Hello!
As you can read here[0], the Fedora Join SIG is experimenting a new way to help people become part of the community.
This workflow includes also a temporary FAS group if required or asked by the newcomer. Since this overlaps with the current "wikiedit" system, we were wondering if it'd make sense to retire it and send newcomers to the Fedora Join channels instead where they can speak to community members and take their time learning/exploring the community and it's projects.
It'll be one less responsibility for the infra team, and it'll help us channel folks to the new workflow.
Please let us know if this sounds OK and we'll edit the wiki page here accordingly [1].
We'll send out more posts announcing the new workflow to the community this week. If you have the cycles, please hang out in the Fedora Join channels[2].
[0] : https://communityblog.fedoraproject.org/fedora-join-is-trying-a-new-people-f... [1] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Help:Editing#Gaining_Edit_Access [2] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/SIGs/Join?rd=Fedora_Join_SIG
Thanks, A.
Hello,
On Tue, Oct 22, 2019 00:16:13 +0200, alciregi@gmail.com wrote:
Hello!
As you can read here[0], the Fedora Join SIG is experimenting a new way to help people become part of the community.
This workflow includes also a temporary FAS group if required or asked by the newcomer. Since this overlaps with the current "wikiedit" system, we were wondering if it'd make sense to retire it and send newcomers to the Fedora Join channels instead where they can speak to community members and take their time learning/exploring the community and it's projects.
It'll be one less responsibility for the infra team, and it'll help us channel folks to the new workflow.
Please let us know if this sounds OK and we'll edit the wiki page here accordingly [1].
We'll send out more posts announcing the new workflow to the community this week. If you have the cycles, please hang out in the Fedora Join channels[2].
[0] : https://communityblog.fedoraproject.org/fedora-join-is-trying-a-new-people-f... [1] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Help:Editing#Gaining_Edit_Access [2] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/SIGs/Join?rd=Fedora_Join_SIG
Any comments/concerns around this? Otherwise we'll start working on the required changes:
- update wiki page(s) to remove mention of the wikiedit system
We don't need the wikiedit group to be removed/retired, but we can file a ticket for that too if infra thinks that'll work better?
On Mon, 28 Oct 2019 at 08:43, Ankur Sinha sanjay.ankur@gmail.com wrote:
Hello,
On Tue, Oct 22, 2019 00:16:13 +0200, alciregi@gmail.com wrote:
Hello!
As you can read here[0], the Fedora Join SIG is experimenting a new way to help people become part of the community.
This workflow includes also a temporary FAS group if required or asked by the newcomer. Since this overlaps with the current "wikiedit" system, we were wondering if it'd make sense to retire it and send newcomers to the Fedora Join channels instead where they can speak to community members and take their time learning/exploring the community and it's projects.
It'll be one less responsibility for the infra team, and it'll help us channel folks to the new workflow.
Please let us know if this sounds OK and we'll edit the wiki page here accordingly [1].
We'll send out more posts announcing the new workflow to the community this week. If you have the cycles, please hang out in the Fedora Join channels[2].
[0] : https://communityblog.fedoraproject.org/fedora-join-is-trying-a-new-people-f... [1] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Help:Editing#Gaining_Edit_Access [2] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/SIGs/Join?rd=Fedora_Join_SIG
Any comments/concerns around this? Otherwise we'll start working on the required changes:
- update wiki page(s) to remove mention of the wikiedit system
We don't need the wikiedit group to be removed/retired, but we can file a ticket for that too if infra thinks that'll work better?
No comments or concerns. Thank you for doing this. I would like to remove the people in the group and retire it when possible,
On Mon, Oct 28, 2019 at 11:11:07AM -0400, Stephen John Smoogen wrote:
On Mon, 28 Oct 2019 at 08:43, Ankur Sinha sanjay.ankur@gmail.com wrote:
Any comments/concerns around this? Otherwise we'll start working on the required changes:
- update wiki page(s) to remove mention of the wikiedit system
We don't need the wikiedit group to be removed/retired, but we can file a ticket for that too if infra thinks that'll work better?
No comments or concerns. Thank you for doing this. I would like to remove the people in the group and retire it when possible,
Yeah, I meant to reply to this before I was out on PTO last week, but ran out of time. ;(
I'm happy to try this out and thanks for working on it!
I am not sure we can retire the existing group unless we contact all of the members and ask them to go through the new process thought right?
