29 May
2015
29 May
'15
9:57 a.m.
Hello,
I do not have at hand the letter that is received by people asking to be
a member but with no or nearly no contribution, and so refused.
I think this letter is much too rude, and that it's a waste of good will
not to make some sort of follow up. There are not so many :-)
I can try to do so.
I propose to have a letter of this sort (very incomplete, please read
and comment)
https://en.opensuse.org/User:Jdd/letter_to_people_asking_to_be_a_member_2015
do we have a forum/mailing list that we could ask such people to
subscribe? "opensuse@" seems to me much to intimidating :-)
thanks
jdd
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org
To contact the owner, email: opensuse-project+owner(a)opensuse.org
29 May
29 May
10:31 p.m.
jdd - 9:57 29.05.15 wrote:
Hello,
I do not have at hand the letter that is received by people asking to be
a member but with no or nearly no contribution, and so refused.
I think this letter is much too rude, and that it's a waste of good will
not to make some sort of follow up. There are not so many :-)
I would prefer/suggest to start with pointing out what is wrong/rude in
current letter.
I can try to do so.
I propose to have a letter of this sort (very incomplete, please read
and comment)
https://en.opensuse.org/User:Jdd/letter_to_people_asking_to_be_a_member_2015
do we have a forum/mailing list that we could ask such people to
subscribe? "opensuse@" seems to me much to intimidating :-)
I would advice against pointing to one particular person as this person
would become single critical point in the whole process. I think
opensuse or opensuse-project seems like a good place to start.
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org
To contact the owner, email: opensuse-project+owner(a)opensuse.org
10:53 p.m.
Michal Hrusecky - 22:31 29.05.15 wrote:
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org
To contact the owner, email: opensuse-project+owner(a)opensuse.org
jdd - 9:57 29.05.15 wrote:
So I dug up the letter, we can discuss it and see where are places for
improvements:
Hi <username>,
everybody is welcome to participate and get involved in the openSUSE
project and we grant membership for those that have shown a continued
and substantial contribution to the openSUSE project.
Membership officials have rejected your application since that does not
apply to you. We just found too little contribution and encourage you
to get more involved with openSUSE and then apply again for membership.
As a person new to openSUSE you might check the "How to Participate"
which gives a variety of possibilities,
http://en.opensuse.org/Portal:How_to_participate to start contributing. Or
you join our bi-weekly project meeting to see what' going on,
http://en.opensuse.org/Portal:Meetings
If you disagree with the decision, please send an email to
membership-officials(a)opensuse.org
You can start contributing to openSUSE right away, you do not need to
become a recognized openSUSE member,
Best Regards,
Membership officials
Hello,
I do not have at hand the letter that is received by people asking to be
a member but with no or nearly no contribution, and so refused.
I think this letter is much too rude, and that it's a waste of good will
not to make some sort of follow up. There are not so many :-)
I would prefer/suggest to start with pointing out what is wrong/rude in
current letter. I can try to
do so.
I propose to have a letter of this sort (very incomplete, please read
and comment)
https://en.opensuse.org/User:Jdd/letter_to_people_asking_to_be_a_member_2015
do we have a forum/mailing list that we could ask such people to
subscribe? "opensuse@" seems to me much to intimidating :-)
I would advice against pointing to one particular person as this person
would become single critical point in the whole process. I think
opensuse or opensuse-project seems like a good place to start.
1 Jun
1 Jun
12:10 p.m.
Le 29/05/2015 22:53, Michal Hrusecky a écrit :
Michal Hrusecky - 22:31 29.05.15 wrote:
So I dug up the letter, we can discuss it and see
where are places for
improvements:
good, I couldn't find it (and didn't keep a copy for myself).
I find the text very impersonal and unfriendly. As I understand it, most
of the people asking to be a member simply do not understand what this
mean for us, but are willing to contribute in some form. We have to make
as most as we can to keep them around.
Hi <username>,
everybody is welcome to participate and get involved in the openSUSE
project and we grant membership for those that have shown a continued
and substantial contribution to the openSUSE project.
strictly speaking, this is right, but "everybody" is nobody!
it remember me the "we will call you later" you may receive when you ask
for a job
don't forget people coming there have at least done a first step:
registering to connect, I think we have to thanks them for that.
what I propose myself may not be the best wording (I'm not english
native), but shows the goal. give the reader the will to read ahead :-)
"We want to thank you for asking to be an openSUSE member. This means
that you are already an openSUSE user and already enjoying the quality
of openSUSE.
By asking to be a member, you have already made your first step in this
direction :-). "
Membership officials have rejected your application
since that does not
apply to you. We just found too little contribution and encourage you
to get more involved with openSUSE and then apply again for membership.
As a person new to openSUSE you might check the "How to Participate"
which gives a variety of possibilities,
we have to provide a *very simple* task we are nearly sure the user can
do to begin the process, the simpler I could imagine was:
"What you can do now, if you haven't already, is to fill your wiki page
(http://www.opensuse.org/) on the English wiki (the common language here
can't be anything other than English!)"
worth long time reading
to start contributing. Or
you join our bi-weekly project meeting to see
what' going on,
http://en.opensuse.org/Portal:Meetings
whow... most people do not have a meeting in they vicinity, even once a
year!
If you disagree with the decision, please send an email to
membership-officials(a)opensuse.org
You can start contributing to openSUSE right away, you do not need to
become a recognized openSUSE member,
I think we should have a personalized following; Our language (as
openSUSE, not the english, even if being in english do not make things
easier) may have to be explained.
How many people do ask again right now?
what would be a real help is an interface very similar to the one used
to accept or deny the membership (with several links to way to make
evidence of activity), with something to write down who did the survey
and what was the result, and kept after the membership, because it's
first/major importance to verify we do not lose member for simple lack
of communication
I know it's work, so why I proposed to begin
thanks
jdd
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org
To contact the owner, email: opensuse-project+owner(a)opensuse.org
5:01 p.m.
jdd wrote:
to start contributing. Or
It's an IRC meeting, not in person.
--
Per Jessen, Zürich (24.2°C)
http://www.dns24.ch/ - free dynamic DNS, made in Switzerland.
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org
To contact the owner, email: opensuse-project+owner(a)opensuse.org
you join our bi-weekly project meeting to see
what' going on,
http://en.opensuse.org/Portal:Meetings
whow... most people do not have a meeting in they vicinity, even once
a year!
5:08 p.m.
Le 01/06/2015 17:01, Per Jessen a écrit :
jdd wrote:
I wonder if it's not worst, and the link sent go to th meeeting page,
not IRC (at least not on the frist lines)
jdd
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org
To contact the owner, email: opensuse-project+owner(a)opensuse.org
to start contributing. Or
It's an IRC meeting, not in person.
you join our bi-weekly project meeting to see
what' going on,
http://en.opensuse.org/Portal:Meetings
whow... most people do not have a meeting in they vicinity, even once
a year!
5:15 p.m.
jdd wrote:
Le 01/06/2015 17:01, Per Jessen a écrit :
Yeah. I'm also not sure if joining the project meeting is really going
to show anyone "what's going on".
--
Per Jessen, Zürich (22.6°C)
http://www.hostsuisse.com/ - virtual servers, made in Switzerland.
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org
To contact the owner, email: opensuse-project+owner(a)opensuse.org
jdd wrote:
I wonder if it's not worst, and the link sent go to th meeeting page,
not IRC (at least not on the frist lines) to start contributing. Or
It's an IRC meeting, not in person.
you join our bi-weekly project meeting to see
what' going on,
http://en.opensuse.org/Portal:Meetings
whow... most people do not have a meeting in they vicinity, even
once a year!
5:20 p.m.
Le 01/06/2015 17:15, Per Jessen a écrit :
Yeah. I'm also not sure if joining the project
meeting is really going
to show anyone "what's going on".
my position is that it's very important not to discourage a people that
already did the first step of registering to connect (necessary to be
candidate), there are not so many.
In my Linux User group (local), I have my personal phone number on the
web site. I get 2/3 calls a year, but most of these people come to
meetings after that. Any kind of seemingly personal contact build
stronger links than robot answer :-)
jdd
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org
To contact the owner, email: opensuse-project+owner(a)opensuse.org
4:59 p.m.
Michal Hrusecky wrote:
Membership officials have rejected your application
since that does
not apply to you. We just found too little contribution and encourage
you to get more involved with openSUSE and then apply again for
membership.
This does sound a little harsh.
How about this instead:
After having reviewed your application for membership, we regret to have
to say that we don't think your contributions are currently sufficient
to warrant openSUSE membership. We suggest you get more involved with
the project and the communities, then we would welcome your renewed
application at a later time.
--
Per Jessen, Zürich (25.4°C)
http://www.hostsuisse.com/ - dedicated server rental in Switzerland.
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org
To contact the owner, email: opensuse-project+owner(a)opensuse.org
5:11 p.m.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA256
On 2015-06-01 16:59, Per Jessen wrote:
Michal Hrusecky wrote:
Much better.
- --
Cheers / Saludos,
Carlos E. R.
(from 13.1 x86_64 "Bottle" (Minas Tirith))
Membership officials have rejected your
application since that
does not apply to you. We just found too little contribution and
encourage you to get more involved with openSUSE and then apply
again for membership.
This does sound a little harsh.
How about this instead:
After having reviewed your application for membership, we regret to
have to say that we don't think your contributions are currently
sufficient to warrant openSUSE membership. We suggest you get more
involved with the project and the communities, then we would
welcome your renewed application at a later time. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (GNU/Linux)
iF4EAREIAAYFAlVsdgkACgkQja8UbcUWM1wqMQD/SR7Sk/u9sN2AIrl20qddBu6m
DpD52NinxeR0rkJfTZwA/RLezmY34XrFYWG0HDN0l98bNNRO179nM9R8+3+tAWiX
=tzQ2
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org
To contact the owner, email: opensuse-project+owner(a)opensuse.org
9:06 p.m.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
On 05/29/2015 04:53 PM, Michal Hrusecky wrote:
Michal Hrusecky - 22:31 29.05.15 wrote:
Lots of room for improvement, my suggestion
""""
Hi <username>,
Thank you for your contributions so far to the openSUSE Project. All
contributions are important and valued. After review of your
application for membership, we were unable to verify a contribution
level that would warrant us to accept your application at this time.
However, this does not preclude you from applying again in the future
after you have had a chance to be more involved with the openSUSE projec
t.
If you need additional information about how to get involved the
following might be a good starting point
http://en.opensuse.org/Portal:How_to_participate.
We are looking forward to seeing additional contributions from you and
hope that after some time of continued substantial contributions you
will re-apply to become an openSUSE member.
If you feel your contributions meet the definition for membership and
we were just not able to find your contributions please e-mail us at
membership-officials at opensuse dot org
Regards,
Memebrship team
""""
Later,
Robert
- --
Robert Schweikert MAY THE SOURCE BE WITH YOU
Public Cloud Architect LINUX
rjschwei(a)suse.com
IRC: robjo
jdd - 9:57 29.05.15 wrote:
So I dug up the letter, we can discuss it and see where are places
for improvements:
Hi <username>,
everybody is welcome to participate and get involved in the
openSUSE project and we grant membership for those that have shown
a continued and substantial contribution to the openSUSE project.
Membership officials have rejected your application since that does
not apply to you. We just found too little contribution and
encourage you to get more involved with openSUSE and then apply
again for membership.
As a person new to openSUSE you might check the "How to
Participate" which gives a variety of possibilities,
http://en.opensuse.org/Portal:How_to_participate to start
contributing. Or you join our bi-weekly project meeting to see
what' going on, http://en.opensuse.org/Portal:Meetings
If you disagree with the decision, please send an email to
membership-officials(a)opensuse.org
You can start contributing to openSUSE right away, you do not need
to become a recognized openSUSE member,
Best Regards, Membership officials Hello,
I do not have at hand the letter that is received by people
asking to be a member but with no or nearly no contribution,
and so refused.
I think this letter is much too rude, and that it's a waste of
good will not to make some sort of follow up. There are not so
many :-)
I would prefer/suggest to start with pointing out what is
wrong/rude in current letter. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2
iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJVbK1OAAoJEE4FgL32d2Uk5boH/2MU+HbTJ04eK3qevgRpJ0FD
AklbB/M+SXh09y+xYSYYYd7k0wCtLp9pzvkz9f2rgJ7R/lzYCKsaAZX9tTOcQZ8Z
fFXuZHIazKt37d/ksdiMa1CMoc06t+QjBYSYb0cr6h5pndH6MO9YNQj32M9y8tv+
0ANv+/Rizkx3wGZTq13g6pPt8lcuPqlvgJ3IVpHPgHFt+RxDIzCjZzFXw20rUO3b
flOEqbBQrqqZpVmTcQf4VMFBpAEXtuYrKc1xWk1oVnySiAyoULj4GG8hgt2KpE1q
JSi2z7XClB1rqW64tSKcSxPBUClLziNezYC0S5t6DRDQUutApl/yEdXqlcHIrFA=
=NRW5
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org
To contact the owner, email: opensuse-project+owner(a)opensuse.org
9:21 p.m.
On Mon, Jun 1, 2015 at 3:06 PM, Robert Schweikert <rjschwei(a)suse.com> wrote:
Thank you for your contributions so far to the openSUSE Project. All
contributions are important and valued. After review of your
application for membership, we were unable to verify a contribution
level that would warrant us to accept your application at this time.
===
I'd insert a sentence in the middle:
Thank you for your contributions so far to the
openSUSE Project. All
contributions are important and valued.
As you may know openSUSE members have voting privileges for who the
board members are as well as occasionally participating in other
survey and direction setting activities. Thus being an openSUSE
member designates our members as people not only using openSUSE but
also given the privilege of participating in guiding the future of
openSUSE.
After review of your
application for membership, we were unable to verify a contribution
level that would warrant us to accept your application at this time.
Greg
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org
To contact the owner, email: opensuse-project+owner(a)opensuse.org
11:33 p.m.
On Monday 2015-06-01 21:21, Greg Freemyer wrote:
"Thus being an openSUSE member designates our members as people not
only using openSUSE but also given the privilege of participating in
guiding the future of openSUSE."
Which is not quite true, either. - That is to say I am of the opinion
that my involvement _is_ having an effect on openSUSE, even without
registration.
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org
To contact the owner, email: opensuse-project+owner(a)opensuse.org
2 Jun
2 Jun
1:30 p.m.
On Monday 01 June 2015 15:06:54 Robert Schweikert wrote:
"Thank you for your contributions so far to the openSUSE Project. All
contributions are important and valued. After review of your
application for membership, we were unable to verify a contribution
level that would warrant us to accept your application at this time.
However, this does not preclude you from applying again in the future
after you have had a chance to be more involved with the openSUSE projec
t."
Where is it defined what a "contribution level to warrant us to accept your
application" is? It would be much better, if people would have a concrete idea
of what they would have to actually do to become members.
That said, the whole idea of judging people's contributions feels unwelcoming
to me. I think it is a structural flaw of the openSUSE membership that you
can't join by doing things, but you have to pass a committee. This is not how
you encourage people to become part of a community. I would be very much in
favor of just eliminating the need for discussing wording of rejection letters
by not rejecting people who want to be part of the community.
--
Cornelius Schumacher <cschum(a)suse.de>
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org
To contact the owner, email: opensuse-project+owner(a)opensuse.org
1:56 p.m.
On 02.06.2015 13:30, Cornelius Schumacher wrote:
On Monday 01 June 2015 15:06:54 Robert Schweikert
wrote:
No, please do not start
thinking about a definition now ;-)
Rather the other way around: Do we _really_ have a problem with too many
(even inactive) members? I guess not. So why decline _at_all_? Is it
that we need to protect our nice club here? Yes, we can drop out obvious
cheaters (I am sure the board is able to judge that) but all (how many?)
the others? If they're interested, just let them in. Somebody who does
not contribute today, can do tomorrow!
"Thank you for your contributions so far to the openSUSE Project. All
contributions are important and valued. After review of your
application for membership, we were unable to verify a contribution
level that would warrant us to accept your application at this time.
However, this does not preclude you from applying again in the future
after you have had a chance to be more involved with the openSUSE projec
t."
Where is it defined what a "contribution level to warrant us to accept your
application" is? It would be much better, if people would have a concrete idea
of what they would have to actually do to become members. That said, the whole idea of judging people's
contributions feels unwelcoming
to me. I think it is a structural flaw of the openSUSE membership that you
can't join by doing things, but you have to pass a committee. This is not how
you encourage people to become part of a community. I would be very much in
favor of just eliminating the need for discussing wording of rejection letters
by not rejecting people who want to be part of the community.
Exactly. Rather discuss a letter such as "We have seen you being active
so much in openSUSE recently, how about you become an openSUSE member to
help us making the right decisions?". Or just do some work :o)
Thanks,
klaas
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org
To contact the owner, email: opensuse-project+owner(a)opensuse.org
2:24 p.m.
Hey,
On 02.06.2015 13:56, Klaas Freitag wrote:
On 02.06.2015 13:30, Cornelius Schumacher wrote:
All elections we held have a pretty weak voter turnout. Weak enough that
it's debatable that the outcome represents the voters body opinion.
Apart from that everything is fine ;-)
On Monday 01 June 2015 15:06:54 Robert Schweikert
wrote:
No, please do not start
thinking about a definition now ;-)
Rather the other way around: Do we _really_ have a problem with too many
(even inactive) members? I guess not.
"Thank you for your contributions so far to the openSUSE Project. All
contributions are important and valued. After review of your
application for membership, we were unable to verify a contribution
level that would warrant us to accept your application at this time.
However, this does not preclude you from applying again in the future
after you have had a chance to be more involved with the openSUSE projec
t."
Where is it defined what a "contribution level to warrant us to accept your
application" is? It would be much better, if people would have a concrete idea
of what they would have to actually do to become members. So why decline _at_all_? Is it that we need to protect
our nice club here?
Yes we do need to protect our nice club to some degree. We need to make
sure that the direction we're going and the decisions we're taking are
made by people who will suffer the consequences of them.
Somebody who does not contribute today, can do
tomorrow!
And can apply the day after tomorrow...
Rather discuss a letter such as "We have seen you
being active
so much in openSUSE recently, how about you become an openSUSE member to
help us making the right decisions?". Or just do some work :o)
Would also be an option but how is that more welcoming and more practical?
Henne
--
Henne Vogelsang
http://www.opensuse.org
Everybody has a plan, until they get hit.
- Mike Tyson
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org
To contact the owner, email: opensuse-project+owner(a)opensuse.org
3:12 p.m.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
On 06/02/2015 08:24 AM, Henne Vogelsang wrote:
I'd say "protection" is not quite the way to think about it as there
is nothing really to protect. However, it is about the direction of
the project and the governance model, and maybe that requires
"protection" ;) .
