind of feedback and "signal-boosting." Guillaume Paumier has been working on that kind of relationship-building and community-building, and will be picking that up more once the VE rollout stops requiring so much of his attention. :)
Second: ECT is available to help when individuals or communities are trying to figure out how to fulfill specific desires for functionality. Andre Klapper as bug wrangler is a key point of contact here, and has nurtured two-way communication between developers and users through presence in Village Pumps and so on. In the case of A2K I presume we'd be less needed because I think A2K's technical needs fall mostly within the Language team's remit, and they have their own dedicated Outreach Coordinator, Runa Bhattacharjee. But our continuing availability in bug management is one of our four main activities: https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Platform_Engineering#Engineering_Co... And when any of us hear of a Wikimedia community needing some technical assistance, we try to connect them with technologists who can help.
While ECT doesn't want to be unnecessarily duplicating any efforts of regional or thematic entities such as CIS/A2K, I'm sure sometimes we'll overlap or work together on similar aims. But as of right now, ECT does not have any specific plans to do so in the next year -- except that of course we'll help chapters with running the spring hackathon and the Wikimania developer days.
I hope that helps! Thanks again.
wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org