That may be more trouble than it's worth.
kevin
On Mon, Oct 28, 2019 at 1:38 PM Kevin Fenzi kevin@scrye.com wrote:
I am not sure we can retire the existing group unless we contact all of the members and ask them to go through the new process thought right?
That may be more trouble than it's worth.
Thanks for bringing this up. Retiring the wikiedit group isn't a technical decision, it's a community one. The wikiedit group says "if you're just here to edit the wiki, you're still a valid member of our community". Retiring it says we no longer consider that a valid role and that we expect community members to participate in some other way. That's a valid position for us to take, but it's one that should be taken explicitly.
If we want to move forward on this, we should wait until the new FCAIC is in place and give them the opportunity to weigh in.
On Mon, Oct 28, 2019 14:39:20 -0400, Ben Cotton wrote:
On Mon, Oct 28, 2019 at 1:38 PM Kevin Fenzi kevin@scrye.com wrote:
I am not sure we can retire the existing group unless we contact all of the members and ask them to go through the new process thought right?
Yes. We'd have to send out an e-mail to wikiedit-members@fp.o on the lines of "this group is being retired, if you are not part of another group and still need membership to wikiedit to be CLA+1, please head over to the Fedora Join SIG". The Fedora Join SIG can send this out and let infra know.
That may be more trouble than it's worth.
Thanks for bringing this up. Retiring the wikiedit group isn't a technical decision, it's a community one. The wikiedit group says "if you're just here to edit the wiki, you're still a valid member of our community". Retiring it says we no longer consider that a valid role and that we expect community members to participate in some other way.
Is only editing the wiki a role nowadays? There is no community group around wiki-editing, no team, no SIG. Since our focus moved to docs, the wiki has been deemed a scratch board for teams to use implying that one would be a member of one of these teams already. So, if someone wants to only edit the wiki, they should ideally be pointed to editing/moving the information to docs instead.
The most common case in which people request wikiedit access currently appears to be to set up their user pages---hubs was supposed to host user profiles and get rid of user pages on the wiki IIRC but that got shelved, unfortunately.
By retiring "wikiedit", we do not take away that role should someone come looking for it. We're switching who handles it, and what FAS group is used. Instead of infra doing it, Fedora Join does it, and instead of using "wikiedit", we use the fedora-join FAS group where we provide users with temporary membership---if at all required for whatever purpose (not just wiki editing). The difference here would be that the Fedora Join SIG members would speak to these people to see why the CLA+1 requirement cropped up in the first place.
That's a valid position for us to take, but it's one that should be taken explicitly.
Sure, what can we do to make it more explicit? We've spread the word using the commblog and an e-mail to -devel announce already:
- https://communityblog.fedoraproject.org/fedora-join-is-trying-a-new-people-f... - https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/devel-announce@lists.fedorapro...
If we want to move forward on this, we should wait until the new FCAIC is in place and give them the opportunity to weigh in.
Hrm, if Infra and Fedora-Join are in agreement over this change of responsibility and process, I think we're OK to proceed. It has taken three months to get this far and it has been discussed with Mindshare in detail[1].
[1] https://pagure.io/mindshare/issue/147
On Tue, Oct 29, 2019 at 5:42 AM Ankur Sinha sanjay.ankur@gmail.com wrote:
Is only editing the wiki a role nowadays?
Potentially.
There is no community group around wiki-editing, no team, no SIG.
So?
Since our focus moved to docs, the wiki has been deemed a scratch board for teams to use implying that one would be a member of one of these teams already. So, if someone wants to only edit the wiki, they should ideally be pointed to editing/moving the information to docs instead.
I agree, that's the ideal case. But there are still a lot of things that live in the wiki. Change proposals, elections nominations, QA policies, talking points, screenshot libraries, common bugs, etc. Plus the fact that we use it for scratch space means we need to give people the ability to edit it for that purpose, even if they're not active in ways that require a FAS group membership.
The most common case in which people request wikiedit access currently appears to be to set up their user pages---hubs was supposed to host user profiles and get rid of user pages on the wiki IIRC but that got shelved, unfortunately.
Which is, by itself, a good argument for keeping the group.
By retiring "wikiedit", we do not take away that role should someone come looking for it. We're switching who handles it, and what FAS group is used. Instead of infra doing it, Fedora Join does it, and instead of using "wikiedit", we use the fedora-join FAS group where we provide users with temporary membership---if at all required for whatever purpose (not just wiki editing). The difference here would be that the Fedora Join SIG members would speak to these people to see why the CLA+1 requirement cropped up in the first place.