At some point it was decided that an elected board would guide the
governance of the project. This decision has consequences, as in limit
the number of people that can be elected and that can vote to a
certain pool. To establish this pool of people a membership model is a
reasonable choice. From this, one can reasonably conclude that some
kind of "proof that I care" entry gate to the membership is a
reasonable approach. For many organizations "proof that I care" comes
from people's (member's) wallets, i.e. you pay and your in. For
openSUSE, "proof that I care" means "sustained and substantial
contributions". I would claim that the latter is a much better
indicator of "proof that I care" than the former. However, the later
is much more difficult to keep current. In the "pay for proof" model
it is easy, when a member doesn't pay the dues on time they are out as
the member "obviously" no longer cares, the wallet as sitting a bit
too tight ;) . The problem with the "contribution model as proof"
chosen by openSUSE is that because people have to make personal
investment, i.e. give something that is much more valuable than money,
it is much harder for people to let go. Therefore, the topic of
inactivity and possibly "loosing" membership is much more sensitive
than in the "pay for membership" model.
**** Excursion ****
As people we over value our contributions/investments. Think about the
value people place on a bicycle they bought pre-assembled vs. the
bicycle that came in a box with "some assembly required" instructions.
Even if both bikes cost the same and they look the same, the person
that assembled their bike will place a much higher value on that bike
than the person that "just" bought it.
**** End Excursion ****
Anyway, the chosen model of membership does not appear to be a
deterrent to people joining the community and contributing to the
project, IMHO.
Later,
Robert
- --
Robert Schweikert MAY THE SOURCE BE WITH YOU
Public Cloud Architect LINUX
rjschwei(a)suse.com
IRC: robjo
Hey,
On 02.06.2015 13:56, Klaas Freitag wrote:
As Henne points out, the board election is probably the component
where the inactivity is the most glaring. For members there are some
"perks", one of which is to be able to vote for and the other is to
be elected to the openSUSE Board. So if we have 500 members (numbers
are made up because I was too lazy to look them up ;) ) and 125 vote
during board elections what does that say about the other 375?
- - Are they no longer active?
- - Are they active contributors but do not care about the board and
thus our project governance?
- - .....
One can probably have a very long list of questions about this state.
This happens to be the state we are in, and thus to answer the
question. Yes, inactive members are an issue.
The same problem manifests itself for oSC. If we have 500 members and
we cannot motivate at least 1/2 of the membership to get their butts
off the couch and show up at oSC what does that mean? Maybe it means
that the membership number is inflated and of the 500 that are
"members" only 100 or so really care and of those 100 we get 50
showing up at oSC. Then we have 50% of members who care show up and
that's not a bad number. Problem is we do not know.
It goes back to the discussion we had a couple of years ago, and I
still have the same opinion. Those that are active in the project
should determine the direction and should have more input than those
who were active in the past but are no longer active. This does not
imply that the contributions of those that are no longer active should
be ignored, give credit where credit is due, but as far as the current
status the distinction between active and inactive members is quite
important.
On 02.06.2015 13:30, Cornelius Schumacher wrote:
All elections we held have a pretty weak voter turnout. Weak enough
that it's debatable that the outcome represents the voters body
opinion. Apart from that everything is fine ;-) On Monday 01 June 2015 15:06:54 Robert Schweikert
wrote:
No, please do not start thinking about a definition now ;-)
Rather the other way around: Do we _really_ have a problem with
too many (even inactive) members? I guess not.
"Thank you for your contributions so far to the openSUSE
Project. All contributions are important and valued. After
review of your application for membership, we were unable to
verify a contribution level that would warrant us to accept
your application at this time. However, this does not
preclude you from applying again in the future after you have
had a chance to be more involved with the openSUSE projec
t."
Where is it defined what a "contribution level to warrant us to
accept your application" is? It would be much better, if people
would have a concrete idea of what they would have to actually
do to become members. So why decline _at_all_? Is it that we need to
protect our nice
club here?
Yes we do need to protect our nice club to some degree. We need to
make sure that the direction we're going and the decisions we're
taking are made by people who will suffer the consequences of
them. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2
iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJVbau8AAoJEE4FgL32d2Ukm6sH/RGSIvC+R0afxdwdDxyqQYaP
zMdO2nOtMkDmcbOxoQ72kN+S+r+LlhMmUUXsH2fWiPuZS/o2YFLFCVWG3D5217OD
Ky4XeKrB0rPVUf7eT/kkP/nH/l+lB4coiE50LR9kg6vA3MS/VnObpGo3wiuK1oLB
NbJEgPYvIZ8lT+YujIRNfarjbSAxo0TLHLHh2sPRShss24Iu0GAe4SG8bf5Y6mfl
/kF7G2rDHOsmI0AqQu7wc7eGMkdY9R1q29a1fLAb/fdzHN/MLWQouaLq176k/jzE
f6zfF2ZtRMNnlAsf+/yugMfdEU9r/5R/sB6jaxDgHMKoHVXFGvgobpRlvo5bX6M=
=yRLA
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org
To contact the owner, email: opensuse-project+owner(a)opensuse.org
3:24 p.m.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
On 2015-06-02 15:12, Robert Schweikert wrote:
On 06/02/2015 08:24 AM, Henne Vogelsang wrote:
I can tell you my case: I simply do not know the candidates. Few of
the names are familiar to me.
This time I was reading their pages, which is a long process for me,
when election timed out and I finally couldn't vote.
All elections we held have a pretty weak voter
turnout. Weak
enough that it's debatable that the outcome represents the voters
body opinion. Apart from that everything is fine ;-)
As Henne points out, the board election is probably the component
where the inactivity is the most glaring. For members there are
some "perks", one of which is to be able to vote for and the other
is to be elected to the openSUSE Board. So if we have 500 members
(numbers are made up because I was too lazy to look them up ;) )
and 125 vote during board elections what does that say about the
other 375?
- Are they no longer active? - Are they active contributors but do
not care about the board and thus our project governance?
The same problem manifests itself for oSC. If we have 500 members
and we cannot motivate at least 1/2 of the membership to get their
butts off the couch and show up at oSC what does that mean?
Again, I can tell you my case: it is quite far from my place of
residence, and travel is expensive. I can't afford it.
- --
Cheers / Saludos,
Carlos E. R.
(from 13.1 x86_64 "Bottle" at Telcontar)
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (GNU/Linux)
iEYEARECAAYFAlVtrm4ACgkQtTMYHG2NR9WrswCgle4uz7eG03wUeAKBJ3B9P18M
rLUAnjEnEGZBZ9B2bD7PKSm42++hwhTG
=6zbN
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org
To contact the owner, email: opensuse-project+owner(a)opensuse.org
4:17 p.m.
Robert Schweikert wrote:
On 06/02/2015 08:24 AM, Henne Vogelsang wrote:
Probably the latter. We certainly can't assume "not voting" = "not
active".
Hey,
All elections we held have a pretty weak voter turnout. Weak enough
that it's debatable that the outcome represents the voters body
opinion. Apart from that everything is fine ;-)
As Henne points out, the board election is probably the component
where the inactivity is the most glaring. For members there are some
"perks", one of which is to be able to vote for and the other is to
be elected to the openSUSE Board. So if we have 500 members (numbers
are made up because I was too lazy to look them up ;) ) and 125 vote
during board elections what does that say about the other 375?
- - Are they no longer active?
- - Are they active contributors but do not care about the board and
thus our project governance? One can probably have a very long list of questions
about this state.
This happens to be the state we are in, and thus to answer the
question. Yes, inactive members are an issue.
I was wondering about the meaning of "inactive" when jdd first started
the thread last week. Do we have a way of determining who or how many
are "inactive"?
The same problem manifests itself for oSC. If we have
500 members and
we cannot motivate at least 1/2 of the membership to get their butts
off the couch and show up at oSC what does that mean? Maybe it means
that the membership number is inflated and of the 500 that are
"members" only 100 or so really care
Maybe it just means that attending oSC is a low priority for many. I
know it is for me.
--
Per Jessen, Zürich (25.0°C)
http://www.hostsuisse.com/ - virtual servers, made in Switzerland.
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org
To contact the owner, email: opensuse-project+owner(a)opensuse.org
3 Jun
3 Jun
2:54 p.m.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
On 06/02/2015 10:17 AM, Per Jessen wrote:
Robert Schweikert wrote:
Not at the moment.
Later,
Robert
- --
Robert Schweikert MAY THE SOURCE BE WITH YOU
Public Cloud Architect LINUX
rjschwei(a)suse.com
IRC: robjo
On 06/02/2015 08:24 AM, Henne Vogelsang wrote:
Probably the latter. We certainly can't assume "not voting" =
"not active".
Hey,
All elections we held have a pretty weak voter turnout. Weak
enough that it's debatable that the outcome represents the
voters body opinion. Apart from that everything is fine ;-)
As Henne points out, the board election is probably the
component where the inactivity is the most glaring. For members
there are some "perks", one of which is to be able to vote for
and the other is to be elected to the openSUSE Board. So if we
have 500 members (numbers are made up because I was too lazy to
look them up ;) ) and 125 vote during board elections what does
that say about the other 375?
- - Are they no longer active? - - Are they active contributors
but do not care about the board and thus our project governance? One can probably have a very long list of
questions about this
state. This happens to be the state we are in, and thus to answer
the question. Yes, inactive members are an issue.
I was wondering about the meaning of "inactive" when jdd first
started the thread last week. Do we have a way of determining who
or how many are "inactive"? -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2
iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJVbvkJAAoJEE4FgL32d2Ukjd0H/At99RYRVSf++m3um94L23MZ
tbMw6WCE509n3Bi8mxVaSz7NwvqKnfGN4LQnpPv9DZ95WUuKt8eDhXSOwkHd+rHo
5yrmwQBn10Oc60UbWreLf5/2v0qAXC7q1tpTP5huxSQPUmM+ipCaB9RiDkhkEho7
yTyqd2DMUF2Y/5xWR0AunmsHM25VTg+U8RUGJ7WM6mvWW3m8umD+OUinqvYsWQJt
sfsxpQypuLOtMy1Tg9FOHUxWJGS/MurE+WQUT7v1TJK07FAwVq6mJtNUXZWZ0sOu
ILJNDrBnQtjkqS+PKXa4Z1EyYiqULesQKnNlO6nPnpoKq9C3l7nLTSsBFCm9oHg=
=RIad
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org
To contact the owner, email: opensuse-project+owner(a)opensuse.org
3:17 p.m.
Le 03/06/2015 14:54, Robert Schweikert a écrit :
it's an other thread. I wont let this unanswered, but not here, thanks
jdd
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org
To contact the owner, email: opensuse-project+owner(a)opensuse.org
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
On 06/02/2015 10:17 AM, Per Jessen wrote:
I was
wondering about the meaning of "inactive" when jdd first
started the thread last week. Do we have a way of determining who
or how many are "inactive"?
Not at the moment. 
2 Jun
2 Jun
5:51 p.m.
Do we track who votes during these sessions. I think one way to
determine if people care is if they cast a vote. This is the methodology
used around the globe in democratic votes. If I don't care about an
election, I do not take the time to register or vote. In order to keep a
more accurate current count, we could implement a re-registration
process.
On Tue, 2015-06-02 at 09:12 -0400, Robert Schweikert wrote:
On 06/02/2015 08:24 AM, Henne Vogelsang wrote:
I'd say "protection" is not quite the way to think about it as there
is nothing really to protect. However, it is about the direction of
the project and the governance model, and maybe that requires
"protection" ;) .
At some point it was decided that an elected board would guide the
governance of the project. This decision has consequences, as in limit
the number of people that can be elected and that can vote to a
certain pool. To establish this pool of people a membership model is a
reasonable choice. From this, one can reasonably conclude that some
kind of "proof that I care" entry gate to the membership is a
reasonable approach. For many organizations "proof that I care" comes
from people's (member's) wallets, i.e. you pay and your in. For
openSUSE, "proof that I care" means "sustained and substantial
contributions". I would claim that the latter is a much better
indicator of "proof that I care" than the former. However, the later
is much more difficult to keep current. In the "pay for proof" model
it is easy, when a member doesn't pay the dues on time they are out as
the member "obviously" no longer cares, the wallet as sitting a bit
too tight ;) . The problem with the "contribution model as proof"
chosen by openSUSE is that because people have to make personal
investment, i.e. give something that is much more valuable than money,
it is much harder for people to let go. Therefore, the topic of
inactivity and possibly "loosing" membership is much more sensitive
than in the "pay for membership" model.
**** Excursion ****
As people we over value our contributions/investments. Think about the
value people place on a bicycle they bought pre-assembled vs. the
bicycle that came in a box with "some assembly required" instructions.
Even if both bikes cost the same and they look the same, the person
that assembled their bike will place a much higher value on that bike
than the person that "just" bought it.
**** End Excursion ****
Anyway, the chosen model of membership does not appear to be a
deterrent to people joining the community and contributing to the
project, IMHO.
Later,
Robert
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org
To contact the owner, email: opensuse-project+owner(a)opensuse.org
Hey,
On 02.06.2015 13:56, Klaas Freitag wrote:
As Henne points out, the board election is probably the component
where the inactivity is the most glaring. For members there are some
"perks", one of which is to be able to vote for and the other is to
be elected to the openSUSE Board. So if we have 500 members (numbers
are made up because I was too lazy to look them up ;) ) and 125 vote
during board elections what does that say about the other 375?
- Are they no longer active?
- Are they active contributors but do not care about the board and
thus our project governance?
- .....
One can probably have a very long list of questions about this state.
This happens to be the state we are in, and thus to answer the
question. Yes, inactive members are an issue.
The same problem manifests itself for oSC. If we have 500 members and
we cannot motivate at least 1/2 of the membership to get their butts
off the couch and show up at oSC what does that mean? Maybe it means
that the membership number is inflated and of the 500 that are
"members" only 100 or so really care and of those 100 we get 50
showing up at oSC. Then we have 50% of members who care show up and
that's not a bad number. Problem is we do not know.
It goes back to the discussion we had a couple of years ago, and I
still have the same opinion. Those that are active in the project
should determine the direction and should have more input than those
who were active in the past but are no longer active. This does not
imply that the contributions of those that are no longer active should
be ignored, give credit where credit is due, but as far as the current
status the distinction between active and inactive members is quite
important.
On 02.06.2015 13:30, Cornelius Schumacher wrote:
All elections we held have a pretty weak voter turnout. Weak enough
that it's debatable that the outcome represents the voters body
opinion. Apart from that everything is fine ;-) On Monday 01 June 2015 15:06:54 Robert Schweikert
wrote:
>
> "Thank you for your contributions so far to the openSUSE
> Project. All contributions are important and valued. After
> review of your application for membership, we were unable to
> verify a contribution level that would warrant us to accept
> your application at this time. However, this does not
> preclude you from applying again in the future after you have
> had a chance to be more involved with the openSUSE projec
> t."
Where is it defined what a "contribution level to warrant us to
accept your application" is? It would be much better, if people
would have a concrete idea of what they would have to actually
do to become members.
No, please do not start thinking about a definition now ;-)
Rather the other way around: Do we _really_ have a problem with
too many (even inactive) members? I guess not. So why decline _at_all_? Is it that we need to
protect our nice
club here?
Yes we do need to protect our nice club to some degree. We need to
make sure that the direction we're going and the decisions we're
taking are made by people who will suffer the consequences of
them.
5:59 p.m.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA256
On 2015-06-02 17:51, Joel Gordon wrote:
Do we track who votes during these sessions. I think
one way to
determine if people care is if they cast a vote. This is the
methodology used around the globe in democratic votes.
No, it is not. The only valid measurement in democracy is statistical:
you can not register who votes or not, because choosing whether to
vote is also a vote decision that deserves secrecy, same as the actual
vote (notice result counts for blank votes, etc).
There is a registry used to ensure that people only vote once. But
making use of that information for something else is akin to using
information about who voted whom.
- --
Cheers / Saludos,
Carlos E. R.
(from 13.1 x86_64 "Bottle" (Minas Tirith))
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (GNU/Linux)
iF4EAREIAAYFAlVt0vMACgkQja8UbcUWM1yn1AD8Csr1TMu7Nfi6rwHr/uQjsP+R
UN8MBH+fxzVi8fYV7qIA/3ZILysqYaghmDBTv2bFq72IHmQMnIcNAnwihcvmR0pT
=BPKX
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org
To contact the owner, email: opensuse-project+owner(a)opensuse.org
3 Jun
3 Jun
7:42 a.m.
On Tuesday 02 of June 2015 09:12:28 Robert Schweikert wrote:
As Henne points out, the board election is probably
the component
where the inactivity is the most glaring.
...
The same problem manifests itself for oSC. If we have 500 members and
we cannot motivate at least 1/2 of the membership to get their butts
off the couch and show up at oSC what does that mean? Maybe it means
that the membership number is inflated and of the 500 that are
"members" only 100 or so really care and of those 100 we get 50
showing up at oSC. Then we have 50% of members who care show up and
that's not a bad number. Problem is we do not know.
I don't think it's the same problem. When it comes to elections, you can
surely talk about taking one's butt off the couch (figuratively, of
course, as to vote, one doesn't actually need to take it off) but
visiting a conference is something completely different. The travel and
accomodation expenses might seem negligible to you but not everyone
feels the same way (and it's (by far) not only matter of perception).
In the end, everyone has to decide whether their presence at the
conference is worth the price. And I find nothing surprising or
disturbing in it if many (or even most) of them - including active
members of the community - decide that their answer is negative.
Michal Kubeček
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org
To contact the owner, email: opensuse-project+owner(a)opensuse.org
2:51 p.m.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
On 06/03/2015 01:42 AM, Michal Kubecek wrote:
On Tuesday 02 of June 2015 09:12:28 Robert Schweikert
wrote:
Yes, travel expenses need to be taken into consideration. However, the
TSP is there to help. While I do not have the hard numbers handy, my
gut feel tells me that we do not get overwhelmed by TSP applications
and in the end we have money left over.
As Henne points out, the board election is
probably the
component where the inactivity is the most glaring. ... The same
problem manifests itself for oSC. If we have 500 members and we
cannot motivate at least 1/2 of the membership to get their
butts off the couch and show up at oSC what does that mean? Maybe
it means that the membership number is inflated and of the 500
that are "members" only 100 or so really care and of those 100 we
get 50 showing up at oSC. Then we have 50% of members who care
show up and that's not a bad number. Problem is we do not know.
I don't think it's the same problem. When it comes to elections,
you can surely talk about taking one's butt off the couch
(figuratively, of course, as to vote, one doesn't actually need to
take it off) but visiting a conference is something completely
different. The travel and accomodation expenses might seem
negligible to you but not everyone feels the same way (and it's (by
far) not only matter of perception).
In the end, everyone has to decide whether their presence at the
conference is worth the price. And I find nothing surprising or
disturbing in it if many (or even most) of them - including active
members of the community - decide that their answer is negative.
Fair enough, that of course raises the question if we should continue
with oSC. Considering that it is a lot of effort for volunteers to
pull the conference together. If members and contributors cannot be
bothered to show up to our own conference then maybe we should not
undertake the endeavour past oSC16.
