Bugmeister opening at Wikimedia Foundation

List overview All Threads
Download

newer

older

New CodeReview changes live!

New committers

Rob Lanphier

7 Oct 2010 7 Oct '10

12:04 a.m.

Hi everyone, I'd like to make everyone aware of this new open position: http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Job_openings/Bugmeister The goal for the person hired to this position is to sift through the many, many bugs we have in Bugzilla, and surface the ones that are most important for everyone to focus on. We're looking for someone who understands our editing community and developer community, and isn't intimidated by Bugzilla or its trappings. However, we're *not* looking for someone with 10+ years of development experience. We think this is a really good entry-level position for someone who is eager to work with Wikimedia Foundation and is interested in the technical problems, but isn't (yet) suited to be a developer or other more technical role. This position represents a great opportunity for someone interested in learning the ropes here. That said, we want to make sure we hire someone who is going to stick with it for a little while, rather than get bored after a month or two and wander off to do something else. We imagine this person is going to be responsible for running community triage discussions, updating fields in Bugzilla, helping update our bug filing documentation, and helping members from our editing community file quality bug reports. We want someone who really wants to do a fantastic job with this for a year or two before moving on to other roles. If you're interested, please apply! (and let me know that you did) If you're someone who hangs around on this mailing list, IRC, etc, please make sure to point that out in your cover letter, along with the id you use around these parts. Rob

Show replies by date

MZMcBride

7 Oct 7 Oct

12:38 a.m.

Rob Lanphier wrote:

...

I'd like to make everyone aware of this new open position: http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Job_openings/Bugmeister

I edited that page yesterday. Two parts were unclear to me, though: Is the position intended to be full-time? And are local candidates really preferred? MZMcBride

Rob Lanphier

12:56 a.m.

On Wed, Oct 6, 2010 at 3:38 PM, MZMcBride <z(a)mzmcbride.com> wrote:

...

Rob Lanphier wrote:

I'd like to make everyone aware of this new open position: http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Job_openings/Bugmeister

I edited that page yesterday. Two parts were unclear to me, though: Is the position intended to be full-time?

Yup.

...

And are local candidates really preferred?

All other things being equal, then having someone in the SF office would be preferred to someone working remotely. For an entry-level job like this, it's pretty tough to learn the ropes of the job and also learn everything necessary to be successful outside the main office. For a remote candidate to be considered, they'd pretty much have to already be part of the community and have demonstrated that they can do the job. Rob

MZMcBride

8 Oct 8 Oct

5:30 a.m.

Rob Lanphier wrote:

...

On Wed, Oct 6, 2010 at 3:38 PM, MZMcBride <z(a)mzmcbride.com> wrote:

Rob Lanphier wrote:

I'd like to make everyone aware of this new open position: http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Job_openings/Bugmeister

Is the position intended to be full-time?

Yup.

Given that Wikimedia already employs a number of contractors who don't work full-time, I think the fact that this position would be full-time is really odd. MZMcBride

Ryan Lane

7:37 a.m.

...

Given that Wikimedia already employs a number of contractors who don't work full-time, I think the fact that this position would be full-time is really odd.

It's in the strategic plan: http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/2010-2011_Annual_Plan_Questions_and_Ans… If you'd like to discuss this, I think the strategy wiki is the right spot. Not wikitech-l. Respectfully, Ryan Lane

MZMcBride

7:48 a.m.

Ryan Lane wrote:

...

Given that Wikimedia already employs a number of contractors who don't work full-time, I think the fact that this position would be full-time is really odd.

It's in the strategic plan:

http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/2010-2011_Annual_Plan_Questions_and_Ans… I don't see how the link you provided addresses the post you were replying to at all.

...

If you'd like to discuss this, I think the strategy wiki is the right spot. Not wikitech-l.

It's okay to advertise the position on wikitech-l, but not discuss it on wikitech-l? Okay. The strategy wiki is pretty much dead, so I guess I'll just move on. MZMcBride

Roan Kattouw

9:14 a.m.

2010/10/8 MZMcBride <z(a)mzmcbride.com>om>:

...

I don't see how the link you provided addresses the post you were replying to at all.

I think Ryan meant that the hiring a (full-time) Bugmeister was in the annual plan. Roan Kattouw (Catrope)

Ryan Lane

5:14 p.m.

...

It's in the strategic plan:

http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/2010-2011_Annual_Plan_Questions_and_Ans… I don't see how the link you provided addresses the post you were replying to at all.

As Roan pointed out, I was telling you that a full time Bugmeister was in the annual plan, if you had bothered to click the link, and searched for "Bugmeister".

...

If you'd like to discuss this, I think the strategy wiki is the right spot. Not wikitech-l.

It's okay to advertise the position on wikitech-l, but not discuss it on wikitech-l? Okay. The strategy wiki is pretty much dead, so I guess I'll just move on.