I have no objection to Fedora Join handling this. I think that's a big benefit. But the temporary membership aspect is what concerns me. What if someone just wants to have the ability to edit a few wiki pages?
Sure, what can we do to make it more explicit? We've spread the word using the commblog and an e-mail to -devel announce already:
It's not about communication, it's about agreeing that this form of contribution is no longer one we'll account for.
Hrm, if Infra and Fedora-Join are in agreement over this change of responsibility and process, I think we're OK to proceed. It has taken three months to get this far and it has been discussed with Mindshare in detail[1].
But it's not a technical decision, so whether infra is in agreement or not is irrelevant. Why do we need to retire the group? Why not hand it over to Join and let it exist as-is? Join can audit the group over time and remove people who have membership in other groups, then they can work with the people who don't and help them find a new home if they want it. But I think the *existence* of this group is still valid.
On Tue, Oct 29, 2019 10:42:49 -0400, Ben Cotton wrote:
On Tue, Oct 29, 2019 at 5:42 AM Ankur Sinha sanjay.ankur@gmail.com wrote:
Is only editing the wiki a role nowadays?
Potentially.
There is no community group around wiki-editing, no team, no SIG.
So?
So who provides resources to audit/manage the wikiedit group?
Since our focus moved to docs, the wiki has been deemed a scratch board for teams to use implying that one would be a member of one of these teams already. So, if someone wants to only edit the wiki, they should ideally be pointed to editing/moving the information to docs instead.
I agree, that's the ideal case. But there are still a lot of things that live in the wiki. Change proposals, elections nominations, QA policies, talking points, screenshot libraries, common bugs, etc.
All of these are related to various Fedora teams. None of these are isolated.
Plus the fact that we use it for scratch space means we need to give people the ability to edit it for that purpose, even if they're not active in ways that require a FAS group membership.
But scratch work related to something or the other that's happening somewhere in Fedora. I'm yet to come across a team/sub team that does not link to a FAS group in some way.
The most common case in which people request wikiedit access currently appears to be to set up their user pages---hubs was supposed to host user profiles and get rid of user pages on the wiki IIRC but that got shelved, unfortunately.
Which is, by itself, a good argument for keeping the group.
I agree that user pages are good to have, but I do not agree that wikiedit should be used for this. CLA+1 was set intentionally as the lowest possible bar to gain wiki-access. For newcomers, the new Fedora Join process will hopefully remove the need for them to get into wikiedit to gain wiki-access---they'll get CLA+1 by getting sponsored to some team or the other.
By retiring "wikiedit", we do not take away that role should someone come looking for it. We're switching who handles it, and what FAS group is used. Instead of infra doing it, Fedora Join does it, and instead of using "wikiedit", we use the fedora-join FAS group where we provide users with temporary membership---if at all required for whatever purpose (not just wiki editing). The difference here would be that the Fedora Join SIG members would speak to these people to see why the CLA+1 requirement cropped up in the first place.
I have no objection to Fedora Join handling this. I think that's a big benefit. But the temporary membership aspect is what concerns me. What if someone just wants to have the ability to edit a few wiki pages?
Then we ask them what it is that they're looking to edit on the wiki. If its docs, we direct them to docs; if it's QA material, we help them get familiar with the QA team and get approved there and so on.
Sure, what can we do to make it more explicit? We've spread the word using the commblog and an e-mail to -devel announce already:
It's not about communication, it's about agreeing that this form of contribution is no longer one we'll account for.
I don't think I understand. What do you mean by "account for"? Is it being "accounted for" now?
Hrm, if Infra and Fedora-Join are in agreement over this change of responsibility and process, I think we're OK to proceed. It has taken three months to get this far and it has been discussed with Mindshare in detail[1].
But it's not a technical decision, so whether infra is in agreement or not is irrelevant. Why do we need to retire the group? Why not hand it over to Join and let it exist as-is? Join can audit the group over time and remove people who have membership in other groups, then they can work with the people who don't and help them find a new home if they want it.
"Join can audit.." That's where it gets technical---where do the resources to do the required work come from? Whether volunteers agree to take on the task or not is not irrelevant.
Anyway, we went ahead and discussed this in the #fedora-join channel earlier today. While we agree that wikiedit may be useful in principle to provide access in a few scenarios, it's not related to helping newcomers integrate with the community, which is the main goal/mission of the Fedora Join SIG. In fact, the wikiedit use case specifically addresses people who need wiki access *without* having to join other teams.