Later,
Robert
- --
Robert Schweikert MAY THE SOURCE BE WITH YOU
Public Cloud Architect LINUX
rjschwei(a)suse.com
IRC: robjo
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2
iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJVbvhmAAoJEE4FgL32d2UkqVkH/RoME6KCJi5UAXK9oRYN8Rk3
LTY5cZGU7sPCWAzwqw9z91qMCWZP3SlbOCTRQG0IXLTXPyF4ilYSP7tywYMh4rbe
EKmZdhPyXT72GzyfmM/m5KjXHt9LPdN4lMiUvgeVirHXFu8CIPrRLL6yYyyUwZhc
UiKTuoQ3CTfWZexwb75z96Jy9uFXmT86GC0ZPyvmSbV24wXgA8QGvotDnZzXubkN
Qu8BOBs88OFdvlMlmx9QirXNgleb6dX2AVYoZUbYCkucR7M9Q5FdNWkd1cqAmvIV
Kn70Vz4lP8XteCnwOUksbJVijJ+M6OyLPe2HhKnBT3l3CRR4nhbbKb/EBAwMO8Y=
=yxSa
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org
To contact the owner, email: opensuse-project+owner(a)opensuse.org
3:16 p.m.
Le 03/06/2015 14:51, Robert Schweikert a écrit :
Yes, travel expenses need to be taken into
consideration. However, the
TSP is there to help. While I do not have the hard numbers handy, my
gut feel tells me that we do not get overwhelmed by TSP applications
and in the end we have money left over.
good to know. But may be the system should be improved. This is an other
tread evantually
Fair enough, that of course raises the question if we
should continue
with oSC. Considering that it is a lot of effort for volunteers to
pull the conference together. If members and contributors cannot be
bothered to show up to our own conference then maybe we should not
undertake the endeavour past oSC16.
I think this as pretty rude.
We could first ask us why people do not come (enough), and what could be
improved to make them come.
For example, having an OSC moving from location to location each year
should mean that we try to be more near of the users. Good. But what do
we do to make local users come? I see little in the OSC programm to make
them comfortable.
Could we, for example, do an install party? I learned by accident than a
powerfull server could locally serve installs, why don't use it?
this also is not for this thread
please do come back to the subject: How can we make the *refused* people
not abandoned to themselves too fast? We need them, may be not as
members, but as basic contributors.
There is no need to conclude fast, We can let this discussion for some
time (as I see more and more contributors with interesting content, thanks)
jdd
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org
To contact the owner, email: opensuse-project+owner(a)opensuse.org
3:34 p.m.
jdd wrote:
I have to agree - maybe Robert was feeling a bit frustrated. I"m sure he
didn't mean to say "If members and contributors cannot be bothered to
show up to our own conference".
Fair enough,
that of course raises the question if we should continue
with oSC. Considering that it is a lot of effort for volunteers to
pull the conference together. If members and contributors cannot be
bothered to show up to our own conference then maybe we should not
undertake the endeavour past oSC16.
I think this as pretty rude. We could first ask us why people do not come (enough),
and what could
be improved to make them come.
Yep.
For example, having an OSC moving from location to
location each year
should mean that we try to be more near of the users. Good. But what
do we do to make local users come? I see little in the OSC programm to
make them comfortable.
Could we, for example, do an install party? I learned by accident than
a powerfull server could locally serve installs, why don't use it?
That might be more of a topic for a user group meeting, not the openSUSE
conference (for members and contributors).
please do come back to the subject: How can we make
the *refused*
people not abandoned to themselves too fast? We need them, may be not
as members, but as basic contributors.
I think Cornelius Schumacher is right - just open memberhip to everyone
on the assumption they will contribute sooner or later.
--
Per Jessen, Zürich (26.3°C)
http://www.hostsuisse.com/ - virtual servers, made in Switzerland.
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org
To contact the owner, email: opensuse-project+owner(a)opensuse.org
3:46 p.m.
Hey,
On 06/03/2015 03:34 PM, Per Jessen wrote:
jdd wrote:
I have to
agree - maybe Robert was feeling a bit frustrated. I"m sure he
didn't mean to say "If members and contributors cannot be bothered to
show up to our own conference".
@henne: Do we still have the attendance
list from oSC?
Maybe we could start to transfer it into OSEM and then send a survey to
the attended people and also to the people which registered and not
attended!
Don't know if this is too late now but maybe a first attemp for an oSC
"quality assurance"?
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org
To contact the owner, email: opensuse-project+owner(a)opensuse.org
Fair
enough, that of course raises the question if we should continue
with oSC. Considering that it is a lot of effort for volunteers to
pull the conference together. If members and contributors cannot be
bothered to show up to our own conference then maybe we should not
undertake the endeavour past oSC16.
I think this as pretty rude. We could first ask us why people do not come
(enough), and what could
be improved to make them come.
Yep. 
3:28 p.m.
* Robert Schweikert <rjschwei(a)suse.com> [06-03-15 08:54]:
While certainly deserving consideration, this is quite a leap. Traveling
thousands of miles/kilometers to attend a conference of most any nature
must be quite down the ladder for anyone whose employement is not
dependent upon or who has excess funds, even with subsidized travel.
Family, home and community have to remain a greater concern.
Continuation of oSC should be weighed on the interest it generates rather
than the number of members and contributers who "can be bothered" to
attend.
--
(paka)Patrick Shanahan Plainfield, Indiana, USA @ptilopteri
http://en.opensuse.org openSUSE Community Member facebook/ptilopteri
http://wahoo.no-ip.org Photo Album: http://wahoo.no-ip.org/gallery2
Registered Linux User #207535 @ http://linuxcounter.net
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org
To contact the owner, email: opensuse-project+owner(a)opensuse.org
On 06/03/2015 01:42 AM, Michal Kubecek wrote:
[...]
In the end,
everyone has to decide whether their presence at the
conference is worth the price. And I find nothing surprising or
disturbing in it if many (or even most) of them - including active
members of the community - decide that their answer is negative.
Fair enough, that of course raises the question if we should continue
with oSC. Considering that it is a lot of effort for volunteers to
pull the conference together. If members and contributors cannot be
bothered to show up to our own conference then maybe we should not
undertake the endeavour past oSC16. 
4 Jun
4 Jun
10:42 p.m.
Am 03.06.2015 um 14:51 schrieb Robert Schweikert:
Yes, travel expenses need to be taken into
consideration. However, the
TSP is there to help. While I do not have the hard numbers handy, my
gut feel tells me that we do not get overwhelmed by TSP applications
and in the end we have money left over.
I'm in the comfortable position that my boss would pay for the
Conference, but for me, Time on Weekends is valuable.
Last openSUSE Conferences I attended were
* Nürnberg
* Prague
Prague is even nearer than Nürnberg (a 2h train ride) for me.
I could not be bothered to go to Dubrovnik, Athens or The Hague, because
it is just too much hassle. Somehow the date just never fits for me so
that I could throw in an additional week of holiday with my family
(which would be horribly bored at the conference).
And for example this year it would have meant leaving work early on
Thursday, flying to The Hague, 4 Days of conference, coming back home
Monday evening very late just so that I can go back to work on tuesday
morning. I'm too old for that :-)
I personally like the professional conferences much better that start on
Tuesday and end on Thursday or Friday -- I am off work for a week and
back home at the weekend :-)
Yes, I know, for most contributors this is not an option, and not
everyone is in the lucky position I am. It is just *one* explanation why
many people might not attend the conferences.
Fair enough, that of course raises the question if we
should continue
with oSC. Considering that it is a lot of effort for volunteers to
pull the conference together.
I was actually thinking about this, too, and I most likely would have
gone to The Hague, but we had a family event on May 1st and that decided
the issue for me.
Best regards,
Stefan
--
Stefan Seyfried
"For a successful technology, reality must take precedence over
public relations, for nature cannot be fooled." -- Richard Feynman
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org
To contact the owner, email: opensuse-project+owner(a)opensuse.org
11:36 p.m.
Le 04/06/2015 22:42, Stefan Seyfried a écrit :
I personally like the professional conferences much
better that start on
Tuesday and end on Thursday or Friday -- I am off work for a week and
back home at the weekend :-)
are many people like you? I'm retired, so the day is of little interest,
but if lot of people are like you it could be possible to alternate one
year on week end, the other on week days?
jdd
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org
To contact the owner, email: opensuse-project+owner(a)opensuse.org
8 Jun
8 Jun
2:52 p.m.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
On 06/04/2015 04:42 PM, Stefan Seyfried wrote:
Am 03.06.2015 um 14:51 schrieb Robert Schweikert:
Well my gut feel is that many are in the same boat. As the project has
gotten older so have we, that's just the way it is. Priorities change,
that's just a fact of life.
Basic question remains and has really been moved to a new thread "oSC
looking past 2016"
So for oSC discussion please respond in that thread.
Later,
RObert
- --
Robert Schweikert MAY THE SOURCE BE WITH YOU
Public Cloud Architect LINUX
rjschwei(a)suse.com
IRC: robjo
Yes, travel expenses need to be taken into
consideration.
However, the TSP is there to help. While I do not have the hard
numbers handy, my gut feel tells me that we do not get
overwhelmed by TSP applications and in the end we have money left
over.
I'm in the comfortable position that my boss would pay for the
Conference, but for me, Time on Weekends is valuable. Last openSUSE
Conferences I attended were * Nürnberg * Prague Prague is even
nearer than Nürnberg (a 2h train ride) for me.
I could not be bothered to go to Dubrovnik, Athens or The Hague,
because it is just too much hassle. Somehow the date just never
fits for me so that I could throw in an additional week of holiday
with my family (which would be horribly bored at the conference).
And for example this year it would have meant leaving work early
on Thursday, flying to The Hague, 4 Days of conference, coming back
home Monday evening very late just so that I can go back to work on
tuesday morning. I'm too old for that :-)
I personally like the professional conferences much better that
start on Tuesday and end on Thursday or Friday -- I am off work for
a week and back home at the weekend :-) Yes, I know, for most
contributors this is not an option, and not everyone is in the
lucky position I am. It is just *one* explanation why many people
might not attend the conferences.
Fair enough, that of course raises the question
if we should
continue with oSC. Considering that it is a lot of effort for
volunteers to pull the conference together.
I was actually thinking about this, too, and I most likely would
have gone to The Hague, but we had a family event on May 1st and
that decided the issue for me. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2
iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJVdZAkAAoJEE4FgL32d2UkU/QIAKzUgm6xDA9O4mdnQ4uWtScI
jRq4nVTjQtrW/ggN29+wYeAgKLyb1RkKbeh765a2gAIoyUhOqQWG4mSdJWQM/qQk
gfD1tlv2raVBfu0SdHAAyW3kZjVP/yl87i6NTqLHZrE4Qli6W6HBlURJ+AdAx56F
u96NEguyRVaxC5s2LIIxuw3RRijkgYhkBACPQcQ/fBEq8kpOtwChk4TjPpaepqMd
SAa/Tc7XhUMGqi0/HMblWdSwRTEAZKv3+KVBxDQC0+A3qmb+Qkr8XMP/FpjmqhUF
ShgkMYB+25X3FK3sL2HkBEIM5Dnkj3gQczzO6SSmF0x+VtxF6CM2fFifL2QV0C4=
=XLkv
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org
To contact the owner, email: opensuse-project+owner(a)opensuse.org
6 Jun
6 Jun
6:53 p.m.
On Wednesday, June 03, 2015 08:51:50 AM Robert Schweikert wrote:
On 06/03/2015 01:42 AM, Michal Kubecek wrote:
TSP is actually a great program, that i used to attend oSC14, but due to the
way it works, it wasn't useful to me to attend this year, even though I was
approved.
On Tuesday 02 of June 2015 09:12:28 Robert
Schweikert wrote:
Yes, travel expenses need to be taken into consideration. However, the
TSP is there to help. While I do not have the hard numbers handy, my
gut feel tells me that we do not get overwhelmed by TSP applications
and in the end we have money left over.
As Henne points out, the board election is
probably the
component where the inactivity is the most glaring. ... The same
problem manifests itself for oSC. If we have 500 members and we
cannot motivate at least 1/2 of the membership to get their
butts off the couch and show up at oSC what does that mean? Maybe
it means that the membership number is inflated and of the 500
that are "members" only 100 or so really care and of those 100 we
get 50 showing up at oSC. Then we have 50% of members who care
show up and that's not a bad number. Problem is we do not know.
I don't think it's the same problem. When it comes to elections,
you can surely talk about taking one's butt off the couch
(figuratively, of course, as to vote, one doesn't actually need to
take it off) but visiting a conference is something completely
different. The travel and accomodation expenses might seem
negligible to you but not everyone feels the same way (and it's (by
far) not only matter of perception). In the end, everyone has to decide whether their
presence at the
conference is worth the price. And I find nothing surprising or
disturbing in it if many (or even most) of them - including active
members of the community - decide that their answer is negative.
Fair enough, that of course raises the question if we should continue
with oSC. Considering that it is a lot of effort for volunteers to
pull the conference together. If members and contributors cannot be
bothered to show up to our own conference then maybe we should not
undertake the endeavour past oSC16.
Later,
Robert
3 Jun
3 Jun
2:40 p.m.
On Tuesday 02 June 2015 14:24:43 Henne Vogelsang wrote:
Yes we do need to protect our nice club to some degree. We need to make
sure that the direction we're going and the decisions we're taking are
made by people who will suffer the consequences of them.
Technical decisions are taken by those who do the work, that's the old and
proven open source mantra. No club needed for that.
Some other decisions are taken by those who own the assets which the community
needs, be it the trademark, the infrastructure, or the paid time of
contributors. The club which is taking most of these decisions is SUSE.
In some cases it still is good to have a well-defined group representing the
community as a whole, that's where the membership comes in. But as this is not
so much about taking decisions but more about representation there is not much
to protect unless you want to stay exclusive, which I suppose we don't want to
be.
--
Cornelius Schumacher <cschum(a)suse.de>
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org
To contact the owner, email: opensuse-project+owner(a)opensuse.org
2 Jun
2 Jun
2:09 p.m.
On 2 June 2015 at 12:30, Cornelius Schumacher <cschum(a)suse.de> wrote:
On Monday 01 June 2015 15:06:54 Robert Schweikert
wrote:
It would be, but in order to be able to encompass the full range of
potential contributions, including technical, community, support and
everything else, we are left with the definition decided a very long
time ago "Sustained and Substantial", which is obviously somewhat
subjective.
"Thank you for your contributions so far to the openSUSE Project. All
contributions are important and valued. After review of your
application for membership, we were unable to verify a contribution
level that would warrant us to accept your application at this time.
However, this does not preclude you from applying again in the future
after you have had a chance to be more involved with the openSUSE projec
t."
Where is it defined what a "contribution level to warrant us to accept your
application" is? It would be much better, if people would have a concrete idea
of what they would have to actually do to become members. That said, the whole idea of judging people's
contributions feels unwelcoming
to me. I think it is a structural flaw of the openSUSE membership that you
can't join by doing things, but you have to pass a committee.
The purpose of the Membership commitee is not to *judge* peoples
contributions, but to *validate* the claimed contributions in the
application for Membership
The most common reason for the template email we're discussing being
sent out is because in many, many, many (way too many cases) people
are applying to be a Member with either NO contributions in their
application (despite the instructions on
https://en.opensuse.org/openSUSE:Members) or, also sadly very common,
are applications promising to contribute if they become members, which
is totally the wrong way around
Contribute first, then you become a Member
This is not how
you encourage people to become part of a community. I would be very much in
favor of just eliminating the need for discussing wording of rejection letters
by not rejecting people who want to be part of the community.
Anyone can be part of the community, anyone can contribute, without
any committee, or anyone else giving anyone any permission to do so.
'Membership' in the openSUSE sense is about having proven a long term
commitment to the openSUSE project, which makes you eligible to vote
in major decisions by the Project, and have an openSUSE email
address.. that's all.
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org
To contact the owner, email: opensuse-project+owner(a)opensuse.org
2:16 p.m.
Hey,
nice to see this get together of the openSUSE Elders Council ;-)
On 02.06.2015 13:30, Cornelius Schumacher wrote:
On Monday 01 June 2015 15:06:54 Robert Schweikert
wrote:
Nowhere, its a group of people voting on if your individual
contributions are "continued and substantial". And how would you define
that? There are a gazillion ways to contribute and after you're finished
defining them there are a gazillion and sixteen ways :-)
"Thank you for your contributions so far to the openSUSE Project. All
contributions are important and valued. After review of your
application for membership, we were unable to verify a contribution
level that would warrant us to accept your application at this time.
However, this does not preclude you from applying again in the future
after you have had a chance to be more involved with the openSUSE projec
t."
Where is it defined what a "contribution level to warrant us to accept your
application" is? It would be much better, if people would have a
concrete idea
of what they would have to actually do to become members.
Continued and substantial contribution sums that up pretty nicely. The
documentation also mentions Portal:How_to_participate...
That said, the whole idea of judging people's
contributions feels unwelcoming
to me. I think it is a structural flaw of the openSUSE membership that you
can't join by doing things, but you have to pass a committee. This is not how
you encourage people to become part of a community. I would be very much in
favor of just eliminating the need for discussing wording of rejection letters
by not rejecting people who want to be part of the community.
So you want people who never have done anything "continued and
substantial" to our project to join the body that elects our board? I'm
pretty sure that this isn't a good idea :-)
Please don't confuse being part of the openSUSE project with being a
"openSUSE Member".
Henne
--
Henne Vogelsang
http://www.opensuse.org
Everybody has a plan, until they get hit.
- Mike Tyson
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org
To contact the owner, email: opensuse-project+owner(a)opensuse.org
3 Jun
3 Jun
3:04 p.m.
On Tuesday 02 June 2015 14:16:33 Henne Vogelsang wrote:
So you want people who never have done anything "continued and
substantial" to our project to join the body that elects our board? I'm
pretty sure that this isn't a good idea :-)
I want people who want to contribute feel welcome, even if they haven't done
anything yet. I'm pretty sure that is a good idea.
I want the board to be elected by people who express that they want to be part
of the community. I want it to be a representation of the people who feel part
of the community. I'm pretty sure that is a good idea as well.
I want to operate from a point of view that people mean well when they want to
join openSUSE and optimize for getting new contributors on board, not for
protecting against potential abuse. I'm pretty sure that this also is a good
idea for an open community like openSUSE is.
Please don't confuse being part of the openSUSE
project with being a
"openSUSE Member".
There is confusion. As Richard said, too many people are applying as members
under wrong assumptions. The fact that we need rejection mails, membership
committees validating contributions, Wiki pages with red warnings, etc. shows
that there is an issue with becoming part of openSUSE.
The big problem is that we will never hear from those people who didn't even
try to become part because they were discouraged by how we handle this. We
lose these people without even knowing about them.
So to live up to our expectations as open community, to remove a barrier in
becoming a contributor, to encourage people to join us, we could get rid of
the validation and rejection step and just let everybody become a member who
wants to.