Wikitech-l is for technical discussions. I'm not saying you *need* to discuss this on strategy wiki, but this isn't this right place for it. Maybe foundation-l? Let's keep this list on topic. - Ryan

Chad

5:31 p.m.

I don't think its really that off topic, we've certainly done worse. Plus, foundation-l is useless. -Chad On Oct 8, 2010 11:15 AM, "Ryan Lane" <rlane32(a)gmail.com> wrote:

...

It's in the strategic plan:

http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/2010-2011_Annual_Plan_Que...

As Roan pointed out, I was telling you that a full time Bugmeister was in the annual plan, if you had bothered to click the link, and searched for "Bugmeister".

...

If you'd like to discuss this, I think the strategy wiki is the right spot. Not wikitech-l.

...

Wikitech-l is for technical discussions. I'm not saying you *need* to discuss this on strategy wiki, but this isn't this right place for it. Maybe foundation-l? Let's keep this list on topic. - Ryan _______________________________________________ Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l(a)lists.wikimedia....

MZMcBride

11:58 p.m.

Ryan Lane wrote:

...

>> It's in the strategic plan: >>

http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/2010-2011_Annual_Plan_Questions_and_Ans…

...

I don't see how the link you provided addresses the post you were replying to at all.

As Roan pointed out, I was telling you that a full time Bugmeister was in the annual plan, if you had bothered to click the link, and searched for "Bugmeister".

Please don't be snide and wrong at the same time. Pick one. I don't see anything in that link (or in the related PDF) about a Bugmeister position being full-time. (Though feel free to quote a specific section if you think I've missed something.) As I said earlier, it's pretty common for Wikimedia to hire folks on a non-full-time basis[1] (especially in tech roles), which is why I found it odd that this particular position is intended to be full-time. Aryeh Gregor wrote:

...

On Thu, Oct 7, 2010 at 11:30 PM, MZMcBride <z(a)mzmcbride.com> wrote:

Given that Wikimedia already employs a number of contractors who don't work full-time, I think the fact that this position would be full-time is really odd.

I think a full-time position is really needed here. There are lots of bugs filed, and it's not trivial to triage them, try to extract more information from users, assign them to the right people, and make sure those people fix them. Plus, the bugmeister could actually fix some of the bugs in their spare time. Plenty of work for a full-time position.

...

From discussions with some of the people involved in creating this position,

it seems that Wikimedia is specifically looking for someone who _isn't_ a (PHP) developer because that type of person would want to fix these bugs themselves and there's a serious concern that a developer would very likely quickly get bored with the job after a few weeks. That's my understanding, at least. MZMcBride [1] http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Foundation_contractors

Trevor Parscal

9 Oct 9 Oct

12:16 a.m.

On 10/8/10 2:58 PM, MZMcBride wrote:

...

Ryan Lane wrote:

>> It's in the strategic plan: >>

http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/2010-2011_Annual_Plan_Questions_and_Ans…

I don't see how the link you provided addresses the post you were replying to at all.

As Roan pointed out, I was telling you that a full time Bugmeister was in the annual plan, if you had bothered to click the link, and searched for "Bugmeister".

I don't see anything that specifically says something about full-time either, but all of that aside, RobLa gave you a response within 20 minutes of you asking your original question: "is this really full-time local?". Your disagreement that the open Bugmeister position should be full-time and local has been well noted. Let's move along please. - Trevor

...

Aryeh Gregor wrote:

On Thu, Oct 7, 2010 at 11:30 PM, MZMcBride<z(a)mzmcbride.com> wrote:

Given that Wikimedia already employs a number of contractors who don't work full-time, I think the fact that this position would be full-time is really odd.

Personally, I can't see it taking more than a few hours each week (and I say that as someone who's done a fair bit of bug triaging, assigning, and cleanup in this particular tracker). Though I suppose it's likely that the scope of the role would expand over time past Bugzilla. From discussions with some of the people involved in creating this position, it seems that Wikimedia is specifically looking for someone who _isn't_ a (PHP) developer because that type of person would want to fix these bugs themselves and there's a serious concern that a developer would very likely quickly get bored with the job after a few weeks. That's my understanding, at least. MZMcBride [1] http://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Wikimedia_Foundation_contractors _______________________________________________ Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l

Gerard Meijssen

8 Oct 8 Oct

1:30 p.m.

Hoi, It is not that odd when you consider the Herculean job that is awaiting the bugmeister. Thanks, Gerard PS there is no stream running nearby that can be used to clean out the stables On 8 October 2010 05:30, MZMcBride <z(a)mzmcbride.com> wrote:

...

