On 06/11/13 12:57, Erik Moeller wrote:
However, Brion, Tim and Mark are not infinitely
scalable, nor are they
immortal (except in our hearts). They can’t be in every conversation,
know every part of Wikimedia’s technical ecosystem, review every RFC,
etc.
Well, we can't be in every conversation, but I think we could probably
review every RFC, on some level of detail.
Obviously we can't identify every potential technical issue in every
RFC. RFC review should be a process of gathering comments from people
with relevant technical expertise, and then making a decision on the
basis of the consensus of those experts. Personal judgement should
rarely be required.
There is obviously a need for people to drive the process -- and since
driving the process is time-consuming, the people who do it will
probably have time allocated for the purpose by their managers. This
is the reason for the current connection between RFC review and WMF
management.
I'm not sure if I'm the ideal person to organise meetings, solicit
comments, ensure that action items are completed, etc. It hasn't
traditionally been my core competency. But I'm sure that the amount of
time required could be met by a very small group of people.
We also have many other deeply talented technical
contributors,
including some who have many years of experience in our technical
context specifically -- not just at WMF. Beyond just making technical
decisions, architectural leadership creates opportunities for
mentorship, modeling and nurturing the kind of behavior we want to
foster in our technical community.
I think the best way to respect technical talent is by consensus
decision making -- that is, objections made by actively involved,
technically competent participants should be addressed by modification
or rejection of the proposal.
Leaders are still needed, to evaluate consensus, and to make a
decision as a last resort in the case of intractable conflict. Such
leaders should have the respect of the community. An RFA-style process
would be one way to ensure that leaders have that respect.
I understand from comments in this thread that an RFA-style process is
generally not a popular solution. An alternative is to have WMF
carefully choose people to lead the RFC process, taking into account
the amount of respect the community is likely to have for them.
-- Tim Starling