This way the board would be the representative of all self-proclaimed members
of the openSUSE community, which I think is exactly what it should be.
The work would still be done by those who are active. The decisions would
still be taken by those who do the work. We still would have protection
mechanisms like the veto power of the chairman of the board or the guiding
principles.
But we would have a more open, more welcoming, more inclusive community.
That's what I would really like to see.
--
Cornelius Schumacher <cschum(a)suse.de>
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org
To contact the owner, email: opensuse-project+owner(a)opensuse.org
3:25 p.m.
Le 03/06/2015 15:04, Cornelius Schumacher a écrit :
So to live up to our expectations as open community,
to remove a barrier in
becoming a contributor, to encourage people to join us, we could get rid of
the validation and rejection step and just let everybody become a member who
wants to.
This way the board would be the representative of all self-proclaimed members
of the openSUSE community, which I think is exactly what it should be.
The work would still be done by those who are active. The decisions would
still be taken by those who do the work. We still would have protection
mechanisms like the veto power of the chairman of the board or the guiding
principles.
But we would have a more open, more welcoming, more inclusive community.
That's what I would really like to see.
We could imagine lot of mechanisms to ensure this, apart the letter.
For example we could imagine a 6 month delay between the moment the
membership is accepted and the moment a people can vote (to prevent mass
subscription only for the vote). We could also revive the membership
involvement verification that is already written in the rules.
We could say:
"thanks asking to be an openSUSE member, we are proud to welcome you to
the openSUSE membership. As you may know, membership mean contributions
of any sort (link to page), and is revised each year (as said in ... page).
Do not hesitate to ask if you don't know how to contribute, we have
tasks of all sorts, easy and difficult, for every kind of knowledge.
Your first step now could be to subscribe to (opensuse mailing list or
forum and present yourself :-)"
jdd
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org
To contact the owner, email: opensuse-project+owner(a)opensuse.org
4 Jun
4 Jun
11:40 a.m.
Le 03/06/2015 15:25, jdd a écrit :
We could imagine lot of mechanisms to ensure this,
apart the letter.
we could also let the demand stay and send the letter before giving the
answer... there is provision for this in the interface
jdd
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org
To contact the owner, email: opensuse-project+owner(a)opensuse.org
3 Jun
3 Jun
3:32 p.m.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
On 06/03/2015 09:04 AM, Cornelius Schumacher wrote:
On Tuesday 02 June 2015 14:16:33 Henne Vogelsang
wrote:
Then why bother having membership at all?
If everyone who wants to be a member gets to be a member just for
filling out the application then we might as well not have it. The
board can then be elected by the general population on the internet
and everyone can run. Yes, this is a bit of an extreme statement, but
is the logical consequence of not expecting people to actually
contribute to the project to be a member.
The other option is to figure out how to collect money and have a "pay
for" membership model, i.e. pay and you get to vote or run for the
board. Of course this will draw complaints from those that do not have
the financial means and are members today because of their contributions
.
If there is confusion about membership and being part of the community
then lets fix that issue. Rather than abandoning the whole model and
re-orchestrating the governance model. In order to move forward we
have to eventually stop squabbling about the fundamentals and leave
them alone. If there are issue with certain things lets fix the issues
rather than questioning the whole concept that has been chosen over
and over again.
Later,
Robert
- --
Robert Schweikert MAY THE SOURCE BE WITH YOU
Public Cloud Architect LINUX
rjschwei(a)suse.com
IRC: robjo
So you want people who never have done anything "continued and
substantial" to our project to join the body that elects our
board? I'm pretty sure that this isn't a good idea :-)
I want people who want to contribute feel welcome, even if they
haven't done anything yet. I'm pretty sure that is a good idea.
I want the board to be elected by people who express that they want
to be part of the community. I want it to be a representation of
the people who feel part of the community. I'm pretty sure that is
a good idea as well.
I want to operate from a point of view that people mean well when
they want to join openSUSE and optimize for getting new
contributors on board, not for protecting against potential abuse.
I'm pretty sure that this also is a good idea for an open community
like openSUSE is.
Please don't confuse being part of the
openSUSE project with
being a "openSUSE Member".
There is confusion. As Richard said, too many people are applying
as members under wrong assumptions. The fact that we need rejection
mails, membership committees validating contributions, Wiki pages
with red warnings, etc. shows that there is an issue with becoming
part of openSUSE.
The big problem is that we will never hear from those people who
didn't even try to become part because they were discouraged by how
we handle this. We lose these people without even knowing about
them.
So to live up to our expectations as open community, to remove a
barrier in becoming a contributor, to encourage people to join us,
we could get rid of the validation and rejection step and just let
everybody become a member who wants to.
This way the board would be the representative of all
self-proclaimed members of the openSUSE community, which I think is
exactly what it should be.
The work would still be done by those who are active. The decisions
would still be taken by those who do the work. We still would have
protection mechanisms like the veto power of the chairman of the
board or the guiding principles.
But we would have a more open, more welcoming, more inclusive
community. That's what I would really like to see.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2
iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJVbwHbAAoJEE4FgL32d2UkWIQH/2mty5MaW/rTeL5A1GU9owm0
WXN+qL21/FfmCeOlntLarNUz8sGzJBUAbAoXJM+622o2AQN4zZyE99xApjDNwqad
W0BViQmRzHdsRAulWPzNDGWvAyYXYPLov+tefG5lkw5qSROSeC9UrnY9NQ8KecBd
em82vPqbSJaXA7SAI3ztPdAzDyYXSUBQDDJn2mSDudQXctV01l1drLomEuSu/ePD
NmQX+lTCHnBr6Weqx+vJ2roNmVyNGzrgYV+sSGcVBeyD10DH8OxVWwWplcxt2K6T
3wIv39Es91W1UQqLLGn9pXPNtBguQXGDZtmHaL5xiI7iGbYbf4aOiNVLJamrjU8=
=Uu4t
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org
To contact the owner, email: opensuse-project+owner(a)opensuse.org
3:51 p.m.
Robert Schweikert wrote:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
On 06/03/2015 09:04 AM, Cornelius Schumacher wrote:
Ah, but that's not what Cornelius said - we should and we do expect
members to contribute, but it doesn't have to be an absolute criteria
for becoming a member, just as it isn't a criteria for remaining a
member.
--
Per Jessen, Zürich (26.2°C)
http://www.dns24.ch/ - free dynamic DNS, made in Switzerland.
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org
To contact the owner, email: opensuse-project+owner(a)opensuse.org
On Tuesday 02 June 2015 14:16:33 Henne Vogelsang
wrote:
Then why bother having membership at all?
If everyone who wants to be a member gets to be a member just for
filling out the application then we might as well not have it. The
board can then be elected by the general population on the internet
and everyone can run. Yes, this is a bit of an extreme statement, but
is the logical consequence of not expecting people to actually
contribute to the project to be a member.
So you want people who never have done anything "continued and
substantial" to our project to join the body that elects our
board? I'm pretty sure that this isn't a good idea :-)
I want people who want to contribute feel welcome, even if they
haven't done anything yet. I'm pretty sure that is a good idea.
I want the board to be elected by people who express that they want
to be part of the community. I want it to be a representation of
the people who feel part of the community. I'm pretty sure that is
a good idea as well.
I want to operate from a point of view that people mean well when
they want to join openSUSE and optimize for getting new
contributors on board, not for protecting against potential abuse.
I'm pretty sure that this also is a good idea for an open community
like openSUSE is.
Please don't confuse being part of the
openSUSE project with
being a "openSUSE Member".
There is confusion. As Richard said, too many people are applying
as members under wrong assumptions. The fact that we need rejection
mails, membership committees validating contributions, Wiki pages
with red warnings, etc. shows that there is an issue with becoming
part of openSUSE.
The big problem is that we will never hear from those people who
didn't even try to become part because they were discouraged by how
we handle this. We lose these people without even knowing about
them.
So to live up to our expectations as open community, to remove a
barrier in becoming a contributor, to encourage people to join us,
we could get rid of the validation and rejection step and just let
everybody become a member who wants to.
This way the board would be the representative of all
self-proclaimed members of the openSUSE community, which I think is
exactly what it should be.
The work would still be done by those who are active. The decisions
would still be taken by those who do the work. We still would have
protection mechanisms like the veto power of the chairman of the
board or the guiding principles.
But we would have a more open, more welcoming, more inclusive
community. That's what I would really like to see.
6:48 p.m.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
On 06/03/2015 09:51 AM, Per Jessen wrote:
Robert Schweikert wrote:
Well my personal opinion is that the same criteria that are applied to
become a member should be required to sustain membership. But I am
just repeating myself.
Second, I believe everyone has good intentions. But we all know that
despite the best intentions things happen that derail our plans. Thus,
I am not in favour of a model that opens membership to people who plan
to contribute in the future.
Later,
RObert
- --
Robert Schweikert MAY THE SOURCE BE WITH YOU
Public Cloud Architect LINUX
rjschwei(a)suse.com
IRC: robjo
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1
On 06/03/2015 09:04 AM, Cornelius Schumacher wrote:
Ah, but that's not what Cornelius said - we should and we do
expect members to contribute, but it doesn't have to be an absolute
criteria for becoming a member, just as it isn't a criteria for
remaining a member. On Tuesday 02 June 2015 14:16:33 Henne Vogelsang
wrote:
Then why bother having membership at all?
If everyone who wants to be a member gets to be a member just
for filling out the application then we might as well not have
it. The board can then be elected by the general population on
the internet and everyone can run. Yes, this is a bit of an
extreme statement, but is the logical consequence of not
expecting people to actually contribute to the project to be a
member.
So you want people who never have done anything "continued
and substantial" to our project to join the body that elects
our board? I'm pretty sure that this isn't a good idea :-)
I want people who want to contribute feel welcome, even if
they haven't done anything yet. I'm pretty sure that is a good
idea.
I want the board to be elected by people who express that they
want to be part of the community. I want it to be a
representation of the people who feel part of the community.
I'm pretty sure that is a good idea as well.
I want to operate from a point of view that people mean well
when they want to join openSUSE and optimize for getting new
contributors on board, not for protecting against potential
abuse. I'm pretty sure that this also is a good idea for an
open community like openSUSE is.
Please don't confuse being part of the
openSUSE project with
being a "openSUSE Member".
There is confusion. As Richard said, too many people are
applying as members under wrong assumptions. The fact that we
need rejection mails, membership committees validating
contributions, Wiki pages with red warnings, etc. shows that
there is an issue with becoming part of openSUSE.
The big problem is that we will never hear from those people
who didn't even try to become part because they were
discouraged by how we handle this. We lose these people without
even knowing about them.
So to live up to our expectations as open community, to remove
a barrier in becoming a contributor, to encourage people to
join us, we could get rid of the validation and rejection step
and just let everybody become a member who wants to.
This way the board would be the representative of all
self-proclaimed members of the openSUSE community, which I
think is exactly what it should be.
The work would still be done by those who are active. The
decisions would still be taken by those who do the work. We
still would have protection mechanisms like the veto power of
the chairman of the board or the guiding principles.
But we would have a more open, more welcoming, more inclusive
community. That's what I would really like to see.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2
iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJVby/gAAoJEE4FgL32d2Ukd7QH/3GL0HTp2yAOLcA919Vj5Fch
GAhRcce7R5jIy6C5FOaj5+9p08xsVAxHkusLdnJ2eBH/oTm/4XxzYmmKpRJZOICN
2qSUYcOUCn/EAJB+KJew0zK22ogXUP1Ay0isoHCBNi7K/S2zH6Le600bKKN8Pivj
Gy05K9KC0jryjPJ3D8ZRqkER5Bj5DMEcc9mhjVd5xbGGWpCYzCYcdhgW0HyMStPv
O0RfYYajcKuTpk8VBsmC1PCnm8T4V8PBBWuPCpQ4p7Y8v7LpL8Pxyb9Czpfy7FRE
lqMkeZeIyBzY3GsOgL7jMNQqT03mDv7GGFqBcJ6U7eYMzQqqiGMvnGKllSZE7+E=
=NOwh
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org
To contact the owner, email: opensuse-project+owner(a)opensuse.org
4 p.m.
On 03.06.2015 15:32, Robert Schweikert wrote:
On 06/03/2015 09:04 AM, Cornelius Schumacher wrote:
But the general population on the internet is not at all interested in
openSUSE. If it was, yes, why not let them vote? Filling out the
application means "I am interested in openSUSE and wanna work on and
with it" - and that makes the difference...
We are not in the danger that Fedora or Ubuntu will swarm over us and
vote their buddy into the board. We are rather in the danger of having
very few being interested in openSUSE any more, and thus we should
follow Cornelius' wise advice IMO, to simplify and open up.
Klaas
On Tuesday 02 June 2015 14:16:33 Henne Vogelsang
wrote:
>
> So you want people who never have done anything "continued and
> substantial" to our project to join the body that elects our
> board? I'm pretty sure that this isn't a good idea :-)
I want people who want to contribute feel
welcome, even if they
haven't done anything yet. I'm pretty sure that is a good idea.
I want the board to be elected by people who
express that they want
to be part of the community. I want it to be a representation of
the people who feel part of the community. I'm pretty sure that is
a good idea as well.
I want to operate from a point of view that
people mean well when
they want to join openSUSE and optimize for getting new
contributors on board, not for protecting against potential abuse.
I'm pretty sure that this also is a good idea for an open community
like openSUSE is.
> Please don't confuse being part of the
openSUSE project with
> being a "openSUSE Member".
There is confusion. As Richard said, too many
people are applying
as members under wrong assumptions. The fact that we need rejection
mails, membership committees validating contributions, Wiki pages
with red warnings, etc. shows that there is an issue with becoming
part of openSUSE.
The big problem is that we will never hear from
those people who
didn't even try to become part because they were discouraged by how
we handle this. We lose these people without even knowing about
them.
So to live up to our expectations as open
community, to remove a
barrier in becoming a contributor, to encourage people to join us,
we could get rid of the validation and rejection step and just let
everybody become a member who wants to.
This way the board would be the representative of
all
self-proclaimed members of the openSUSE community, which I think is
exactly what it should be.
The work would still be done by those who are
active. The decisions
would still be taken by those who do the work. We still would have
protection mechanisms like the veto power of the chairman of the
board or the guiding principles.
But we would have a more open, more welcoming,
more inclusive
community. That's what I would really like to see.
Then why bother having membership at all?
If everyone who wants to be a member gets to be a member just for
filling out the application then we might as well not have it. The
board can then be elected by the general population on the internet
and everyone can run.
The other option is to figure out how to collect money and have a "pay
for" membership model, i.e. pay and you get to vote or run for the
board. Of course this will draw complaints from those that do not have
the financial means and are members today because of their contributions
.
If there is confusion about membership and being part of the community
then lets fix that issue. Rather than abandoning the whole model and
re-orchestrating the governance model. In order to move forward we
have to eventually stop squabbling about the fundamentals and leave
them alone. If there are issue with certain things lets fix the issues
rather than questioning the whole concept that has been chosen over
and over again.
Later,
Robert
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org
To contact the owner, email: opensuse-project+owner(a)opensuse.org
4:40 p.m.
Moin
On 03.06.2015 16:00, Klaas Freitag wrote:
On 03.06.2015 15:32, Robert Schweikert wrote:
How is making membership free making more people contributing to
openSUSE? This isn't an either/or thing. When you are making membership
'free' you are still in danger of having very few being interested in
openSUSE anymore _AND_ you're in danger that the FIFA will swarm over us
and vote their buddy into the board. The first risk makes the second
risk even higher. You gain nothing, except twice as much risk.
We can simply make our membership process more welcoming, friendly, open
and inclusive _AND_ have the same 'risk' level as today.
Henne
--
Henne Vogelsang
http://www.opensuse.org
Everybody has a plan, until they get hit.
- Mike Tyson
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org
To contact the owner, email: opensuse-project+owner(a)opensuse.org
On 06/03/2015 09:04 AM, Cornelius Schumacher
wrote:
But the general population on the internet is not at all interested in
openSUSE. If it was, yes, why not let them vote? Filling out the
application means "I am interested in openSUSE and wanna work on and
with it" - and that makes the difference...
We are not in the danger that Fedora or Ubuntu will swarm over us and
vote their buddy into the board. We are rather in the danger of having
very few being interested in openSUSE any more On Tuesday 02 June 2015 14:16:33 Henne Vogelsang
wrote:
If everyone who wants to be a member gets to be a member just for
filling out the application then we might as well not have it. The
board can then be elected by the general population on the internet
and everyone can run. 
5:18 p.m.
On 06/03/2015 07:40 AM, Henne Vogelsang wrote:
Moin
On 03.06.2015 16:00, Klaas Freitag wrote:
There is the only thing I will say about this. I will neither defend nor debate
beyond this post. The history speaks for itself.
openSUSE is already autocratic. This wasn't a bad thing when the code quality was
high and ecosystem was rich and alive. The autocracy kept it that way. It no longer is and
has
been declining for some time.
The origin of Linux itself is defined by an equally autocratic project. Had it not been so
insular Linus might have put his efforts into that. The doors were closed to him so he
went on to put his energy into creating this new thing.
The lesson of history is plain. Learn from it or not.
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org
To contact the owner, email: opensuse-project+owner(a)opensuse.org
On 03.06.2015 15:32, Robert Schweikert wrote:
How is making membership free
making more people contributing to
openSUSE? This isn't an either/or thing. When you are making membership
'free' you are still in danger of having very few being interested in
openSUSE anymore _AND_ you're in danger that the FIFA will swarm over us
and vote their buddy into the board. The first risk makes the second
risk even higher. You gain nothing, except twice as much risk.
We can simply make our membership process more welcoming, friendly, open
and inclusive _AND_ have the same 'risk' level as today.
Henne
On 06/03/2015 09:04 AM, Cornelius Schumacher
wrote:
But the general population on the internet is not at all
interested in
openSUSE. If it was, yes, why not let them vote? Filling out the
application means "I am interested in openSUSE and wanna work on and
with it" - and that makes the difference...
We are not in the danger that Fedora or Ubuntu will swarm over us and
vote their buddy into the board. We are rather in the danger of having
very few being interested in openSUSE any more On Tuesday 02 June 2015 14:16:33 Henne Vogelsang
wrote:
If everyone who wants to be a member gets to be a member just for
filling out the application then we might as well not have it. The
board can then be elected by the general population on the internet
and everyone can run.
7:07 p.m.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
On 06/03/2015 10:00 AM, Klaas Freitag wrote:
On 03.06.2015 15:32, Robert Schweikert wrote:
The debate is really misplaced. It has become so simple to contribute
to openSUSE that I proclaim the endless possibilities to contribute
are over whelming and scare people off.
A "non-member" contributor has just as many possibilities to
contribute and help out as the "member" contributor. The term
"member"
is a more or less logical consequence of our governance model of the
project with an elected board. Somehow the pool of people that vote
needs to be defined. A "anyone who is interested" on election day
model is probably not the best approach. Those interested on election
day will not be involved in the project long enough to notice the
effects of their decision.