Rob Lanphier wrote:

On Wed, Oct 6, 2010 at 3:38 PM, MZMcBride <z(a)mzmcbride.com> wrote:

Rob Lanphier wrote:

I'd like to make everyone aware of this new open position: http://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Job_openings/Bugmeister

Is the position intended to be full-time?

Yup.

Given that Wikimedia already employs a number of contractors who don't work full-time, I think the fact that this position would be full-time is really odd. MZMcBride _______________________________________________ Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l

Brandon Harris

9 Oct 9 Oct

9:02 a.m.

On 10/8/10 4:30 AM, Gerard Meijssen wrote:

...

PS there is no stream running nearby that can be used to clean out the stables

I love that there are people on this list who knows about the 12 labors. And yes, I think that the Stables is the best metaphor for what awaits.

David Gerard

11:46 a.m.

On 9 October 2010 08:02, Brandon Harris <bharris(a)wikimedia.org> wrote:

...

On 10/8/10 4:30 AM, Gerard Meijssen wrote:

...

> PS there is no stream running nearby that can be used to clean out the > stables

...

I love that there are people on this list who knows about the 12 labors.

Wikipedians entering pub quizzes is just unfair to the other patrons. - d.

Aryeh Gregor

8 Oct 8 Oct

10:05 p.m.

On Thu, Oct 7, 2010 at 11:30 PM, MZMcBride <z(a)mzmcbride.com> wrote:

...

Given that Wikimedia already employs a number of contractors who don't work full-time, I think the fact that this position would be full-time is really odd.

...

If you'd like to discuss this, I think the strategy wiki is the right spot. Not wikitech-l.

Things should be discussed wherever there are the most interested, informed people. Developers are some of the people who are most interested and informed about what resources are being allocated to things like bug handling, so wikitech-l is a good place for a discussion on this, IMO (although not the only legitimate place).

Platonides

11:36 p.m.

Chad

11:47 p.m.

On Fri, Oct 8, 2010 at 5:36 PM, Platonides <Platonides(a)gmail.com> wrote:

...

I'm assuming you meant +1 to making it a FT position, but you didn't quote any text so I cannot be sure ;-) -Chad

Platonides

9 Oct 9 Oct

1:50 a.m.

Chad wrote:

...

On Fri, Oct 8, 2010 at 5:36 PM, Platonides <Platonides(a)gmail.com> wrote:

I'm assuming you meant +1 to making it a FT position, but you didn't quote any text so I cannot be sure ;-) -Chad

I didn't want to quote the full email ;) I agree that reviewing the thousands of open bugs* will take a lot of time. Although if it means the position should be full time would mostly depend on the importance given to the backlog. I agree with this mailing list being a proper place to discuss about the bugmeister position. After all, this is the people with which the bugmeister should work (tech staff + tech community). Neil wrote:

...

I think he was trying to direct your concerns to where they would be heard by the right people and in the right context.

Then the right people should be pointed to follow this thread (whoever they are, the CTO for a bugmeister position would have been a fair guess). On the other hand, if this bugmeister discussion was about the budget allocated to its salary instead of the work it has to do, I would move that to foundation-l not wikitech-l *Asking for new/reopen bugs in mediawiki component stops at 2700. There may be more.

Gerard Meijssen

8:25 a.m.

Hoi, If I had anything to say about the importance of the existing back log, I would have the WMF hire two full time people. This would show the importance given to the contributions of volunteer developers. I can imagine that working only on bugs is not that interesting to some. Once the two bugmeisters are in "maintenance mode" there would be time for something else as well. This kind of carrot is intended to be motivating. The advantage of two people working as a bugmeister is that they can have complementary skills. This would also improve the total quality of the process. Thanks, GerardM On 9 October 2010 01:50, Platonides <Platonides(a)gmail.com> wrote:

...

Chad wrote:

On Fri, Oct 8, 2010 at 5:36 PM, Platonides <Platonides(a)gmail.com> wrote:

I'm assuming you meant +1 to making it a FT position, but you didn't quote any text so I cannot be sure ;-) -Chad

I think he was trying to direct your concerns to where they would be

heard by the right

people and in the right context.

Neil Kandalgaonkar

8 Oct 8 Oct

11:56 p.m.

On 10/8/10 1:05 PM, Aryeh Gregor wrote:

...

On Fri, Oct 8, 2010 at 1:37 AM, Ryan Lane<rlane32(a)gmail.com> wrote:

If you'd like to discuss this, I think the strategy wiki is the right spot. Not wikitech-l.

Things should be discussed wherever there are the most interested, informed people.

I don't think that Ryan was trying to shut you down... I think he was trying to direct your concerns to where they would be heard by the right people and in the right context. Realistically, the non-techie strategy and budget people are not going to follow wikitech-l. Danese (and the rest of the WMF tech staffers) do read this list, but most of us think hiring someone local to SF is a good thing, so we're not the best people to be advocates for your point. -- Neil Kandalgaonkar <neilk(a)wikimedia.org>

Aryeh Gregor

10 Oct 10 Oct

2:44 a.m.

