On 12/27/2012 07:38 AM, Sébastien Santoro wrote:
To create a bug squad is a nice idea, and, as a
volunteer active on
Bugzilla, of course, I'm interested.
To create a MediaWiki Group Bug Squad is something else.
I fail to see why, and I really appreciate the fact that you are going
to the details.
First, I would like we clarify the matter a little
bit.
"MediaWiki groups organize open source community activities within the
scope of specific topics and geographical areas. They are Wikimedia
User Groups that agree on a level of coordination in the MediaWiki
context. As such, they extend the capacity of the Wikimedia Foundation
in events, training, promotion and other technical activities
benefiting Wikipedia, the Wikimedia movement and the MediaWiki
software."
AND
"Wikimedia User Groups are groups of Wikimedians who intend to do
offline work that could range from meetups to partnerships to any new
and novel way the group comes up with to further the Wikimedia vision.
The requirements to set up an officially recognized user group are
meant to be light-weight and easy to follow.".
A promotion group makes sense: it handles tasks offline, in
conferences for example. It needs funding and to convey the Wikimedia
brands.
I would like to understand how a bug resolution group enters in the
Affiliations Committee scope.
The fact that MediaWiki Groups are also Wikimedia Groups (and therefore
under the scope of the Affiliations Committee) has some extra advantages
for groups willing to grow, and little (zero?) disadvantages for the rest:
- We assimilate MediaWiki groups to the Wikimedia movement and the
Wikimedia Groups that had been discussed at length, instead of coming of
yet something else on our own.
- We make it easier for groups needing support in the form of funding
for events, travel. If you don't need this, it's fine.
I don't see the bureaucratic burden you mention. The tough part of
creating a Bug Squad team is to recruit the people and keep them active
as a team. Formalize that as a MediaWiki Group is just an extra mile
that takes adapting a couple of existing templates and answer a couple
of potential questions.
More specifically, I would like elements we noted in
our own MediaWiki list.
(1) You want to have an identity as a group within the MediaWiki
community and the Wikimedia movement.
Why do we want that? How resolve bug is the bug squad scope would be
different than for example submit code to fix a bug? What we want to
achieve?
Doing things together as a Bug Squad. Getting the attention of newcomers
as a Bug Squad. Participate in related events as members of the
MediaWiki Group Bug Squad.
You say: we can do all this without a MediaWiki Group, which is true.
I say: organizing this as a MediaWiki Group brings little, extra effort
and opens other possibilities, which is also true.
(2) You want to reach out to people interested in
MediaWiki and the
software powering Wikipedia in a specific area.
Please give a sample of a bug specific outreach activity.
We will organize bug triaging sprints and training sessions. We want to
reach out to volunteers helping ad joining the Bug Squad. We might want
to go to events and share our experiences.
(3) You want to have officially recognized MediaWiki
channels like a
mailing list, a microblogging user account...
We already have a lot of channels. Instead to create another one, to
use #wikimedia-dev could work (it worked for previous bug squads
meetings).
And nobody is suggesting a bug resolution team need to be a formal
approved group to get a mailing list (see bureaucratif cost below)?
Nobody is suggesting that all groups need to create new channels. Nobody
is suggesting that you need to be a group to get a new channel created.
It just makes sense to say that a formalized MediaWiki Group is in a
good position to request a new channel if their members agree that it's
a good idea to have it.
(4) You want to organize technical activities under
the name of
MediaWiki, Wikimedia or related projects like Wikipedia.
What kind of offline activites do we want to plan?
No offline plans currently.
(5) You want to obtain funding from the Wikimedia
Foundation or a
Wikimedia chapter.
What kind of budget to we need? To what goals?
No budget plans currently.
* * *
Then, I would like we think about cost/benefits.
Bug resolution is a core function of a software. To transform the bug
resolution operations into - potentially - a bureaucratic leviathan
isn't something I'm comfortable with.
I don't see where the bureaucratic leviathan comes from. This Bug Squad
teamwould define its processes and would work exactly in the same way,
being a formal MediaWiki Group or not.
This is a dangerous precedents to a bureaucratization
of our
fundamental processes. A group should be about a vision. My vision of
this proposal is I clearly see this proposal as the first step in a
path who will lead to a road, where we will ask new contributors to
sign request CLA with copyright transfer to the Wikimedia Fundation.
Ok, you could have started with this paragraph and then I could have
simply answered: W-W-WHAT!!?? :)
Your main complaint is about bureaucratization (and control,
apparently). I don't know how you get to this idea but if it's because
of the wording used in the Groups pages I'm willing to edit them further
to sweep away this fear, uncertainty and doubt.
The idea of the Groups is precisely the opposite: to enable people to do
more, do it easier and in their own way.
Sure, we would have stronger possibilities with all
that, but we're
speaking about resolving bugs. Couldn't we instead have a meeting on
#wikimedia-dev, drafts our idea on
http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Project:WikiProject_Bug_Squad pages and
start our bug resolution activites?
That is the most important part and you will need to do it in any case,
yes. :) If you see any obstacle on this path caused by the MediaWiki
Groups process let me know.
--
Quim Gil
Technical Contributor Coordinator @ Wikimedia Foundation
http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/User:Qgil