Again, if the messaging is the problem, which is what jdd originally
started out with, lets fix the messaging, lets fix the member page,
lets fix the membership such that we have members that actually still
contribute on a more or less regular basis. Those that are members but
no longer contribute should be recognized for their past
contributions, but should not necessarily continue to be able to vote
or have @opensuse.org e-mail addresses. Lets fix the confusion about
what being a member means. If people really think one has to be a
member to contribute lets get that addressed and set the record straight
.
Later,
Robert
- --
Robert Schweikert MAY THE SOURCE BE WITH YOU
Public Cloud Architect LINUX
rjschwei(a)suse.com
IRC: robjo
On 06/03/2015 09:04 AM, Cornelius Schumacher
wrote:
But the general population on the internet is not at all interested
in openSUSE. If it was, yes, why not let them vote? Filling out
the application means "I am interested in openSUSE and wanna work
on and with it" - and that makes the difference...
We are not in the danger that Fedora or Ubuntu will swarm over us
and vote their buddy into the board. We are rather in the danger of
having very few being interested in openSUSE any more, and thus we
should follow Cornelius' wise advice IMO, to simplify and open up. On Tuesday 02 June 2015 14:16:33 Henne Vogelsang
wrote:
>
> So you want people who never have done anything "continued
> and substantial" to our project to join the body that elects
> our board? I'm pretty sure that this isn't a good idea :-)
I want people who want to contribute feel
welcome, even if
they haven't done anything yet. I'm pretty sure that is a good
idea.
I want the board to be elected by people who
express that they
want to be part of the community. I want it to be a
representation of the people who feel part of the community.
I'm pretty sure that is a good idea as well.
I want to operate from a point of view that
people mean well
when they want to join openSUSE and optimize for getting new
contributors on board, not for protecting against potential
abuse. I'm pretty sure that this also is a good idea for an
open community like openSUSE is.
> Please don't confuse being part of the
openSUSE project with
> being a "openSUSE Member".
There is confusion. As Richard said, too many
people are
applying as members under wrong assumptions. The fact that we
need rejection mails, membership committees validating
contributions, Wiki pages with red warnings, etc. shows that
there is an issue with becoming part of openSUSE.
The big problem is that we will never hear from
those people
who didn't even try to become part because they were
discouraged by how we handle this. We lose these people without
even knowing about them.
So to live up to our expectations as open
community, to remove
a barrier in becoming a contributor, to encourage people to
join us, we could get rid of the validation and rejection step
and just let everybody become a member who wants to.
This way the board would be the representative of
all
self-proclaimed members of the openSUSE community, which I
think is exactly what it should be.
The work would still be done by those who are
active. The
decisions would still be taken by those who do the work. We
still would have protection mechanisms like the veto power of
the chairman of the board or the guiding principles.
But we would have a more open, more welcoming,
more inclusive
community. That's what I would really like to see.
Then why bother having membership at all?
If everyone who wants to be a member gets to be a member just
for filling out the application then we might as well not have
it. The board can then be elected by the general population on
the internet and everyone can run. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2
iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJVbzRrAAoJEE4FgL32d2UkWdYH/jEgzqQfNRuUVJTObCqOhf/D
2g6+dMzpwsuIifMCd8r44cvfgW49sfg0NDRt+Og3BHjGckFSaBSvLa8lWZPyHIfa
9bf9UJSLzVamiTybTgflaIqvn/CEt9vx25ekaFtFzPY1tiruhjwMFTftEn425Hxz
b3WLHzfJN2F6pXpNV/GOdRuNWm+w0m15zlxsg6czn/L12RsdKuJ9P7Y+j/m2nj2W
+6dmdsfndpwGl3ZHSOBtVtTqKoDa8TrrWX9KTquKFNbgHY0OZc+DA9IKZ0BymXfc
6heqtNCnCw7NCIdU73tkp8dzpEKAu64iUzbRrP7Fa/nmI/9Gu2phcizqdYHA50U=
=0f4m
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org
To contact the owner, email: opensuse-project+owner(a)opensuse.org
7:54 p.m.
Le 03/06/2015 19:07, Robert Schweikert a écrit :
A "non-member" contributor has just as many
possibilities to
contribute and help out as the "member" contributor.
right, may be this have to be made more clear
Again, if the messaging is the problem, which is what
jdd originally
started out with, lets fix the messaging, lets fix the member page,
lets fix the membership such that we have members that actually still
contribute on a more or less regular basis. Those that are members but
no longer contribute should be recognized for their past
contributions, but should not necessarily continue to be able to vote
it's the official rule but AFAIK nobody yet do care of this (it's partly
what I began to do in the other thread)
I'm pretty pleased by the way this discussion runs, we are discussing
the core of the problem. There no need to change all, but neither need
to keep all...
jdd
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org
To contact the owner, email: opensuse-project+owner(a)opensuse.org
4 Jun
4 Jun
12:40 a.m.
On Wed, Jun 3, 2015 at 10:07 AM, Robert Schweikert <rjschwei(a)suse.com> wrote:
On 06/03/2015 10:00 AM, Klaas Freitag wrote:
So far, I haven't seen anyone participating in this discussion
recognize the root cause of the need for the discussion or the letter:
there has been an overloading of the meaning of the English word
'member'.
Those that apply have one understanding of the meaning of 'member' and
those that reject that application have another.
Perhaps, if you better labeled the status gained by the granting of
certain privileges, people would wait until they felt qualified.
Maybe, 'openSUSE elector' could be used for that which must be
requested?
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org
To contact the owner, email: opensuse-project+owner(a)opensuse.org
On 03.06.2015 15:32, Robert Schweikert wrote:
The debate is really misplaced. It has become so simple to contribute
to openSUSE that I proclaim the endless possibilities to contribute
are over whelming and scare people off.
A "non-member" contributor has just as many possibilities to
contribute and help out as the "member" contributor. The term
"member"
is a more or less logical consequence of our governance model of the
project with an elected board. Somehow the pool of people that vote
needs to be defined. A "anyone who is interested" on election day
model is probably not the best approach. Those interested on election
day will not be involved in the project long enough to notice the
effects of their decision.
Again, if the messaging is the problem, which is what jdd originally
started out with, lets fix the messaging, lets fix the member page,
lets fix the membership such that we have members that actually still
contribute on a more or less regular basis. Those that are members but
no longer contribute should be recognized for their past
contributions, but should not necessarily continue to be able to vote
or have @opensuse.org e-mail addresses. Lets fix the confusion about
what being a member means. If people really think one has to be a
member to contribute lets get that addressed and set the record straight
.
Later,
Robert On 06/03/2015 09:04 AM, Cornelius Schumacher
wrote:
But the general population on the internet is not at all interested
in openSUSE. If it was, yes, why not let them vote? Filling out
the application means "I am interested in openSUSE and wanna work
on and with it" - and that makes the difference...
We are not in the danger that Fedora or Ubuntu will swarm over us
and vote their buddy into the board. We are rather in the danger of
having very few being interested in openSUSE any more, and thus we
should follow Cornelius' wise advice IMO, to simplify and open up. On Tuesday 02 June 2015 14:16:33 Henne Vogelsang
wrote:
>
> So you want people who never have done anything "continued
> and substantial" to our project to join the body that elects
> our board? I'm pretty sure that this isn't a good idea :-)
I want people who want to contribute feel
welcome, even if
they haven't done anything yet. I'm pretty sure that is a good
idea.
I want the board to be elected by people who
express that they
want to be part of the community. I want it to be a
representation of the people who feel part of the community.
I'm pretty sure that is a good idea as well.
I want to operate from a point of view that
people mean well
when they want to join openSUSE and optimize for getting new
contributors on board, not for protecting against potential
abuse. I'm pretty sure that this also is a good idea for an
open community like openSUSE is.
> Please don't confuse being part of the
openSUSE project with
> being a "openSUSE Member".
There is confusion. As Richard said, too many
people are
applying as members under wrong assumptions. The fact that we
need rejection mails, membership committees validating
contributions, Wiki pages with red warnings, etc. shows that
there is an issue with becoming part of openSUSE.
The big problem is that we will never hear from
those people
who didn't even try to become part because they were
discouraged by how we handle this. We lose these people without
even knowing about them.
So to live up to our expectations as open
community, to remove
a barrier in becoming a contributor, to encourage people to
join us, we could get rid of the validation and rejection step
and just let everybody become a member who wants to.
This way the board would be the representative of
all
self-proclaimed members of the openSUSE community, which I
think is exactly what it should be.
The work would still be done by those who are
active. The
decisions would still be taken by those who do the work. We
still would have protection mechanisms like the veto power of
the chairman of the board or the guiding principles.
But we would have a more open, more welcoming,
more inclusive
community. That's what I would really like to see.
Then why bother having membership at all?
If everyone who wants to be a member gets to be a member just
for filling out the application then we might as well not have
it. The board can then be elected by the general population on
the internet and everyone can run. 
4:02 a.m.
So far, I haven't seen anyone participating in
this discussion
recognize the root cause of the need for the discussion or the letter:
there has been an overloading of the meaning of the English word
'member'.
Those that apply have one understanding of the meaning of 'member' and
those that reject that application have another.
Perhaps, if you better labeled the status gained by the granting of
certain privileges, people would wait until they felt qualified.
Maybe, 'openSUSE elector' could be used for that which must be
requested?
Or even something as simple as “openSUSE Member” and “openSUSE Voting Member” which would
have the privileges attached to it. I know that we might be “splitting hairs” for many,
but it is a possibility at least to have a “membership” level for anyone to feel a part of
the community while still keeping decision-making held within the contributors.
Sincerely,
Bob Martens
> On Jun 3, 2015, at 5:40 PM, PatrickD Garvey <patrickdgarveyt(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On Wed, Jun 3, 2015 at 10:07 AM, Robert Schweikert <rjschwei(a)suse.com> wrote:
>> On 06/03/2015 10:00 AM, Klaas Freitag wrote:
>>> On 03.06.2015 15:32, Robert Schweikert wrote:
>>>> On 06/03/2015 09:04 AM, Cornelius Schumacher wrote:
>>>>> On Tuesday 02 June 2015 14:16:33 Henne Vogelsang wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> So you want people who never have done anything "continued
>>>>>> and substantial" to our project to join the body that
elects
>>>>>> our board? I'm pretty sure that this isn't a good idea
:-)
>>>>
>>>>> I want people who want to contribute feel welcome, even if
>>>>> they haven't done anything yet. I'm pretty sure that is a
good
>>>>> idea.
>>>>
>>>>> I want the board to be elected by people who express that they
>>>>> want to be part of the community. I want it to be a
>>>>> representation of the people who feel part of the community.
>>>>> I'm pretty sure that is a good idea as well.
>>>>
>>>>> I want to operate from a point of view that people mean well
>>>>> when they want to join openSUSE and optimize for getting new
>>>>> contributors on board, not for protecting against potential
>>>>> abuse. I'm pretty sure that this also is a good idea for an
>>>>> open community like openSUSE is.
>>>>
>>>>>> Please don't confuse being part of the openSUSE project with
>>>>>> being a "openSUSE Member".
>>>>
>>>>> There is confusion. As Richard said, too many people are
>>>>> applying as members under wrong assumptions. The fact that we
>>>>> need rejection mails, membership committees validating
>>>>> contributions, Wiki pages with red warnings, etc. shows that
>>>>> there is an issue with becoming part of openSUSE.
>>>>
>>>>> The big problem is that we will never hear from those people
>>>>> who didn't even try to become part because they were
>>>>> discouraged by how we handle this. We lose these people without
>>>>> even knowing about them.
>>>>
>>>>> So to live up to our expectations as open community, to remove
>>>>> a barrier in becoming a contributor, to encourage people to
>>>>> join us, we could get rid of the validation and rejection step
>>>>> and just let everybody become a member who wants to.
>>>>
>>>>> This way the board would be the representative of all
>>>>> self-proclaimed members of the openSUSE community, which I
>>>>> think is exactly what it should be.
>>>>
>>>>> The work would still be done by those who are active. The
>>>>> decisions would still be taken by those who do the work. We
>>>>> still would have protection mechanisms like the veto power of
>>>>> the chairman of the board or the guiding principles.
>>>>
>>>>> But we would have a more open, more welcoming, more inclusive
>>>>> community. That's what I would really like to see.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Then why bother having membership at all?
>>>>
>>>> If everyone who wants to be a member gets to be a member just
>>>> for filling out the application then we might as well not have
>>>> it. The board can then be elected by the general population on
>>>> the internet and everyone can run.
>>>
>>> But the general population on the internet is not at all interested
>>> in openSUSE. If it was, yes, why not let them vote? Filling out
>>> the application means "I am interested in openSUSE and wanna work
>>> on and with it" - and that makes the difference...
>>>
>>> We are not in the danger that Fedora or Ubuntu will swarm over us
>>> and vote their buddy into the board. We are rather in the danger of
>>> having very few being interested in openSUSE any more, and thus we
>>> should follow Cornelius' wise advice IMO, to simplify and open up.
>>
>> The debate is really misplaced. It has become so simple to contribute
>> to openSUSE that I proclaim the endless possibilities to contribute
>> are over whelming and scare people off.
>>
>> A "non-member" contributor has just as many possibilities to
>> contribute and help out as the "member" contributor. The term
"member"
>> is a more or less logical consequence of our governance model of the
>> project with an elected board. Somehow the pool of people that vote
>> needs to be defined. A "anyone who is interested" on election day
>> model is probably not the best approach. Those interested on election
>> day will not be involved in the project long enough to notice the
>> effects of their decision.
>>
>> Again, if the messaging is the problem, which is what jdd originally
>> started out with, lets fix the messaging, lets fix the member page,
>> lets fix the membership such that we have members that actually still
>> contribute on a more or less regular basis. Those that are members but
>> no longer contribute should be recognized for their past
>> contributions, but should not necessarily continue to be able to vote
>> or have @opensuse.org e-mail addresses. Lets fix the confusion about
>> what being a member means. If people really think one has to be a
>> member to contribute lets get that addressed and set the record straight
>> .
>>
>> Later,
>> Robert
>
So far, I haven't seen anyone participating in
this discussion
recognize the root cause of the need for the discussion or the letter:
there has been an overloading of the meaning of the English word
'member'.
Those that apply have one understanding of the meaning of 'member' and
those that reject that application have another.
Perhaps, if you better labeled the status gained by the granting of
certain privileges, people would wait until they felt qualified.
Maybe, 'openSUSE elector' could be used for that which must be
requested?
> --
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org
> To contact the owner, email: opensuse-project+owner(a)opensuse.org
>
--
This electronic communication, including any attached documents, may
contain confidential and/or legally privileged information that is intended
only for use by the recipient(s) named above. If you have received this
communication in error, please notify the sender immediately and delete the
communication and any attachments. Views expressed by the author do not
necessarily represent those of Martin Luther College.
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org
To contact the owner, email: opensuse-project+owner(a)opensuse.org
2:40 p.m.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
On 06/03/2015 10:02 PM, Robert Martens wrote:
Lets make the assumption that the issue lies with the overloading of
"member" as in:
Member of the openSUSE community:
A person that contributes to the project but does not vote, have an
@opensuse.org e-mail etc. (no form required)
openSUSE Member:
A person that has provided sustained substantial contributions to the
project and has applied for and received membership
"blessing/status/INSERT_OTHER_NOT_QUITE_APPROPRIATE_WORD_HERE". Has
voting rights and @opensuse.org e-mail....
Now lets rename the two and see where we end up
Member of the openSUSE community:
A person that contributes to the project but does not vote, have an
@opensuse.org e-mail etc. (no form required)
openSUSE Voting Member:
A person that has provided sustained substantial contributions to the
project and has applied for and received membership
"blessing/status/INSERT_OTHER_NOT_QUITE_APPROPRIATE_WORD_HERE". Has
voting rights and @opensuse.org e-mail....
Would we not end up in the same predicament?
Having to explain the difference between "member" and "voting
member",
having to separate these two in a friendly way such that those that
apply to become a voting member and do not get accepted as such don't
run away because the form e-mail they received is not friendly? Would
we not need to fix the wiki to avoid all the red warning labels? Add
all the arguments that have already been made in this thread.
No matter the "title" chosen, the basic conundrum remains. Given the
governance model of the project and the logical need to limit the pool
of people with certain rights/obligations to those that "show they
care" creates a certain degree of separation. No matter what the
"title" bestowed on each group, an explanation of/to both is required.
Therefore I proclaim that we can do just a good a job explaining the
first (current) double meaning as we can explaining the modified naming.
Later,
Robert
- --
Robert Schweikert MAY THE SOURCE BE WITH YOU
Public Cloud Architect LINUX
rjschwei(a)suse.com
IRC: robjo
So far, I
haven't seen anyone participating in this discussion
recognize the root cause of the need for the discussion or the
letter: there has been an overloading of the meaning of the
English word 'member'.
Those that apply have one understanding of the meaning of
'member' and those that reject that application have another.
Perhaps, if you better labeled the status gained by the granting
of certain privileges, people would wait until they felt
qualified. Maybe, 'openSUSE elector' could be used for that which
must be requested?
Or even something as simple as “openSUSE Member” and “openSUSE
Voting Member” which would have the privileges attached to it. I
know that we might be “splitting hairs” for many, but it is a
possibility at least to have a “membership” level for anyone to
feel a part of the community while still keeping decision-making
held within the contributors.
Sincerely, Bob Martens
> On Jun 3, 2015, at 5:40 PM, PatrickD Garvey
> <patrickdgarveyt(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>
> On Wed, Jun 3, 2015 at 10:07 AM, Robert Schweikert
> <rjschwei(a)suse.com> wrote:
>> On 06/03/2015 10:00 AM, Klaas Freitag wrote:
>>> On 03.06.2015 15:32, Robert Schweikert wrote:
>>>> On 06/03/2015 09:04 AM, Cornelius Schumacher wrote:
>>>>> On Tuesday 02 June 2015 14:16:33 Henne Vogelsang wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>> So you want people who never have done anything
>>>>>> "continued and substantial" to our project to join the
>>>>>> body that elects our board? I'm pretty sure that this
>>>>>> isn't a good idea :-)
>>>>
>>>>> I want people who want to contribute feel welcome, even
>>>>> if they haven't done anything yet. I'm pretty sure that
>>>>> is a good idea.
>>>>
>>>>> I want the board to be elected by people who express that
>>>>> they want to be part of the community. I want it to be a
>>>>> representation of the people who feel part of the
>>>>> community. I'm pretty sure that is a good idea as well.
>>>>
>>>>> I want to operate from a point of view that people mean
>>>>> well when they want to join openSUSE and optimize for
>>>>> getting new contributors on board, not for protecting
>>>>> against potential abuse. I'm pretty sure that this also
>>>>> is a good idea for an open community like openSUSE is.