So, in its current form wikiedit does not fit the new plan that we are working on, and Fedora Join will not currently take on the responsibility of managing/auditing the wikiedit group as a result. As the team grows, maybe we will revisit this, but at the moment we don't have the resources.
To clarify, the temporary group membership that we've included in the new plan to replace the wikiedit group was meant to do something different. We would work on helping people get their CLA+1 through the teams/SIGs that they become part of, thus negating the need for temporary membership. Only if, in spite of this, the unlikely scenario did crop up where access to resources via CLA+1 were required, we'd provide temporary membership with the view that it would be undone once the person had been sponsored to other team(s). The message would always be that this is not the final stop; that they've got all of Fedora to explore and work with.
But I think the *existence* of this group is still valid.
Sure, so we leave things as they are now as far as wikiedit is concerned.
The Fedora Join process should help reduce the number of wikiedit membership requests, but please feel free to direct folks to us directly also.
On Tue, 29 Oct 2019 at 14:37, Ankur Sinha sanjay.ankur@gmail.com wrote:
But I think the *existence* of this group is still valid.
Sure, so we leave things as they are now as far as wikiedit is concerned.
The Fedora Join process should help reduce the number of wikiedit membership requests, but please feel free to direct folks to us directly also.
To short cut some steps.. should we set you or someone else as the admin for this group? You can either add people if ever needed.
-- Thanks, Regards, Ankur Sinha "FranciscoD" (He / Him / His) | https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Ankursinha Time zone: Europe/London _______________________________________________ infrastructure mailing list -- infrastructure@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to infrastructure-leave@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/infrastructure@lists.fedorapro...
On Tue, Oct 29, 2019 14:51:04 -0400, Stephen John Smoogen wrote:
On Tue, 29 Oct 2019 at 14:37, Ankur Sinha sanjay.ankur@gmail.com wrote:
But I think the *existence* of this group is still valid.
Sure, so we leave things as they are now as far as wikiedit is concerned.
The Fedora Join process should help reduce the number of wikiedit membership requests, but please feel free to direct folks to us directly also.
To short cut some steps.. should we set you or someone else as the admin for this group? You can either add people if ever needed.
Sure, alciregi (Alessio[1]) and ankursinha (me[2]) are managing Join at the moment.
If the plan works, we won't need to use the wikiedit group too much. Fingers crossed :)
[1] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Alciregi [2] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Ankursinha
On Tue, 29 Oct 2019 at 16:16, Ankur Sinha sanjay.ankur@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, Oct 29, 2019 14:51:04 -0400, Stephen John Smoogen wrote:
On Tue, 29 Oct 2019 at 14:37, Ankur Sinha sanjay.ankur@gmail.com wrote:
But I think the *existence* of this group is still valid.
Sure, so we leave things as they are now as far as wikiedit is concerned.
The Fedora Join process should help reduce the number of wikiedit membership requests, but please feel free to direct folks to us directly also.
To short cut some steps.. should we set you or someone else as the admin for this group? You can either add people if ever needed.
Sure, alciregi (Alessio[1]) and ankursinha (me[2]) are managing Join at the moment.
If the plan works, we won't need to use the wikiedit group too much. Fingers crossed :)
[1] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Alciregi [2] https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Ankursinha
You and Alessio have been added as administrators. There are 233 people in the group
On Mon, 4 Nov 2019 at 11:04, alciregi@gmail.com wrote:
On Tue, 2019-10-29 at 16:36 -0400, Stephen John Smoogen wrote:
There are 233 people in the group
Are you sure? I can count 118. Maybe it is due to some privacy setting?
I must have double counted.
Out of curiosity, here's some data about wikiedit FAS group.
118 members 4 administrators 4 sponsors
83 members aren't members of any other FAS group 11 are members of 1 additional FAS group 24 are members of more than 1 additional FAS group
74 members last_seen FAS value is dated 2019 44 members didn't login to FAS in 2019
From 2016 to 2018 membership approvals were 84
In 2019 there are 34 new memberships Of these new members, 22 aren't members of any other FAS group 3 members have 1 additional group membership 9 are members of 2 or more additional FAS groups
Considering wikiedit members last seen in 2019
Total activities tracked in datagrepper since wikiedit membership approval: 0 activities: 6 members from 1 to 10 activities: 10 members from 11 to 40 activities: 22 members more than 40 activities: 36 members
Total activities in 2019: 0 activities: 4 members from 1 to 10 activities: 25 members from 11 to 40 activities: 22 members more than 40 activities: 23 members
wiki activities since membership approval: 0 activities: 24 members from 1 to 10 activities: 33 members from 11 to 40 activities: 7 members more than 40 activities: 10 members
wiki activities this year: 0 activities: 46 members from 1 to 10: 18 from 11 to 40: 6 more than 40 activities: 4
Disclaimer: I'm not a data scientist :-) The tool used to get such data can be found here: https://pagure.io/wikieditstats
Ciao, A.