Original mail not sent to list, re-sending. I hate e-mail. On Fri, Oct 8, 2010 at 5:56 PM, Neil Kandalgaonkar <neilk(a)wikimedia.org> wrote:

...

Realistically, most of the non-administrative techie people are not going to follow the strategy wiki. I'd hope that it's techie administrative people who decide whether a tech position should be part-time or full-time, though, not non-techie administrative people. (Are there techie strategy and budget people too, or are they all non-techie?) On Fri, Oct 8, 2010 at 5:58 PM, MZMcBride <z(a)mzmcbride.com> wrote:

...

Personally, I can't see it taking more than a few hours each week (and I say that as someone who's done a fair bit of bug triaging, assigning, and cleanup in this particular tracker).

I used to read all the bug mail up until a couple of years ago, presumably when the volume was much lower, and I think I spent a few hours a week handling a lot less than all the bugs. If we do hire a full-time person and that's really more than enough, so that every new bug filed gets a substantive response and is triaged and forwarded to the right people within one business day, and our only problem is what to tell the bugmeister to do with the rest of their time -- then that's a good problem to have! Much better than hiring someone part-time and finding they can't keep up.

Danese Cooper

11:23 p.m.

Oh, I have plans for them if they have free time...believe me :-). D On 10/9/10 5:44 PM, Aryeh Gregor wrote:

...

If we do hire a full-time person and that's really more than enough, so that every new bug filed gets a substantive response and is triaged and forwarded to the right people within one business day, and our only problem is what to tell the bugmeister to do with the rest of their time -- then that's a good problem to have! Much better than hiring someone part-time and finding they can't keep up.

Paul Houle

11 Oct 11 Oct

4:30 p.m.

On 10/7/2010 11:30 PM, MZMcBride wrote:

...

Given that Wikimedia already employs a number of contractors who don't work full-time, I think the fact that this position would be full-time is really odd.

Damn, I thought the "too many Indians and not enough Chiefs" problem was just something we faced in hick towns in the U.S. This job isn't really a development job, it seems to be something between a project management and product management job. Someone like this ought to have some insight into software, but the real challenge is going to be herding cats. I don't see this as an entry-level job, but it seems that everybody in the biz only wants to hire entry-level people who'll work 70 hours a week for rice and beans and get thrown away when they start asking for health insurance.

Roan Kattouw

4:43 p.m.

2010/10/11 Paul Houle <paul(a)ontology2.com>om>:

...

I don't see this as an entry-level job, but it seems that everybody in the biz only wants to hire entry-level people who'll work 70 hours a week for rice and beans and get thrown away when they start asking for health insurance.

That's not what Danese meant by "entry-level". I think she meant that it's a position an outsider could get used to fairly quickly, then advance to other positions after a few years. The latter was specifically mentioned by Danese, and I think that's because that person will have developed enough skills and knowledge specific to our organization and software to be useful in a different capacity so we can hire another outsider to do this job for a few years and go full circle. Also, I personally expect a bugmeister to be pretty fed up with their job after a few years; one of the reasons Siebrand initially suggested we hire one was something along the lines of "no one's gonna do this for fun for more than a few days, so we need to pay someone to do it". Roan Kattouw (Catrope)

Aryeh Gregor

11:30 p.m.

On Mon, Oct 11, 2010 at 10:30 AM, Paul Houle <paul(a)ontology2.com> wrote:

...

Bug triaging, like QA, is something where you really want a talented person doing it, but where talented people usually don't want to do it. It's boring and repetitive, and in the case of bug triaging you have to deal with a lot of idiots and probably aren't allowed to yell at them. So it's most likely an entry-level job -- someone with experience probably will want to do actual programming or something. On a somewhat random side note, I hope we won't encourage the bugmeister to close bugs. Valid bugs or enhancement requests that no one is likely to fix in the foreseeable future should be left open, as long as we'd theoretically accept a patch if someone submitted one and got it reviewed. Projects that close bugs as WONTFIX to mean "We don't think this is important enough to fix", or that pester reporters every few months to ask if the problem is still present in hope that they won't respond and the bug can be closed as "No response from reporter", annoy me intensely. Healthy projects have lots of open bugs, there's nothing wrong with that.

4944

days inactive

4949

days old

wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org

Manage subscription

24 comments

15 participants

tags (0)

participants (15)

Aryeh Gregor
Brandon Harris
Chad
Danese Cooper
David Gerard
Gerard Meijssen
MZMcBride
Neil Kandalgaonkar
Paul Houle
Platonides
Roan Kattouw
Rob Lanphier
Rob Lanphier
Ryan Lane
Trevor Parscal