>>>>
>>>>>> Please don't confuse being part of the openSUSE project
>>>>>> with being a "openSUSE Member".
>>>>
>>>>> There is confusion. As Richard said, too many people are
>>>>> applying as members under wrong assumptions. The fact
>>>>> that we need rejection mails, membership committees
>>>>> validating contributions, Wiki pages with red warnings,
>>>>> etc. shows that there is an issue with becoming part of
>>>>> openSUSE.
>>>>
>>>>> The big problem is that we will never hear from those
>>>>> people who didn't even try to become part because they
>>>>> were discouraged by how we handle this. We lose these
>>>>> people without even knowing about them.
>>>>
>>>>> So to live up to our expectations as open community, to
>>>>> remove a barrier in becoming a contributor, to encourage
>>>>> people to join us, we could get rid of the validation and
>>>>> rejection step and just let everybody become a member who
>>>>> wants to.
>>>>
>>>>> This way the board would be the representative of all
>>>>> self-proclaimed members of the openSUSE community, which
>>>>> I think is exactly what it should be.
>>>>
>>>>> The work would still be done by those who are active.
>>>>> The decisions would still be taken by those who do the
>>>>> work. We still would have protection mechanisms like the
>>>>> veto power of the chairman of the board or the guiding
>>>>> principles.
>>>>
>>>>> But we would have a more open, more welcoming, more
>>>>> inclusive community. That's what I would really like to
>>>>> see.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Then why bother having membership at all?
>>>>
>>>> If everyone who wants to be a member gets to be a member
>>>> just for filling out the application then we might as well
>>>> not have it. The board can then be elected by the general
>>>> population on the internet and everyone can run.
>>>
>>> But the general population on the internet is not at all
>>> interested in openSUSE. If it was, yes, why not let them
>>> vote? Filling out the application means "I am interested in
>>> openSUSE and wanna work on and with it" - and that makes the
>>> difference...
>>>
>>> We are not in the danger that Fedora or Ubuntu will swarm
>>> over us and vote their buddy into the board. We are rather in
>>> the danger of having very few being interested in openSUSE
>>> any more, and thus we should follow Cornelius' wise advice
>>> IMO, to simplify and open up.
>>
>> The debate is really misplaced. It has become so simple to
>> contribute to openSUSE that I proclaim the endless
>> possibilities to contribute are over whelming and scare people
>> off.
>>
>> A "non-member" contributor has just as many possibilities to
>> contribute and help out as the "member" contributor. The term
>> "member" is a more or less logical consequence of our
>> governance model of the project with an elected board. Somehow
>> the pool of people that vote needs to be defined. A "anyone who
>> is interested" on election day model is probably not the best
>> approach. Those interested on election day will not be
>> involved in the project long enough to notice the effects of
>> their decision.
>>
>> Again, if the messaging is the problem, which is what jdd
>> originally started out with, lets fix the messaging, lets fix
>> the member page, lets fix the membership such that we have
>> members that actually still contribute on a more or less
>> regular basis. Those that are members but no longer contribute
>> should be recognized for their past contributions, but should
>> not necessarily continue to be able to vote or have
>> @opensuse.org e-mail addresses. Lets fix the confusion about
>> what being a member means. If people really think one has to be
>> a member to contribute lets get that addressed and set the
>> record straight .
>>
>> Later, Robert
>
> So far, I haven't seen anyone participating in this discussion
> recognize the root cause of the need for the discussion or the
> letter: there has been an overloading of the meaning of the
> English word 'member'.
>
> Those that apply have one understanding of the meaning of
> 'member' and those that reject that application have another.
>
> Perhaps, if you better labeled the status gained by the granting
> of certain privileges, people would wait until they felt
> qualified. Maybe, 'openSUSE elector' could be used for that which
> must be requested? -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2
iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJVcEcwAAoJEE4FgL32d2Ukw9oIAK+dNxQsWinBJlx1CP2BcVVt
fJ+9EQ3RYlgm3TiynQCs2tdW56QG5nZmrGOwda1OoIzDZ19V+60q87BQr8zhh5nE
frO3TMEmQuCfSg92gzbPP6voJHeBnXbT3H3rTQGtCM2S67HElR7AjRTY8mFqqEt4
INnFcr/HrCH06FQrYoRhtBaMmRdJJMBrX6Jhd/SK+57VRnRvlwbMCyNqaRH/Zaar
aFVWFjn53ENGIcRQ3PbJbfuc4KL1Noz164NqemV8FYzkvt7IMiFmUdogeT4qY3gD
gUJysRmHnUoRn3k9PKvyhcq2B0NZF/CLi595Nj+zWpQRsrY6/ab1jPqL+PWun+M=
=0jby
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org
To contact the owner, email: opensuse-project+owner(a)opensuse.org
3 p.m.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA256
On 2015-06-04 14:40, Robert Schweikert wrote:
Now lets rename the two and see where we end up
Member of the openSUSE community: A person that contributes to the
project but does not vote, have an @opensuse.org e-mail etc. (no
form required)
openSUSE Voting Member: A person that has provided sustained
substantial contributions to the project and has applied for and
received membership
"blessing/status/INSERT_OTHER_NOT_QUITE_APPROPRIATE_WORD_HERE".
Has voting rights and @opensuse.org e-mail....
The first one does not currently get an @opensuse.org e-mail.
Do we want to?
- --
Cheers / Saludos,
Carlos E. R.
(from 13.1 x86_64 "Bottle" (Minas Tirith))
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2.0.22 (GNU/Linux)
iF4EAREIAAYFAlVwS98ACgkQja8UbcUWM1z4+QD5AUDJ/fbHPFehtGD5JCZcY4Ry
Z7Z9QbxZC1LjzwmGGaYBAI8sL/Ue3VqeE8HD9Jcpg19CakrLoHEJxQz6hITJxATd
=dLTy
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org
To contact the owner, email: opensuse-project+owner(a)opensuse.org
3:13 p.m.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
On 06/04/2015 09:00 AM, Carlos E. R. wrote:
On 2015-06-04 14:40, Robert Schweikert wrote:
Well, that's kind of the point of showing "sustained and substantial
contribution", it shows that you care enough for a period of time.
Therefore as a "perk" one gets @opensuse.org.
It all can be boiled down to the "show that you care" argument. If one
wants a @linux.com address one shows that one cares about Linux by
opening one's wallet.
Later,
Robert
- --
Robert Schweikert MAY THE SOURCE BE WITH YOU
Public Cloud Architect LINUX
rjschwei(a)suse.com
IRC: robjo
Now lets rename the two and see where we end up
Member of the openSUSE community: A person that
contributes to
the project but does not vote, have an @opensuse.org e-mail etc.
(no form required)
openSUSE Voting Member: A person that has
provided sustained
substantial contributions to the project and has applied for and
received membership
"blessing/status/INSERT_OTHER_NOT_QUITE_APPROPRIATE_WORD_HERE".
Has voting rights and @opensuse.org e-mail....
The first one does not currently get an @opensuse.org e-mail. Do we
want to?
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2
iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJVcE8VAAoJEE4FgL32d2UkklUH+gPE9oyWNMiffZjW2wf7ToMQ
zOO94ACbuNoL2Wn8ZUmoI55z3q7dZRAEs/YUth5cuw7aUdi4p6WW8GvjbWAZszBw
xhgJaHdXsKvDYbyF97wt11FIaHMu0SeBCUjrULTClvMBIPAztiszIdyxgURx6ybw
xBv8FlepdQFTATVKGkm+uZqTxRu3JYnhjcBsQd5ubcugwD1kdaBFBSXZ+f1PYN3R
fkkm/KJy4Wj2pe2bG8NgpfMdDxhaLMi/8dIZgZue7kni0QzF81dx0kGNxGgI6IA8
dctQjwIEiI6XqS6R7xf6ajFn1jmMk6TkVB2HgXcctk3JDGXATiu2uhwmOnBwk8U=
=x6RQ
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org
To contact the owner, email: opensuse-project+owner(a)opensuse.org
3:26 p.m.
Le 04/06/2015 14:40, Robert Schweikert a écrit :
Therefore I proclaim that we can do just a good a job
explaining the
first (current) double meaning as we can explaining the modified naming.
searching for synonyms, I could find: "representative" or "senior
members"
jdd
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org
To contact the owner, email: opensuse-project+owner(a)opensuse.org
4:15 p.m.
On Thu, Jun 4, 2015 at 5:40 AM, Robert Schweikert <rjschwei(a)suse.com> wrote:
The key difference is you start with two labels that are more likely
to be distinguished in the mind of the requester. They know that
requesting "voting member" status is a step up from "member" before
they make any request. They may actually research what is required to
move up.
> On Jun 3,
2015, at 5:40 PM, PatrickD Garvey
> <patrickdgarveyt(a)gmail.com> wrote:
>
> So far, I haven't seen anyone participating in this discussion
> recognize the root cause of the need for the discussion or the
> letter: there has been an overloading of the meaning of the
> English word 'member'.
>
> Those that apply have one understanding of the meaning of
> 'member' and those that reject that application have another.
>
> Perhaps, if you better labeled the status gained by the granting
> of certain privileges, people would wait until they felt
> qualified. Maybe, 'openSUSE elector' could be used for that which
> must be requested?
Lets make the assumption that the issue lies with the overloading of
"member" as in:
Member of the openSUSE community:
A person that contributes to the project but does not vote, have an
@opensuse.org e-mail etc. (no form required)
openSUSE Member:
A person that has provided sustained substantial contributions to the
project and has applied for and received membership
"blessing/status/INSERT_OTHER_NOT_QUITE_APPROPRIATE_WORD_HERE". Has
voting rights and @opensuse.org e-mail....
Now lets rename the two and see where we end up
Member of the openSUSE community:
A person that contributes to the project but does not vote, have an
@opensuse.org e-mail etc. (no form required)
openSUSE Voting Member:
A person that has provided sustained substantial contributions to the
project and has applied for and received membership
"blessing/status/INSERT_OTHER_NOT_QUITE_APPROPRIATE_WORD_HERE". Has
voting rights and @opensuse.org e-mail....
Would we not end up in the same predicament?
Having to explain the difference between "member" and "voting
member",
having to separate these two in a friendly way such that those that
apply to become a voting member and do not get accepted as such don't
run away because the form e-mail they received is not friendly? Would
we not need to fix the wiki to avoid all the red warning labels? Add
all the arguments that have already been made in this thread.
No matter the "title" chosen, the basic
conundrum remains. Given the
governance model of the project and the logical need to limit the pool
of people with certain rights/obligations to those that "show they
care" creates a certain degree of separation. No matter what the
"title" bestowed on each group, an explanation of/to both is required.
I totally agree.
Therefore I proclaim that we can do just a good a job explaining the
first (current) double meaning as we can explaining the modified naming.
I'm sorry, but I think you have missed the only opportunity to show
there is a reason for an acceptance process without first confusing
the applicant.
"You only have one chance to make a good first impression." I think
there is ample evidence the first impression currently generates
confusion that is compounded by a poorly worded rejection letter.
Later,
Robert
PatrickD
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org
To contact the owner, email: opensuse-project+owner(a)opensuse.org
10:31 a.m.
Le 04/06/2015 00:40, PatrickD Garvey a écrit :
So far, I haven't seen anyone participating in
this discussion
recognize the root cause of the need for the discussion or the letter:
there has been an overloading of the meaning of the English word
'member'.
we had an extensive discussion on the subject when creating the
membership process, but didn't find a really good wording
but I don't think these demands to be member as bad, on the contrary,
these people are probably of good will and have to be kept connected on
some way...
jdd
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org
To contact the owner, email: opensuse-project+owner(a)opensuse.org
3:56 p.m.
On Thu, Jun 4, 2015 at 1:31 AM, jdd <jdd(a)dodin.org> wrote:
Le 04/06/2015 00:40, PatrickD Garvey a écrit :
I assume you can't point to a recording of that discussion, so please
characterize whether there may have been any suggestion of the use of
any other label than 'member' for the privileged participant.
So far, I haven't seen anyone participating
in this discussion
recognize the root cause of the need for the discussion or the letter:
there has been an overloading of the meaning of the English word
'member'.
we had an extensive discussion on the subject when creating the membership
process, but didn't find a really good wording but I don't think these demands to be member as
bad, on the contrary, these
people are probably of good will and have to be kept connected on some
way...
Precisely, they seem to think they are requesting something less
sophisticated than the Membership_officials attempt to validate
against.
jdd
PatrickD
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org
To contact the owner, email: opensuse-project+owner(a)opensuse.org
3 Jun
3 Jun
5:09 p.m.
New subject: [opensuse-project] Re: letter to people not accepted to be a member
On Wed, 03 Jun 2015 09:32:11 -0400, Robert Schweikert wrote:
Then why bother having membership at all?
If everyone who wants to be a member gets to be a member just for
filling out the application then we might as well not have it. The board
can then be elected by the general population on the internet and
everyone can run.
Yes, this is a bit of an extreme statement, but is the logical
consequence of not expecting people to actually contribute to the
project to be a member.
I don't get the sense that that's what Cornelius is proposing or
suggesting.
It's a question of approach - rather than a page that lists a bunch of
warnings about what not to do, have a page that lists a bunch of things
that you *need to do* or *should do* in order to be a project member.
In a way, you could say it's about a 'marketing spin' - provide a
positive message that says the same thing, rather than a negative message
that pushes people away.
Jim
--
Jim Henderson
Please keep on-topic replies on the list so everyone benefits
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org
To contact the owner, email: opensuse-project+owner(a)opensuse.org
6:42 p.m.
New subject: [opensuse-project] Re: letter to people not accepted to be a member
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
On 06/03/2015 11:09 AM, Jim Henderson wrote:
On Wed, 03 Jun 2015 09:32:11 -0400, Robert Schweikert
wrote:
I very much doubt that anyone will argue against better presentation,
improved wording look and feel. Thus, someone who feels strongly
please go fix the page, instead of saying "it's not nice".
Later,
Robert
- --
Robert Schweikert MAY THE SOURCE BE WITH YOU
Public Cloud Architect LINUX
rjschwei(a)suse.com
IRC: robjo
Then why bother having membership at all?
If everyone who wants to be a member gets to be a member just
for filling out the application then we might as well not have
it. The board can then be elected by the general population on
the internet and everyone can run. Yes, this is a bit of an
extreme statement, but is the logical consequence of not
expecting people to actually contribute to the project to be a
member.
I don't get the sense that that's what Cornelius is proposing or
suggesting.
It's a question of approach - rather than a page that lists a bunch
of warnings about what not to do, have a page that lists a bunch of
things that you *need to do* or *should do* in order to be a
project member.
In a way, you could say it's about a 'marketing spin' - provide a
positive message that says the same thing, rather than a negative
message that pushes people away. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2
iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJVby6BAAoJEE4FgL32d2UklUEH/iBc7t2TZOIIuv8pGDc533UL
bXMisNA3cjGdn4t6yUJE8yVKKlMWj15R4ga5caPXMJYA2/kfI3KPiMyKuhkA6PU/
Q/34QC+ilh8RF2SO65mzZNg2CvwD2x/0KOIpPUHHSSsZ5pD7VIe+SdMN5OYq2w03
06UNRHeuhwwC910O/9siC6TBXRrqtV2GBT5YwWemrzLalFls9cs8TiMFJyauyJ5Y
wriWM0MVuEMPmq5zclhPCOOJoIgI7fwJHMBw/lnQPD1p0Ev5kaFzL63QjCt1XwVZ
tUf7OMIgYovkDFxRIe5ra3FKpwy/DwH02h8O0fIx7ah826KR4dUuaNdYJKG/ups=
=Q2ox
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org
To contact the owner, email: opensuse-project+owner(a)opensuse.org
4 Jun
4 Jun
5:22 a.m.
New subject: [opensuse-project] Re: letter to people not accepted to be a member
On Wed, 03 Jun 2015 12:42:41 -0400, Robert Schweikert wrote:
It seems that that's what the discussion is about - trying to fix the
page, but not doing so unilaterally - instead, asking the community for
input, which has led to a discussion about the membership stuff in
general.
I don't see this as a bad thing - it's easier for people to know they're
making a contribution that's deemed "worthwhile enough to be admitted as
a member" if the guidelines are pretty clear.
When I applied for my membership, I wasn't sure if just answering
questions in the forums was sufficient or would be seen as being
sufficient - but that was the extent of my ongoing contribution at the
time. As the person making the contribution, I felt it was sufficient,
but in a matter like this, my opinion wouldn't matter - the opinion of
the person reviewing the contribution is the opinion that matters.
Personally, I would like to see potential Members (with voting
privileges) to not be as likely to feel uncertain about how their
contributions will be judged. I think there has to be a measurement
made, and such a measurement is going to be - by its nature - somewhat
subjective, and there's an element of 'fit' that is bound to be applied
when it comes to personalities, too.
On the one hand, being proactive in some cases would be a good thing -
instead of waiting for someone contributing to apply for membership,
recognizing the contribution and inviting them to apply would be a good
thing - and in some cases, such an invitation is really a no-brainer.
But there also has to be a mechanism for people to let the project know
how they're contributing to the project.
Which, of course, is why we have a process for doing that. :)
Jim
--
Jim Henderson
Please keep on-topic replies on the list so everyone benefits
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org
To contact the owner, email: opensuse-project+owner(a)opensuse.org
In a way, you
could say it's about a 'marketing spin' - provide a
positive message that says the same thing, rather than a negative
message that pushes people away.
I very much doubt that anyone will argue against better presentation,
improved wording look and feel. Thus, someone who feels strongly please
go fix the page, instead of saying "it's not nice".
10:11 a.m.
New subject: [opensuse-project] Re: letter to people not accepted to be a member
Le 04/06/2015 05:22, Jim Henderson a écrit :
Personally, I would like to see potential Members
(with voting
privileges) to not be as likely to feel uncertain about how their
contributions will be judged.
it's extremely difficult, thing for example of
* meeting participant (they name not being noted on the net)
* chinese participant I don't know how to evaluate in a language I do'nt
understand t all (alas)
and other reasons...
jdd
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org
To contact the owner, email: opensuse-project+owner(a)opensuse.org
7:11 p.m.
New subject: [opensuse-project] Re: letter to people not accepted to be a member
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
On 06/03/2015 11:22 PM, Jim Henderson wrote:
On Wed, 03 Jun 2015 12:42:41 -0400, Robert Schweikert
wrote:
It seems that that's what the discussion is about - trying to fix
the page, but not doing so unilaterally - instead, asking the
community for input, which has led to a discussion about the
membership stuff in general.
Fair enough, but someone still has to act and do something. We can
talk about how "nice it would be to fix the wiki" until we are all
tiered and irritated. Thus in the hopes to end the beating around the
bush inactivity, I removed most of the "Red" that appeared to be an
issue to some people and modified the introduction on the page. Plus
some other changes.
I left 1 warning (red), which was added by me, I think, a couple of
years ago when we first had the discussion about maintaining the
membership status. A similar discussion has been started by Michal,
see the "openSUSE Members retirement" thread. We can fix this part of
the page when that discussion concludes.
