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.