On Mon, Nov 04, 2019 at 11:16:17PM +0100, alciregi@gmail.com wrote:
Out of curiosity, here's some data about wikiedit FAS group.
....snip....
Disclaimer: I'm not a data scientist :-) The tool used to get such data can be found here: https://pagure.io/wikieditstats
Cool. Some interesting stats there. Thanks for sharing them with us.
kevin
Hello,
I think we've managed to create a bit of confusion here, so I thought I'd clarify it.
For cases where an individual requests wikiedit access only to edit the wiki (as in the recent case of @abolgna[1]), will infra please continue to give them the necessary access as before? Fedora-join only comes into the picture if wikiedit access is requested as a way of joining the community. (This wasn't the case here---they're explicitly looking to edit the wiki only.)
The Fedora Join SIG does not have the resources to administer wikiedit as well and we didn't take up this responsibility as a result[2]. @alciregi and I took on sponsor privileges for wikiedit only to short-cut some steps[3]---so that we can add people to the group if they come via the join-process without having to send them to infra, for example (unlikely but not impossible).
In this specific case @alciregi provided them with the required access, since we didn't want to bounce them back to infra. So, this one is "closed: fixed".
[1] https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/issue/8388 [2] https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/infrastructure@lists.fedorapro... [3] https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/infrastructure@lists.fedorapro...
On Mon, 18 Nov 2019 at 05:08, Ankur Sinha sanjay.ankur@gmail.com wrote:
Hello,
I think we've managed to create a bit of confusion here, so I thought I'd clarify it.
For cases where an individual requests wikiedit access only to edit the wiki (as in the recent case of @abolgna[1]), will infra please continue to give them the necessary access as before? Fedora-join only comes into the picture if wikiedit access is requested as a way of joining the community. (This wasn't the case here---they're explicitly looking to edit the wiki only.)
The Fedora Join SIG does not have the resources to administer wikiedit as well and we didn't take up this responsibility as a result[2]. @alciregi and I took on sponsor privileges for wikiedit only to short-cut some steps[3]---so that we can add people to the group if they come via the join-process without having to send them to infra, for example (unlikely but not impossible).
Then there has been a lot of confusion because we also don't really have the resources to administer wikiedit and thought this was what this group was to help us with. I guess we need to start over here because I don't know what the solution is.
In this specific case @alciregi provided them with the required access, since we didn't want to bounce them back to infra. So, this one is "closed: fixed".
[1] https://pagure.io/fedora-infrastructure/issue/8388 [2] https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/infrastructure@lists.fedorapro... [3] https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/infrastructure@lists.fedorapro...
-- Thanks, Regards, Ankur Sinha "FranciscoD" (He / Him / His) | https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/User:Ankursinha Time zone: Europe/London _______________________________________________ infrastructure mailing list -- infrastructure@lists.fedoraproject.org To unsubscribe send an email to infrastructure-leave@lists.fedoraproject.org Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/infrastructure@lists.fedorapro...
On Mon, Nov 18, 2019 at 08:21:57AM -0500, Stephen John Smoogen wrote:
On Mon, 18 Nov 2019 at 05:08, Ankur Sinha sanjay.ankur@gmail.com wrote:
Hello,
I think we've managed to create a bit of confusion here, so I thought I'd clarify it.
For cases where an individual requests wikiedit access only to edit the wiki (as in the recent case of @abolgna[1]), will infra please continue to give them the necessary access as before? Fedora-join only comes into the picture if wikiedit access is requested as a way of joining the community. (This wasn't the case here---they're explicitly looking to edit the wiki only.)
The Fedora Join SIG does not have the resources to administer wikiedit as well and we didn't take up this responsibility as a result[2]. @alciregi and I took on sponsor privileges for wikiedit only to short-cut some steps[3]---so that we can add people to the group if they come via the join-process without having to send them to infra, for example (unlikely but not impossible).