So, head on over to
https://en.opensuse.org/openSUSE:Members
to see if that goes in the right direction and if you think its worse
than previously, oh well, everyone had a chance to start with the change
s.
Later,
Robert
- --
Robert Schweikert MAY THE SOURCE BE WITH YOU
Public Cloud Architect LINUX
rjschwei(a)suse.com
IRC: robjo
In a way,
you could say it's about a 'marketing spin' - provide
a positive message that says the same thing, rather than a
negative message that pushes people away.
I very much doubt that anyone will argue against better
presentation, improved wording look and feel. Thus, someone who
feels strongly please go fix the page, instead of saying "it's
not nice". -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2
iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJVcIbSAAoJEE4FgL32d2UkUV0IAJfsjDpjdRZ0RIR2Vql3FsvQ
UdB7+vXenu5V8vp1lVxphk5DVK57HKtN9ureOCIuRqENUdhi6vxq8imptTq5r+Hu
o4tKHd0+YgZN44/Vv8qtJRNoqON0+mMLiml69rGmHvQvdr41QH85GnjKtxbmGfNX
1m0vq7+MVWa1OOkJ3QAFEnr9cx9+QILpuY3ZCrr3uZNNbC3AWuUZBrDguOcgwWBC
KNSfplWIzNr8sPwdjJ4VPcvR0EUeuNF0rCa92R+KTvlJA5/F4BUmmJLMhLn24nti
Ez8aBr8m46axmQFjcxJEKnWzhZIOjft2CCWH/F22DthryVl1kVb+R04HFDVLQAQ=
=zWr6
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org
To contact the owner, email: opensuse-project+owner(a)opensuse.org
7:37 p.m.
New subject: [opensuse-project] Re: letter to people not accepted to be a member
Le 04/06/2015 19:11, Robert Schweikert a écrit :
Fair enough, but someone still has to act and do
something. We can
talk about how "nice it would be to fix the wiki" until we are all
tiered and irritated.
If I started the thread it's because I plan to use it to update what
have to be updated. At the same time, there is no hurry, I wont probably
do this before July and don't expect real work to be done before
september (summer makes it difficult to find people).
I left 1 warning (red), which was added by me, I
think, a couple of
years ago when we first had the discussion about maintaining the
membership status. A similar discussion has been started by Michal,
see the "openSUSE Members retirement" thread. We can fix this part of
the page when that discussion concludes.
the more I read posts, the more I wonder if it wouldn't be better to use
the mail link on the application forme control to ask people *before*
rejecting.
For example one of the OSC-15 staff member asked to be a member. I think
it to be quite normal, but it's barely visible on the net, so I already
asked him to wait after OSC, and complete the form. We may also ask Hans
about this, but still I would like people to fill they wiki personal
page as starting point
jdd
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org
To contact the owner, email: opensuse-project+owner(a)opensuse.org
5 Jun
5 Jun
7:27 a.m.
New subject: [opensuse-project] Re: letter to people not accepted to be a member
On Thu, 04 Jun 2015 13:11:46 -0400, Robert Schweikert wrote:
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
On 06/03/2015 11:22 PM, Jim Henderson wrote:
Sure, eventually someone needs to change something. But how would the
board feel if someone just went in and started changing stuff about
project processes without any discussion at all?
I (or anyone else) could just go start changing stuff, and maybe piss a
bunch of people off in the process. Better to have some discussion
*first* about what changes the project thinks are appropriate.
This isn't something that's like patching a bug in a network driver.
This is more like deciding that the entire network subsystem needs to be
rewritten from scratch. Before doing that, you need to gather
requirements.
On Wed, 03 Jun 2015 12:42:41 -0400, Robert
Schweikert wrote:
It seems that that's what the discussion is about - trying to fix the
page, but not doing so unilaterally - instead, asking the community for
input, which has led to a discussion about the membership stuff in
general.
Fair enough, but someone still has to act and do something. We can talk
about how "nice it would be to fix the wiki" until we are all tiered and
irritated. Thus in the hopes to end the beating around the bush
inactivity, I removed most of the "Red" that appeared to be an issue to
some people and modified the introduction on the page. Plus some other
changes. In a way,
you could say it's about a 'marketing spin' - provide a
positive message that says the same thing, rather than a negative
message that pushes people away.
I very much doubt that anyone will argue against better presentation,
improved wording look and feel. Thus, someone who feels strongly
please go fix the page, instead of saying "it's not nice". I left 1 warning (red), which was added by me, I
think, a couple of
years ago when we first had the discussion about maintaining the
membership status. A similar discussion has been started by Michal,
see the "openSUSE Members retirement" thread. We can fix this part of
the page when that discussion concludes.
So, head on over to
https://en.opensuse.org/openSUSE:Members
to see if that goes in the right direction and if you think its worse
than previously, oh well, everyone had a chance to start with the change
s.
I'm happy to see what jdd and the others who are spending time working on
it come up with. I'm also happy to provide input and feedback on the
proposed changes (which is how I'm contributing to this). I'm not in a
position to *own* the process, nor am I part of the membership team (nor
do I have time to join another team).
Jim
--
Jim Henderson
Please keep on-topic replies on the list so everyone benefits
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org
To contact the owner, email: opensuse-project+owner(a)opensuse.org
3 Jun
3 Jun
7:48 p.m.
New subject: [opensuse-project] Re: letter to people not accepted to be a member
Le 03/06/2015 17:09, Jim Henderson a écrit :
It's a question of approach - rather than a page
that lists a bunch of
warnings about what not to do, have a page that lists a bunch of things
that you *need to do* or *should do* in order to be a project member.
I image *three* things, and no more at the beginning of the page:
* one for people with no special knowledge (may be fixing typos or
making basic wiki translations)
* one for developers: open and make active an obs account
* one for intermediate: write wiki documentation, reports bugs in bugzilla
for example
In a way, you could say it's about a 'marketing spin' - provide a
positive message that says the same thing, rather than a negative message
that pushes people away.
yes, exactly
jdd
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org
To contact the owner, email: opensuse-project+owner(a)opensuse.org
4 Jun
4 Jun
5:13 a.m.
New subject: [opensuse-project] Re: letter to people not accepted to be a member
On Wed, 03 Jun 2015 19:48:01 +0200, jdd wrote:
Le 03/06/2015 17:09, Jim Henderson a écrit :
Makes sense, though I can see how these categories would grow pretty
substantially. For example, the dedicated forum staff (of which I'm a
member) make a pretty sustained contribution to the project, not just in
terms of helping people in the forums (which could well be a valid type
of contribution itself even without being official "forum staff"), but
also in terms of managing the forums - moderation of posts, dealing with
problem forum members (there's that overloading again <g>), and so on.
But there also comes (thinking out loud) the evaluation of the actual
contribution in the forums. Someone who posts hundreds of messages that
aren't helpful isn't as valuable as someone who posts 20 good answers.
Measuring quality vs. quantity is a long-standing forum issue (not just
for OSF, either - Kim, the guy who runs our sponsor's forums, has been
dealing with that issue almost as long as I've known him.) There are also
other forums out there, like forosuse.es for the Spanish-speaking
audience, or alionet's French openSUSE forums).
Jim
--
Jim Henderson
Please keep on-topic replies on the list so everyone benefits
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org
To contact the owner, email: opensuse-project+owner(a)opensuse.org
It's a question of approach - rather than a
page that lists a bunch of
warnings about what not to do, have a page that lists a bunch of things
that you *need to do* or *should do* in order to be a project member.
I image *three* things, and no more at the beginning of the page:
* one for people with no special knowledge (may be fixing typos or
making basic wiki translations)
* one for developers: open and make active an obs account
* one for intermediate: write wiki documentation, reports bugs in
bugzilla
for example
8:48 a.m.
New subject: [opensuse-project] Re: letter to people not accepted to be a member
Jim Henderson wrote:
But there also comes (thinking out loud) the
evaluation of the actual
contribution in the forums. Someone who posts hundreds of messages
that aren't helpful isn't as valuable as someone who posts 20 good
answers. Measuring quality vs. quantity is a long-standing forum issue
(not just for OSF, either - Kim, the guy who runs our sponsor's
forums, has been dealing with that issue almost as long as I've known
him.) There are also other forums out there, like forosuse.es for the
Spanish-speaking audience, or alionet's French openSUSE forums).
Also thinking out loud - hasn't this issue been tackled quite well by
stackoverflow, serverfault et al ?
--
Per Jessen, Zürich (19.4°C)
http://www.hostsuisse.com/ - dedicated server rental in Switzerland.
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org
To contact the owner, email: opensuse-project+owner(a)opensuse.org
7:10 p.m.
New subject: [opensuse-project] Re: letter to people not accepted to be a member
On Thu, 04 Jun 2015 08:48:04 +0200, Per Jessen wrote:
Jim Henderson wrote:
Through the use of reputation points, yes, to an extent - it's a peer
based system. The trick is to manage people trying to game the system
(which does happen). I'm not sure how Stackoverflow handles that. There
are some controls in vBulletin (as I recall) to limit the number of
reputation points you can assign. We also currently have the forum
configured to not allow anyone who isn't staff to assign negative
reputation, because personalities clash and that clouds the objectivity
of a user who's angry about an answer they got (and we get that through
cultural/language misunderstandings not infrequently - it's not common,
but it does happen).
Jim
--
Jim Henderson
Please keep on-topic replies on the list so everyone benefits
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org
To contact the owner, email: opensuse-project+owner(a)opensuse.org
But there also comes (thinking out loud) the
evaluation of the actual
contribution in the forums. Someone who posts hundreds of messages
that aren't helpful isn't as valuable as someone who posts 20 good
answers. Measuring quality vs. quantity is a long-standing forum issue
(not just for OSF, either - Kim, the guy who runs our sponsor's forums,
has been dealing with that issue almost as long as I've known him.)
There are also other forums out there, like forosuse.es for the
Spanish-speaking audience, or alionet's French openSUSE forums).
Also thinking out loud - hasn't this issue been tackled quite well by
stackoverflow, serverfault et al ?
10:28 a.m.
New subject: [opensuse-project] Re: letter to people not accepted to be a member
Le 04/06/2015 05:13, Jim Henderson a écrit :
But there also comes (thinking out loud) the
evaluation of the actual
contribution in the forums. Someone who posts hundreds of messages that
the membership comity have no way (and no will, I guess) to evaluate the
quality of the posts. What I have already done, when there are only
little posts is to see if there where questions or answers, of course
only answers have to count.
What we could do (to come back to the subject), and I already did
sometime, is to use the link "contact email"
http://dodin.org/owncloud/index.php/s/D9pdU6sIwPsml4q
to ask for more infos. For example, most of the people do not have
filled they personal wiki page. This page (wiki) should be a good place
to list contributions, even for forum members.
jdd
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org
To contact the owner, email: opensuse-project+owner(a)opensuse.org
7:08 p.m.
New subject: [opensuse-project] Re: letter to people not accepted to be a member
On Thu, 04 Jun 2015 10:28:27 +0200, jdd wrote:
Le 04/06/2015 05:13, Jim Henderson a écrit :
Another possibility would be to ask the people who are already in that
venue about the contributions of the specific person. I don't think
anyone on the forum staff would have a problem answering questions along
those lines - "Hey, JohnDoe says that they contribute in the forums -
what can you tell us about the manner of contribution that you see from
them?"
Same would hold for the wiki - the people who manage the wiki are
probably in a good position to at least find out about specific user
contributions.
Jim
--
Jim Henderson
Please keep on-topic replies on the list so everyone benefits
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org
To contact the owner, email: opensuse-project+owner(a)opensuse.org
But there also comes (thinking out loud) the
evaluation of the actual
contribution in the forums. Someone who posts hundreds of messages
that
the membership comity have no way (and no will, I guess) to evaluate the
quality of the posts. What I have already done, when there are only
little posts is to see if there where questions or answers, of course
only answers have to count.
What we could do (to come back to the subject), and I already did
sometime, is to use the link "contact email"
http://dodin.org/owncloud/index.php/s/D9pdU6sIwPsml4q
to ask for more infos. For example, most of the people do not have
filled they personal wiki page. This page (wiki) should be a good place
to list contributions, even for forum members. 
7:45 a.m.
On 06/03/2015 03:32 PM, Robert Schweikert wrote:
In order to move forward we have to eventually stop
squabbling
about the fundamentals and leave them alone.
when a community is as great as it can be, then it's great to go on
doing what one have always done,
when it's not (or in any case of wishing to evolve), it's a great idea
to review fundamentals (of course not everyday)
And anyway, even without the "members system", it will always been
(wise) elder who will go on influencing the community - or most of it.
;-)
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org
To contact the owner, email: opensuse-project+owner(a)opensuse.org
3 Jun
3 Jun
4:32 p.m.
Hey,
On 03.06.2015 15:04, Cornelius Schumacher wrote:
On Tuesday 02 June 2015 14:16:33 Henne Vogelsang
wrote:
Me too :-)
So you want people who never have done anything "continued and
substantial" to our project to join the body that elects our board? I'm
pretty sure that this isn't a good idea :-)
I want people who want to contribute feel welcome, even if they haven't done
anything yet. I'm pretty sure that is a good idea. I want the board to be elected by people who express
that they want to be part
of the community. I want it to be a representation of the people who feel part
of the community. I'm pretty sure that is a good idea as well.
Me too :-)
I want to operate from a point of view that people
mean well when they want to
join openSUSE and optimize for getting new contributors on board, not for
protecting against potential abuse. I'm pretty sure that this also is a good
idea for an open community like openSUSE is.
Me too, but I don't want it to be that black/white. I want to be open
and still have see some degree of protection. Well-balanced.
So to live up to our expectations as open community,
to remove a barrier in
becoming a contributor, to encourage people to join us, we could get rid of
the validation and rejection step and just let everybody become a member who
wants to.
We could also simply make it more friendly right? This is what JDD
initially wanted to do...
This way the board would be the representative of all
self-proclaimed members
of the openSUSE community, which I think is exactly what it should be.
The work would still be done by those who are active. The decisions would
still be taken by those who do the work.
Except in escalation between the people who do the work. Then it would
be taken by (self-proclaimed) members who don't have to suffer the
consequences.
We still would have protection mechanisms like the
veto power of
the chairman of the board.
The veto power of the not-elected chairman is in no way protection of
our community. I think in fact it is a risk. As risky as the sponsor
owned trademark.
But we would have a more open, more welcoming, more
inclusive community.
That's what I would really like to see.
Me too, just not at that cost. I would like to be more open, welcoming
and inclusive without making Membership 'free'. I want openSUSE Members
to be a 100% contributors.
Henne
--
Henne Vogelsang
http://www.opensuse.org
Everybody has a plan, until they get hit.
- Mike Tyson
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org
To contact the owner, email: opensuse-project+owner(a)opensuse.org
7:43 p.m.
Le 03/06/2015 16:32, Henne Vogelsang a écrit :
We could also simply make it more friendly right? This
is what JDD
initially wanted to do...
it's still the main goal -)
we need members. We need contributors.
I know the two are not exactly the same. If contributors do not care to
be member, it's not a problem, membership is just (IMHO) a way to make
contributors "more stable" and a bit more openSUSE centrics.
if welcoming in a good way the newcomers we can get some more
contributors, it's a good thing. Don't be neither too optimisic, most of
them will vanish, but still some may stay...
jdd
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org
To contact the owner, email: opensuse-project+owner(a)opensuse.org
2 Jun
2 Jun
2:28 p.m.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
On 06/02/2015 07:30 AM, Cornelius Schumacher wrote:
On Monday 01 June 2015 15:06:54 Robert Schweikert
wrote:
https://en.opensuse.org/openSUSE:Members
"Thank you for your contributions so far to the openSUSE Project.
All contributions are important and valued. After review of your
application for membership, we were unable to verify a
contribution level that would warrant us to accept your
application at this time. However, this does not preclude you
from applying again in the future after you have had a chance to
be more involved with the openSUSE projec t."
Where is it defined what a "contribution level to warrant us to
accept your application" is? It would be much better, if people would have a
concrete idea of
what they would have to actually do to become members.
But is not an exact science as in "x number of lines of code", "y
number of packages", "z number of wiki pages translated". I'd say
casting activity into exact "hard" accountable numbers would be a
futile attempt.
That said, the whole idea of judging people's contributions feels
unwelcoming to me. I think it is a structural flaw of the openSUSE
membership that you can't join by doing things, but you have to
pass a committee.
No one has to be a member. All contributors are recognized. Being a
member just provides some "perks". For the most part, other than board
elections all contributors are on equal footing. There is no
distinction between members and non-members.
As we have an elected board a definition of a group regarding who gets
to run and who gets to vote is probably a reasonable approach. Having
this pool boundless, i.e. everyone in the world that claims to
contribute gets to vote or run for a board position is probably not
practical. A membership model appears reasonable. Of course the
membership model could be changed to a "pay for membership" model.
This would require that we have some means to collect funds, another
problem.
This is not how you encourage people to become part of
a community.
I would be very much in favor of just eliminating the need for
discussing wording of rejection letters by not rejecting people who
want to be part of the community.
Everyone can be part of the community, no one if forced to be a
member. I think Jan pointed out that he is not a member but very much
feels that he has influence on the project and where it is going.
Thus, there is at least some evidence that the "membership" part is
not much, if any of a deterrent.
Later,
Robert
- --
Robert Schweikert MAY THE SOURCE BE WITH YOU
Public Cloud Architect LINUX
rjschwei(a)suse.com
IRC: robjo
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2
iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJVbaF+AAoJEE4FgL32d2UkFXUH/iv2TxwfmzrKACwpYxpQmHnJ
2gnUy9y5FdC5JMLj1dyy6OaXD6yuttjKUoobk9uypRvBrI/UW67LKCREPBpGDhhy
zgUPMjdnTtzhhvaVj9fPPpva8n7UW+g7cQwPM66L479YD89ktaRs+HjOIiPOy1UY
FRLml1UC/wOGwEgoDl/Jcix1TXfZAlkQ6rjxLXWqHcW/38yxxqsOU1FgO53YMtCx
Ym6jmsCL6g+CCsQ2NYu77+fOpdOEEXYCl2y3wFUCHy/hO88oWed8Qnb3oci7X0vG
Xa4Vux7GEX42f3WFRDHFBtsj2ZpbV+40RVb80xNd+IFPylbumVw4LAGNaQligVg=
=oH1I
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org
To contact the owner, email: opensuse-project+owner(a)opensuse.org
3 Jun
3 Jun
2:30 p.m.
On Tuesday 02 June 2015 08:28:46 Robert Schweikert wrote:
On 06/02/2015 07:30 AM, Cornelius Schumacher wrote:
This by itself is not a very welcoming page. The warnings what not to do
dominate everything else. We do want to have active contributors and members.
I'm sure there is a more welcoming way to present this.
