Fwd: [opensuse-project] Proposal: Reforming openSUSE Membership To Better Reflect Our Ethos
2018-02-10 18:06 GMT+01:00 Richard Brown
Over the years, especially recent ones, openSUSE has appealed to a new generation of contributors.
What that exactly means?
* Any openSUSE contributor can apply to be a Member * The threshold for Membership will be reduced from "sustained and substantial contribution" to "a contribution and a desire to be a Member" (ie. not every contributor should feel compelled to engage with the Project in this way).
Doesn't applying already mean that someone has the desire to become a member?
* If the contribution can be automatically verified, they will automatically become a Member. (New tooling here will be required, but for example, a quick parse of the public mailinglists would be able to verify a good number of contributions, be they through bug reporting, package contributions, or support on the mailinglists)
* If they cannot be automatically verified, they need to be manually verified, but only require a single +1 vote from the Membership committee.
Does that also mean that the time for an application to be accepted will be decreased? It takes tooo long now. Who are the members of the Membership committee and how is it elected?
* Once becoming a Member, they can remain a member as long as they have an interest in the Project. - If ongoing contributions cease or the contributions cannot be automatically detected, Members will be asked by a bot if they wish to remain a Member.
This will mean that if a member doesn't contribute at all in 10 years, but he answers to the bot, he will keep being a member, right? This doesn't much really well with "those that do, decide", but more with "those that did in the past, still decide". I personally think that it someone didn't contribute at all for a long time, he is also not interested any more, even if he answer to a bot. Won't this leed to the same problem? I mean to reach the 20% threshold, or is it going to be removed?
So on balance we feel this is the best way forward to ensure openSUSE Membership is easy, engaging, and enables the Membership to more accurately reflect the Project as a whole.
Given the nature of this change, the Board would like the feedback and consensus of the Project as a whole.
I like the proposed change. Allowing people who contribute to decide, even if the contribution is small, is also a way to value their contributions. And it seems this will reduce the time that takes to accept an application as well. The only part I am not sure about is the fact that once someone become a Member, he can keep being a member for ever without contributing any more. But if I understood it correctly, this is already the case without the change. Regards, Ana -- Ana María Martínez Gómez http://anamaria.martinezgomez.name -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, email: opensuse-project+owner@opensuse.org
On 10 February 2018 at 20:46, Ana Martínez
* Any openSUSE contributor can apply to be a Member * The threshold for Membership will be reduced from "sustained and substantial contribution" to "a contribution and a desire to be a Member" (ie. not every contributor should feel compelled to engage with the Project in this way).
Doesn't applying already mean that someone has the desire to become a member?
Yes, but it was only implied in the previous system. I like having it as an explicit statement in the new model - it not only encourages the 'right' mindset, but I hope also discorages the trap I think we sometimes have in the current system that can lead to the mindset that an openSUSE Member is somehow "more" of a contributor than an non-member. Membership should just be yet-another form of contribution to the project. An important one, but we shouldn't be building silly little hierarchies that will just get in our way long term.
Does that also mean that the time for an application to be accepted will be decreased? It takes tooo long now.
You bet it should be quicker :)
Who are the members of the Membership committee and how is it elected?
https://en.opensuse.org/openSUSE:Membership_officials
This will mean that if a member doesn't contribute at all in 10 years, but he answers to the bot, he will keep being a member, right? This doesn't much really well with "those that do, decide", but more with "those that did in the past, still decide". I personally think that it someone didn't contribute at all for a long time, he is also not interested any more, even if he answer to a bot.
I see both sides of that argument - and we've had that in the Project before. The consensus last time this was discussed was that it was better to give old members the opportunity to still influence the project. I still support that view based on the outcome of the projects previous discussions. I personally have no opinion either way, and I suspect the rest of the Board avoided re-opening the topic during our internal discussions for similar reasons.
Won't this leed to the same problem? I mean to reach the 20% threshold, or is it going to be removed?
There's a difference between now & this proposal and the old-model where we we had no activity check In the old-model., no-longer-contributing--members hung around without any activity and no notifications. This therefore diluted the 20% threshold with zero benefit to the project. Both the current & proposed models ensure old members will have to at least express an interest in continuing as members. My expectation is that in this case they'd still be engaged enough to contribute meaningfully in board elections and in any dispute where the threshold was a factor. We've got to strike a balance between being very open to new blood and not dismissive of the old blood which got us where we are, but can't contribute to the Project on the same level because factors like family life, careers, and such have a habit of getting in the way after a while ;) -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, email: opensuse-project+owner@opensuse.org
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On Saturday, 2018-02-10 at 20:46 +0100, Ana Martínez wrote:
2018-02-10 18:06 GMT+01:00 Richard Brown <>:
...