Then there has been a lot of confusion because we also don't really have the resources to administer wikiedit and thought this was what this group was to help us with. I guess we need to start over here because I don't know what the solution is.
ok, that was not clear to me at least... if you want us to keep processing wikiedit requests we can do that, but then that doesn't really change much for us?
kevin
On Mon, Nov 18, 2019 08:21:51 -0800, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
<snip>
ok, that was not clear to me at least... if you want us to keep processing wikiedit requests we can do that, but then that doesn't really change much for us?
No, it doesn't (please see the end of this e-mail[1]). The idea was to remove wikiedit altogether, but since there's a need to keep it around, that plan got shelved.
[1] https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/infrastructure@lists.fedorapro...
On Mon, Nov 18, 2019 at 05:40:06PM +0000, Ankur Sinha wrote:
On Mon, Nov 18, 2019 08:21:51 -0800, Kevin Fenzi wrote:
<snip>
ok, that was not clear to me at least... if you want us to keep processing wikiedit requests we can do that, but then that doesn't really change much for us?
No, it doesn't (please see the end of this e-mail[1]). The idea was to remove wikiedit altogether, but since there's a need to keep it around, that plan got shelved.
Ah, ok. I misread then. Sorry about that...
we can keep doing the wikiedit requests that are just wiki and point people who want to contribute more (Or don't know where they want to contibute) to join sig. :)
thanks for the clarification.
kevin
On Mon, Nov 18, 2019 at 1:57 PM Kevin Fenzi kevin@scrye.com wrote:
we can keep doing the wikiedit requests that are just wiki and point people who want to contribute more (Or don't know where they want to contibute) to join sig. :)
As the person who argued in favor of keeping wikiedit, I'm happy to own that group if it's a burden for others. I'm a sponsor now, which is probably fine, but if someone wants to make me an admin and drop their own privs, I'm okay with that too.
On Mon, Nov 18, 2019 08:21:57 -0500, Stephen John Smoogen wrote:
Then there has been a lot of confusion because we also don't really have the resources to administer wikiedit and thought this was what this group was to help us with.
The Join SIG's plan was to remove the wikiedit group altogether, not take it on as an additional group to manage.
The Join SIG helps newbies join/integrate with the community. They get sponsored to a team when they're ready and thereby gain the required privileges. So, the use case for wikiedit that Ben pointed out---community members who are not new, not part of any Fedora teams (and thus, FAS groups) but require wiki access for tasks---doesn't fit with the Join SIG's ideas/target audience/plans/workflows.
So, if there are newbies who request wikiedit for user pages, for example, please send them to us---we are the right people for them to speak to. For other cases, we aren't.
I thought I'd said all this stuff in my previous replies. I'm sorry if I was not clear enough.
I guess we need to start over here because I don't know what the solution is.
Maybe infra could give wikiedit away to the community like the other web-apps?
On Tue, Oct 29, 2019 at 2:38 PM Ankur Sinha sanjay.ankur@gmail.com wrote:
Sure, so we leave things as they are now as far as wikiedit is concerned.
The Fedora Join process should help reduce the number of wikiedit membership requests, but please feel free to direct folks to us directly also.
Thank you. I'd be willing to help with auditing the wikiedit group, so I shouldn't have worded it like "I'm asking you to eat this pizza you didn't order." And I'm certainly not advocating adding new users to it (except in rare cases), I *love* the new workflow you've come up with. If managing the wikiedit group becomes a burden on your team, feel free to throw it back at me.
On Wed, Oct 30, 2019 08:28:12 -0400, Ben Cotton wrote:
On Tue, Oct 29, 2019 at 2:38 PM Ankur Sinha sanjay.ankur@gmail.com wrote:
Sure, so we leave things as they are now as far as wikiedit is concerned.
The Fedora Join process should help reduce the number of wikiedit membership requests, but please feel free to direct folks to us directly also.
Thank you. I'd be willing to help with auditing the wikiedit group, so I shouldn't have worded it like "I'm asking you to eat this pizza you didn't order." And I'm certainly not advocating adding new users to it (except in rare cases), I *love* the new workflow you've come up with. If managing the wikiedit group becomes a burden on your team, feel free to throw it back at me.
No worries :)
Sure---we're not going to actively manage it so it should be OK.
infrastructure@lists.fedoraproject.org
-
alciregi＠gmail.com -
Ankur Sinha -
Ben Cotton -
Kevin Fenzi -
Stephen John Smoogen