I don’t believe @logan was at the meeting, and I joined right as it was finishing up. Has there been any update with the WPMS status?
I’m kind of lost as to where to go from here, as well. I think @Kensie mentioned asking the Mozilla Greece people for their thoughts. @tad might’ve been planning on doing that, I think…?
Sorry, but what exactly do you mean by that? Can you clarify what type of testing would be needed?
I emailed Yvan and pinged him a number of times on IRC, but he hasn’t responded at all. I’m at a loss for what to do.
Yeah, that’s @tad’s domain.
I’m not sure. That’s why we I said we should talk to WebQA. This might be a good way to get Community Webdev involved, too. QA might better fall under webdev, not sure though.
We need a footer link and a blog post. When our blog is ready, (with footer link) and synced to planet.mo I can write the post.
What policy are we looking at here? Do we have a draft?
You know what is like to see is a Definition of Done that runs through everything a “production” app should have before it’s considered done.
Regarding any co-markering - is advise caution here and consult with Mozilla PR.
Hey guys, don’t forget to check meeting notes :-p There are action items and links in there.
What’s the purpose or goal of this policy?
ReMo is where I would push the policy with Community IT solely acting as implementors of that policy. If anything this “policy” should highlight roles and responsibilities.
We need set guidelines on what Community IT can do, who is given hosting, and responsibilities of both ReMo and Community IT.
I agree. The policy will be maintained by ReMo, and they should be responsible for the general enforcement of it, but as Kensie says frequently, it’s our resources, so we should certainly decide how we want to use them, using ReMo a maintainer of them, and for suggestions to improve.
Agreed.
I disagree that this group should set a policy around “who is given hosting”.
Let’s focus on that and allow ReMo to use whatever they feel they should for approving processes.
So, whom should we contact from ReMo about refining/approving this policy?
I’ve drafted up an email here: https://communityit.etherpad.mozilla.org/email-to-remo
Could you guys please look it over and see if the wording is appropriate?
If we push policy creation to Reps, then it will become a Reps only program.
Council will not be prepared to say what the responsibilities of users on WordPress should be. What if Council thinks that communities shouldn’t be required to allow us to update their instances? (not saying that’s a realistic example, but it’s to the point). We’ll be the ones doing the work and so we should have a large say in what is reasonable. Do we want to limit the number of communities that are hosted for a bit? If so that should be our call, not Reps. There are certain parts of the policy that makes sense to push out to them.
We also need to not get ahead of ourselves, this is the policy for WPMS, and there is interest in generalizing it to be an overall policy for community IT resources. However there will be things specific to WPMS, like allowing us to manage updates, and the plugins that would be available. @mrz I think you’re focussing on the screening aspect of the policy (under Mozilla Reps), but look at the other two sections - that’s between us and the owners of the community site. We still need to build that part of the policy ourselves.
The draft I read was focused a bit too much on who could have a blog. The two headings I felt weren’t in the domain of Community IT were:
I don’t think Community IT owns either or is appropriately “staffed” to.
I also think this is much more collaborative between both Reps & this group. Look at the draft I edited and let me know if you think I’m on the right or wrong track.
Let’s not hack a draft on the wiki, it gets incredibly confusing.
Here is the etherpad where the policy was drafted - https://communityit.etherpad.mozilla.org/wordpress-policy
I’ve made a couple of changes to the etherpad, mostly moving all the “powers” into responsibilities. I’m beginning to feel “powers” is the wrong word, and rather than simply having overall control on a matter, our access should be relevant to a responsibility.
I also moved the site admin section into the community section; the site admins are the communities themselves.