* Once becoming a Member, they can remain a member as long as they have an interest in the Project. - If ongoing contributions cease or the contributions cannot be automatically detected, Members will be asked by a bot if they wish to remain a Member.
This will mean that if a member doesn't contribute at all in 10 years, but he answers to the bot, he will keep being a member, right? This doesn't much really well with "those that do, decide", but more with "those that did in the past, still decide".
Er... members do not decide anything. Those that actually do things, decide how they do those things they do. Sometimes the members are called to vote on something. For instance, long ago, we were asked to vote on how to number the successive openSUSE versions. And few years later, our decission was ondone by calling it Leap 42.x, without a vote. Those that did it, decided it. Just to clarify your missunderstandging ;-) - -- Cheers, Carlos E. R. (from openSUSE 42.3 x86_64 "Malachite" at Telcontar) -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2 iEYEARECAAYFAlp/X9wACgkQtTMYHG2NR9Xw6gCfdN+qxlDZrL6BwHZMYGOi4A5f YjUAnjpby4uHyYmaC7HXUIa+/6DpPVid =+PM1 -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
On Saturday 2018-02-10 22:10, Carlos E. R. wrote:
Er... members do not decide anything. Those that actually do things, decide how they do those things they do.
Sometimes the members are called to vote on something. For instance, long ago, we were asked to vote on how to number the successive openSUSE versions. And few years later, our decission was ondone by calling it Leap 42.x, without a vote. Those that did it, decided it.
Leap is "made" by lnussel. Well, the releases are. So lnussel made the decision. ;-) Though this statement was meant in jest, it does hold somewhat... For example, I do not expect to have any say in what nickname the next Debian release should have based solely on their decision to agglomerate one of my GPL software into their project. Of course my openSUSE involvement is much larger than Debian, but still. It is not just a do-ocracy, there is also a good dose of meritocracy (and I do not think that is a bad thing). -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, email: opensuse-project+owner@opensuse.org
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On Sunday, 2018-02-11 at 02:01 +0100, Jan Engelhardt wrote:
On Saturday 2018-02-10 22:10, Carlos E. R. wrote:
Er... members do not decide anything. Those that actually do things, decide how they do those things they do.
Sometimes the members are called to vote on something. For instance, long ago, we were asked to vote on how to number the successive openSUSE versions. And few years later, our decission was ondone by calling it Leap 42.x, without a vote. Those that did it, decided it.
Leap is "made" by lnussel. Well, the releases are. So lnussel made the decision. ;-)
Though this statement was meant in jest, it does hold somewhat... For example, I do not expect to have any say in what nickname the next Debian release should have based solely on their decision to agglomerate one of my GPL software into their project. Of course my openSUSE involvement is much larger than Debian, but still.
It is not just a do-ocracy, there is also a good dose of meritocracy (and I do not think that is a bad thing).
I agree :-) - -- Cheers, Carlos E. R. (from openSUSE 42.3 x86_64 "Malachite" at Telcontar) -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v2 iEUEARECAAYFAlp/l0sACgkQtTMYHG2NR9WRMQCYv9BgP+qHg2Y77veoKEpYf4Bh 0QCdH35U9TGrW1v0XZwRND1m0MEQ9eU= =4ldh -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, email: opensuse-project+owner@opensuse.org
Hey, On 10.02.2018 21:04, Richard Brown wrote:
I hope also discorages the trap I think we sometimes have in the current system that can lead to the mindset that an openSUSE Member is somehow "more" of a contributor than an non-member.
They are. The contributor explicitly has stated that they also want to contribute to forming the governance of the project. The project explicitly states that they "represent" the project by given them the means to do so (email address, IRC cloak etc.). Effectively they are more than a contributor without membership. Henne -- Henne Vogelsang http://www.opensuse.org Everybody has a plan, until they get hit. - Mike Tyson -- To unsubscribe, e-mail: opensuse-project+unsubscribe@opensuse.org To contact the owner, email: opensuse-project+owner@opensuse.org
participants (5)
-
Ana Martínez -
Carlos E. R. -
Henne Vogelsang -
Jan Engelhardt -
Richard Brown