Hi,
Astron told me that the idea to have positions within the design team was not well-received and that I should discuss it with you. What do you find problematic about having positions within the team?
To be clear, leads would be there to make sure that things get done, that the process by which they get done produces the best results, and to resolve controversial issues if they arise.
What if we called them “experts” instead?
It needs to be clear to newcomers that they’re the go-to people for certain tasks within the design team, and that requires a semi-formal mention on e.g. the wiki.
2014-06-19 18:14 GMT+02:00 Michael Meeks <michael.meeks@collabora.com>:
Mirek M. wrote (19-06-14 18:18)
What if we called them "experts" instead?
Moderator / key-contact / coordinator / ..
It needs to be clear to newcomers that they're the go-to people for
certain tasks within the design team, and that requires a semi-formal
mention on e.g. the wiki.
Yep!
Mirek M. wrote (19-06-14 18:18)
What if we called them "experts" instead?
Moderator / key-contact / coordinator / ..
I think coordinator gives a good pictures of what you described of the
roles on the Design list.
It needs to be clear to newcomers that they're the go-to people
for certain tasks within the design team, and that requires a
semi-formal mention on e.g. the wiki.Yep!
+ 1 
Cheers
Sophie
Hello Mirek, all,
I'm no longer a board member, but let me just chime in for a second.
Mirek M. wrote (19-06-14 18:18)
> What if we called them "experts" instead?Moderator / key-contact / coordinator / ..
> It needs to be clear to newcomers that they're the go-to people for
> certain tasks within the design team, and that requires a
> semi-formal mention on e.g. the wiki.
Actually what is not wanted -based on our past experience at the time
of the old OpenOffice.org- are permanent or semi-permanent titles that
are granted from the top and are not easily withdrawable in case of
inactivity or a problem. As long as it is understood that there's
someone in charge for this or for that and that it works well within
your team, go ahead and don't worry too much about the title.
Best regards,
Just to pile up on what has already said:
'lead' has a loaded history in the project
so is the bestowing of 'title'.
That being said, as a team, the notion of coordinator is not offensive
per se, and as long as it is a de facto acknowledgement of a actual
function and not a de jure title it is perfectly fine imo.
But one is such coordinator because he/she is actually 'coordinating'
with the approval and agreement of the people being coordinated (no,
no need for an election or such.. if you need a formal election it is
already a 'fail')
This is a natural extension of the meritocratic principle at the core of TDF.
Norbert
Hi Mirek,
Astron told me that the idea to have positions within the design team was
not well-received and that I should discuss it with you. What do you find
problematic about having positions within the team?To be clear, leads would be there to make sure that things get done, that
the process by which they get done produces the best results, and to
resolve controversial issues if they arise.
as others have aleady expressed, electing such titles and granting them on
extended timeframes has historically proven to be a hazard.
I believe in "With great power comes great responsibility", or corollary: power
should always be based on current resposibilities.
To give you an example, Ubuntu has the concept of a patch pilot:
https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UbuntuDevelopment/CodeReviews#Patch_Pilots
whos prime responsibility is to welcome newcomers over a certain timeframe (a
day/a week). There is a natural authority derived from those doing duty on
those, without any need for granting titles or elections. It also usually keeps
those most involved with growing and progressing the team by doing onboarding
work -- which admittedly often is not the most attractive task -- in high
regard and prevents "title-envy" as everyone knows the work attached to the
authority.
Now, I dont know if and how that can be translated to the design team. One
(likely stupid) idea would be to have an email alias for onboarding newcomers
and anyone decently skilled(*) can join that alias and help newcomers asking
questions to it. In general, if things are not completely broken in the
project, those who do the most work there in helping others should naturally
grow authority in the design project. Then again, the same thing should work on
a mailing list -- but a onboarding mail alias _might_ make more obvious who is
doing most in onboarding newcomers and who is mostly following his or her own
agenda(**).
Just my two eurocents -- I admittedly dont have to deep an insight into the design
team structure.
Best,
Bjoern
(*) use common sense here, like for direct commit access for developers
(**) which might be perfectly fine, but isnt the best prerequisite for
leadership work
Hi Charles, Mirek,
Hello Mirek, all,
I'm no longer a board member
So let us look what the board member told us in former days:
http://listarchives.documentfoundation.org/www/board-discuss/msg02104.html
I think it was (and is) a good description of what we all want.