--
Cornelius Schumacher <cschum(a)suse.de>
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org
To contact the owner, email: opensuse-project+owner(a)opensuse.org
On Monday 01 June 2015 15:06:54 Robert Schweikert
wrote:
https://en.opensuse.org/openSUSE:Members "Thank you for your contributions so far to
the openSUSE Project.
All contributions are important and valued. After review of your
application for membership, we were unable to verify a
contribution level that would warrant us to accept your
application at this time. However, this does not preclude you
from applying again in the future after you have had a chance to
be more involved with the openSUSE projec t."
Where is it defined what a "contribution level to warrant us to
accept your application" is?
2:52 p.m.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
On 06/03/2015 08:30 AM, Cornelius Schumacher wrote:
On Tuesday 02 June 2015 08:28:46 Robert Schweikert
wrote:
You are welcome to fix it ;)
- --
Robert Schweikert MAY THE SOURCE BE WITH YOU
Public Cloud Architect LINUX
rjschwei(a)suse.com
IRC: robjo
On 06/02/2015 07:30 AM, Cornelius Schumacher
wrote:
This by itself is not a very welcoming page. The warnings what not
to do dominate everything else. We do want to have active
contributors and members. I'm sure there is a more welcoming way to
present this.
On Monday 01 June 2015 15:06:54 Robert Schweikert
wrote:
https://en.opensuse.org/openSUSE:Members "Thank you for your contributions so far to
the openSUSE
Project. All contributions are important and valued. After
review of your application for membership, we were unable to
verify a contribution level that would warrant us to accept
your application at this time. However, this does not
preclude you from applying again in the future after you have
had a chance to be more involved with the openSUSE projec
t."
Where is it defined what a "contribution level to warrant us
to accept your application" is? -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v2
iQEcBAEBAgAGBQJVbviNAAoJEE4FgL32d2UkhwwH/jIPcJ/83K/zAKeW0QZAfmae
E+lwOqkhSrXG5jvLhTJ9ExO6KWs8kbzZSo+vEITI7skzZ4JIgxbptRr5bsEzNudv
bEwvQ2MZqInh1coESkKH3xVjdno+PVMM1kVH6UobCgD6V7t4ZY/tqg4Tb6aTP2yO
PVDdqtoXnQE7+FIBF5LWormubqD/axMadQnRpOj/Qu4THZQBcOVhrPXqLMzeTH4t
K1lMiA/ADvnUx+evF26Pj7ATl87MpgXvIb3eeJjWSvmZuWqQfr2ykVKOe3PzIytC
ItcUOkeOXemqRiv2S4o3GjlikWoT32Qm416ixtbbNloHADANSp1klQTx+Zu2PUg=
=jJPa
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org
To contact the owner, email: opensuse-project+owner(a)opensuse.org
4:09 p.m.
On Wednesday 03 June 2015 08:52:29 Robert Schweikert wrote:
You are welcome to fix it ;)
That's what my other mail is about ;-)
--
Cornelius Schumacher <cschum(a)suse.de>
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org
To contact the owner, email: opensuse-project+owner(a)opensuse.org
9:56 p.m.
On 06/02/2015 01:30 PM, Cornelius Schumacher wrote:
On Monday 01 June 2015 15:06:54 Robert Schweikert
wrote:
thanks Cornelius,
this idea is welcomed to study for an "open community"
(meaning study => not throwing immediately to trash just because it's a
"different way to imagine community in the future" ...
it cannot be changed in 5 minutes, but it's great to notice that
"judging" & "open" do not match very well together.
It would need a bit more exchange (according to me) and exploration on
concrete situations (and testing).
(then ... about 500 members, as Robert said : only around 120 voting or
going to OSC ... meaning around 100 members being concerned or active ?)
I would just ask a concrete question to jdd :
1. could you (as part of the "jury") give us the number of ppl asking to
become members ? (for ex last year, or last month)
2. how much were accepted and refused
=> these answers would give an idea if the "problem to solve would be to
motivate new contributors ?" - or "to not demotivate the .. ppl who
asked to become members ?" for the last ... months)
3. I have no concrete informations, but we (for sure nearly all) know
that in 2011, a lot of ppl did booths all around the planet (smile),
with plushes, CD, fun etc... And we all know that it's no more that in
2015 ...
that could be a question too ...
resume : it's great to review the letter content, of course if it can be
more open for the person who asked to become member - it's great if it
means a first step on "re-youth openSUSE community" ...
so to come back to Cornelius suggestion, it's exactly the question of
opened or closed system (basic systemic principles) :
if the community do not wish new members/contributors (ok you can be one
without the other) then ... the community has to make it hard to be
recognised as a member,
if the community wish to include more members/contributors, then the
community makes it more easy to join ...
quality/quantity questions ... open/close ...
it's a choice (that can change) ...
ok ... if openSUSE community wish to have more "quality"
contributors/members,
than ok for an "hard way to get there" ...
but then, the question would be :
how big would be the plush I win ?
(even if contributors are not paid, you cannot avoid the question like :
do we say thank you ? do we recognise the work done ? do we give fun to
members, why a contributor would join openSUSE rather than any other
community ... as they all wish it too etc ...)
enought ...
thank you Cornelius - I appreciate ++ your way of suggesting new ideas
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org
To contact the owner, email: opensuse-project+owner(a)opensuse.org
"Thank you for your contributions so far to the openSUSE Project. All
contributions are important and valued. After review of your
application for membership, we were unable to verify a contribution
level that would warrant us to accept your application at this time.
However, this does not preclude you from applying again in the future
after you have had a chance to be more involved with the openSUSE projec
t."
Where is it defined what a "contribution level to warrant us to accept your
application" is? It would be much better, if people would have a concrete idea
of what they would have to actually do to become members.
That said, the whole idea of judging people's contributions feels unwelcoming
to me. I think it is a structural flaw of the openSUSE membership that you
can't join by doing things, but you have to pass a committee. This is not how
you encourage people to become part of a community. I would be very much in
favor of just eliminating the need for discussing wording of rejection letters
by not rejecting people who want to be part of the community.
4 Jun
4 Jun
7:57 a.m.
hey jdd
I just did forget to send this part to you, as member of the "jura
member" ;-) - thanks
On 06/03/2015 09:56 PM, Françoise Wybrecht wrote:
I would just ask a concrete question to jdd :
1. could you (as part of the "jury") give us the number of ppl asking to
become members ? (for ex last year, or last month)
2. how much were accepted and refused
=> these answers would give an idea if the "problem to solve would be to
motivate new contributors ?" - or "to not demotivate the .. ppl who
asked to become members ?" for the last ... months)
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org
To contact the owner, email: opensuse-project+owner(a)opensuse.org
10:09 a.m.
Le 04/06/2015 07:57, Françoise Wybrecht a écrit :
hey jdd
I just did forget to send this part to you, as member of the "jury
member" ;-) - thanks
On 06/03/2015 09:56 PM, Françoise Wybrecht wrote:
> I would just ask a concrete question to jdd :
>
> 1. could you (as part of the "jury") give us the number of ppl asking to
> become members ? (for ex last year, or last month)
>
> 2. how much were accepted and refused
I do not have these numbres, and don't know how to have them.
right now there are 11 people asking to be a member, on which 4 didn't
give any reason at al (No given contributions), and most do not have a
wiki personal page.
the membeship commity do have some tools at hand, very convenient to
sacn the net and see who do what:
http://dodin.org/owncloud/index.php/s/D9pdU6sIwPsml4q
but this comity itself is not very active:-( We need on the beginning to
clean it :-( - as they have to be at least 4 votes to accept or decline
https://en.opensuse.org/openSUSE:Membership_officials
jdd
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org
To contact the owner, email: opensuse-project+owner(a)opensuse.org
5 Jun
5 Jun
8:16 a.m.
On 06/04/2015 10:09 AM, jdd wrote:
Le 04/06/2015 07:57, Françoise Wybrecht a écrit :
Thank you jdd for your answer,
and of course, this doesn't give a good idea
(11 ppl since ... ? for ... months ? )
hey jdd
I just did forget to send this part to you, as member of the "jury
member" ;-) - thanks
On 06/03/2015 09:56 PM, Françoise Wybrecht wrote:
> I would just ask a concrete question to jdd :
>
> 1. could you (as part of the "jury") give us the number of ppl asking to
> become members ? (for ex last year, or last month)
>
> 2. how much were accepted and refused
I do not have these numbres, and don't know how to have them.
right now there are 11 people asking to be a member, on which 4 didn't
give any reason at al (No given contributions), and most do not have a
wiki personal page.
the membeship commity do have some tools at hand, very convenient to
sacn the net and see who do what:
http://dodin.org/owncloud/index.php/s/D9pdU6sIwPsml4q
but this comity itself is not very active:-( We need on the beginning to
clean it :-( - as they have to be at least 4 votes to accept or decline
https://en.opensuse.org/openSUSE:Membership_officials
ok ;-)
and of course, that could be another thread ...
your idea to change the "letter not accepted as member" got nice
suggestions and a lot of exchanges ...
so congrat ;-))
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org
To contact the owner, email: opensuse-project+owner(a)opensuse.org
3 Jun
3 Jun
12:37 a.m.
Hello,
Am Freitag, 29. Mai 2015 schrieb Michal Hrusecky:
Or
you join our bi-weekly project meeting to see what' going on,
http://en.opensuse.org/Portal:Meetings
I assume you are thinking about the project meeting here. For those who
didn't notice it: the project meeting changed from "every two weeks" to
"on demand", see https://en.opensuse.org/openSUSE:Project_meeting
A more general pointer to IRC and the mailing lists might be helpful.
Regards,
Christian Boltz
--
By getting back to the bugs you are high-jacking the
thread
and drawing away attention of what is asked.
I'm ready to try this wonderfull
new car with no engine nor
wheels... [> houghi and jdd in opensuse-factory]
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org
To contact the owner, email: opensuse-project+owner(a)opensuse.org
9:34 p.m.
I have taken a moment to attempt to improve on the message. Obviously
this is a rough draft, so please give any feedback.
Hi <username>,
Thank you for your interest in becoming an openSUSE member. We would
like to preface by explaining the consequences of becoming a member.
Membership allows contributors to participate in the governance of the
openSUSE project. We wish to encourage that the project be governed by
the community that participates in it's development and longevity. For
this reason we have created a method to determine users qualifications.
At this time we have determined that your application does not meet the
requirements. We would like to encourage you to participate in the
community and on the project. We look forward to receiving your
application in the future.
As a person new to openSUSE you might check the "How to Participate"
which gives a variety of possibilities,
http://en.opensuse.org/Portal:How_to_participate to start contributing.
Or
you join our bi-weekly project meeting to see what' going on,
http://en.opensuse.org/Portal:Meetings
If you disagree with the decision, please send an email to
membership-officials(a)opensuse.org
You can start contributing to openSUSE right away, you do not need to
become a recognized openSUSE member,
Best Regards,
Membership officials
-----Original Message-----From: Michal Hrusecky <michal(a)hrusecky.net>
To: opensuse-project(a)opensuse.org
Subject: Re: [opensuse-project] letter to people not accepted to be a
member
Date: Fri, 29 May 2015 22:53:50 +0200
Michal Hrusecky - 22:31 29.05.15 wrote:
jdd - 9:57 29.05.15 wrote:
So I dug up the letter, we can discuss it and see where are places for
improvements:
Hi <username>,
everybody is welcome to participate and get involved in the openSUSE
project and we grant membership for those that have shown a continued
and substantial contribution to the openSUSE project.
Membership officials have rejected your application since that does not
apply to you. We just found too little contribution and encourage you
to get more involved with openSUSE and then apply again for membership.
As a person new to openSUSE you might check the "How to Participate"
which gives a variety of possibilities,
http://en.opensuse.org/Portal:How_to_participate to start contributing. Or
you join our bi-weekly project meeting to see what' going on,
http://en.opensuse.org/Portal:Meetings
If you disagree with the decision, please send an email to
membership-officials(a)opensuse.org
You can start contributing to openSUSE right away, you do not need to
become a recognized openSUSE member,
Best Regards,
Membership officials
Hello,
I do not have at hand the letter that is received by people asking to be
a member but with no or nearly no contribution, and so refused.
I think this letter is much too rude, and that it's a waste of good will
not to make some sort of follow up. There are not so many :-)
I would prefer/suggest to start with pointing out what is wrong/rude in
current letter. I can try to
do so.
I propose to have a letter of this sort (very incomplete, please read
and comment)
https://en.opensuse.org/User:Jdd/letter_to_people_asking_to_be_a_member_2015
do we have a forum/mailing list that we could ask such people to
subscribe? "opensuse@" seems to me much to intimidating :-)
I would advice against pointing to one particular person as this person
would become single critical point in the whole process. I think
opensuse or opensuse-project seems like a good place to start.
9:45 p.m.
self edit...
At this time we have determined that your application does not meet the
requirements.
diff
At this time we have determined that your application does not meet the
contribution requirements.
-----Original Message-----From: Joel Gordon <jgordon(a)suse.com>
To: Michal Hrusecky <michal(a)hrusecky.net>
Cc: opensuse-project(a)opensuse.org
Subject: Re: [opensuse-project] letter to people not accepted to be a
member
Date: Wed, 03 Jun 2015 13:34:54 -0600
I have taken a moment to attempt to improve on the message. Obviously
this is a rough draft, so please give any feedback.
Hi <username>,
Thank you for your interest in becoming an openSUSE member. We would
like to preface by explaining the consequences of becoming a member.
Membership allows contributors to participate in the governance of the
openSUSE project. We wish to encourage that the project be governed by
the community that participates in it's development and longevity. For
this reason we have created a method to determine users qualifications.
At this time we have determined that your application does not meet the
requirements. We would like to encourage you to participate in the
community and on the project. We look forward to receiving your
application in the future.
As a person new to openSUSE you might check the "How to Participate"
which gives a variety of possibilities,
http://en.opensuse.org/Portal:How_to_participate to start contributing.
Or
you join our bi-weekly project meeting to see what' going on,
http://en.opensuse.org/Portal:Meetings
If you disagree with the decision, please send an email to
membership-officials(a)opensuse.org
You can start contributing to openSUSE right away, you do not need to
become a recognized openSUSE member,
Best Regards,
Membership officials
-----Original Message-----From: Michal Hrusecky <michal(a)hrusecky.net>
To: opensuse-project(a)opensuse.org
Subject: Re: [opensuse-project] letter to people not accepted to be a
member
Date: Fri, 29 May 2015 22:53:50 +0200
Michal Hrusecky - 22:31 29.05.15 wrote:
jdd - 9:57 29.05.15 wrote:
So I dug up the letter, we can discuss it and see where are places for
improvements:
Hi <username>,
everybody is welcome to participate and get involved in the openSUSE
project and we grant membership for those that have shown a continued
and substantial contribution to the openSUSE project.
Membership officials have rejected your application since that does not
apply to you. We just found too little contribution and encourage you
to get more involved with openSUSE and then apply again for membership.
As a person new to openSUSE you might check the "How to Participate"
which gives a variety of possibilities,
http://en.opensuse.org/Portal:How_to_participate to start contributing. Or
you join our bi-weekly project meeting to see what' going on,
http://en.opensuse.org/Portal:Meetings
If you disagree with the decision, please send an email to
membership-officials(a)opensuse.org
You can start contributing to openSUSE right away, you do not need to
become a recognized openSUSE member,
Best Regards,
Membership officials
Hello,
I do not have at hand the letter that is received by people asking to be
a member but with no or nearly no contribution, and so refused.
I think this letter is much too rude, and that it's a waste of good will
not to make some sort of follow up. There are not so many :-)
I would prefer/suggest to start with pointing out what is wrong/rude in
current letter. I can try to
do so.
I propose to have a letter of this sort (very incomplete, please read
and comment)
https://en.opensuse.org/User:Jdd/letter_to_people_asking_to_be_a_member_2015
do we have a forum/mailing list that we could ask such people to
subscribe? "opensuse@" seems to me much to intimidating :-)
I would advice against pointing to one particular person as this person
would become single critical point in the whole process. I think
opensuse or opensuse-project seems like a good place to start.
2 Jun
2 Jun
9:28 a.m.
On 29.05.2015 09:57, jdd wrote:
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org
To contact the owner, email: opensuse-project+owner(a)opensuse.org
Hello,
I do not have at hand the letter that is received by people asking to be
a member but with no or nearly no contribution, and so refused.
Just for my understanding: This discussion is only about people who
asked to become a new member, but haven't contributed so much. Or is it
also to be sent out to people who are member, but haven't contributed so
much recently? To throw them kind of out? No, probably not, right? /me
afraid ;-)
Thanks,
Klaas
9:53 a.m.
Le 02/06/2015 09:28, Klaas Freitag a écrit :
On 29.05.2015 09:57, jdd wrote:
yes
Or is it
Hello,
I do not have at hand the letter that is received by people asking to be
a member but with no or nearly no contribution, and so refused.
Just for my understanding: This discussion is only about people who
asked to become a new member, but haven't contributed so much. also to be sent out to people who are member, but
haven't contributed so
much recently? To throw them kind of out? No, probably not, right? /me
afraid ;-)
no.
for present members I have an other mail in dscussion (thread title:
letter to non active openSUSE members), but obviously not the same one
jdd
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org
To contact the owner, email: opensuse-project+owner(a)opensuse.org
24 Jul
24 Jul
8:02 a.m.
New subject: [opensuse-project] Re: letter to people not accepted to be a member
Le 29/05/2015 09:57, jdd a écrit :
I propose to have a letter of this sort (very
incomplete, please read
and comment)
Hello,
I said I will come back to my main threads. That's it.
But there it's only to close the thread.
There are no more pending case on the todo list. So nothing is any more
urgent.
For people asking with no contribution at all, It's probably best to act
on this list before the end of the votes, by sending a mail to ask them
to contribute as soon as possible.
as a remainder, the page URL:
https://connect.opensuse.org/mod/groups/membershipreq.php?group_guid=111
if you want to help, but can't se the page, may be you can ask to be
part of the membership_official team :-)
https://en.opensuse.org/openSUSE:Membership_officials#Members
however, don't worry if it's a bit long, the summer is not a very good
time, specially with leap being around the corner :-)
thanks, this thread is closed (IMHO)
jdd
--
To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe(a)opensuse.org
To contact the owner, email: opensuse-project+owner(a)opensuse.org
2005
days inactive
2061
days old
85 comments
23 participants
participants (23)
-
Bruce Ferrell -
Carlos E. R. -
Christian Boltz -
Christian Bruckmayer -
Cornelius Schumacher -
Françoise Wybrecht -
Greg Freemyer -
Henne Vogelsang -
Jan Engelhardt -
jdd -
Jim Henderson -
Joel Gordon -
Klaas Freitag -
Michal Hrusecky -
Michal Kubecek -
Patrick Shanahan -
PatrickD Garvey -
Per Jessen -
Richard Brown -
Robert Martens -
Robert Schweikert -
Shawn W Dunn -
Stefan Seyfried