W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-webplatform@w3.org > December 2012

Re: Project Issues

From: Julee Burdekin <jburdeki@adobe.com>
Date: Mon, 3 Dec 2012 21:00:53 -0800
To: Jonathan Garbee <jonathan@garbee.me>, "public-webplatform@w3.org" <public-webplatform@w3.org>
Message-ID: <CCE2853C.39CDD%jburdeki@adobe.com>
Hi, Garbee:

Here are some thoughts:

1) Project management solution:

I'm so looking forward to bug genie or some similar solution! Let me know
if I can help. In the meantime, I thought your idea of filing bugs against
the content was a great interim solution. If we can bubble up some of the
highest priority ones on this list or in the meetings, maybe editors will
volunteer to knock off the bugs. Also, currently all bugs are assigned. Is
this deterring contribution? How can we let people know that it's OK to
"take my bug, please." ;-)

2) Regarding getting editors to stick around:

Yes, we have to make the process and resources easier and more
transparent. I think the work you've been doing on the bug "[meta][6 Hour]
- Improve Editors Guide"
https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=20154 will help a lot.

I also think having a content plans, such as the ones Chris Mills has been
working on help define the overall direction of that technology area, e.g.:

WPD plan for accessibility content

https://www.w3.org/Bugs/Public/show_bug.cgi?id=20208


Please let me now if I can help with this.

3) Looser administration:

I'm not convinced that, once the session bug is fixed, logging in is a
significant barrier. No-login makes editing easier, but would the quality
of content suffer? (Interestingly Disqus is saying pseudonyms users post
the highest quality news blog comments, while anon users the lowest.
http://www.poynter.org/latest-news/mediawire/159078/people-using-pseudonyms
-post-the-most-highest-quality-comments-disqus-says/)

4) Goals:

Absolutely agree. Let's define what it would take to get to Beta!

Regards.

Julee
----------------------------
julee@adobe.com
@adobejulee




-----Original Message-----
From: Jonathan Garbee <jonathan@garbee.me>
Date: Monday, December 3, 2012 4:30 PM
To: "public-webplatform@w3.org" <public-webplatform@w3.org>
Subject: Project Issues
Resent-From: <public-webplatform@w3.org>
Resent-Date: Monday, December 3, 2012 4:31 PM

>This email is going to have a lot of topics.  So, sorry for not breaking
>it into more emails with more targeted purposes.
>
>1) Project Management.
>
>We have failed miserably time and time again to try and manage this
>beast.  Tomato has good ideas on using more of the wiki system to help
>and I am looking heavily to using The Bug Genie (more on why I'm
>planning to move forward with this software in another thread) to manage
>the project.  We are going to collaborate over this winter hiatus on
>what we think the best approach should be. Hopefully from this we can
>offer a pretty solid solution shortly after the New Year for everyone to
>look over.
>
>
>2) Getting editors to stick around.
>
>We had a large spur of editors at launch.  Well, of course that was
>going to die out (especially with the session issues running rampant).
>But, it has dropped below even what I had expected.  We need to get
>organized and make some changes to the system and administration in
>order to run another editor campaign that can hopefully be successful in
>keeping editors around. People should easily be able to see what needs
>to be done if they just want to help.  This is something we tried to do
>with the Most Wanted Tasks but it got crufty and fell through the cracks
>of upkeep.  Helping make a solid solution for this will be a part of the
>Project Management plan. Although, this does leave dealing with how to
>best do another round of news targeting possible editors.
>
>
>3) Changes to administration.
>
>As re-opened for discussion in a previous email thread we need to try
>and allow anonymous edits.  Honestly, I don't care about the "we want a
>recognizable community" BS.  We need people who *want* to edit and some
>of them prefer to be anonymous; therefore, we need to deal with it
>{insert gif here to make you feel better}. There are a few other things
>in place right now such as admins only moving pages which should be
>lifted once we document the topic hierarchy properly in this case.
>Basically, later on it should be completely autonomous except for
>deleting pages (perhaps even this could be just allowed.)  We can't have
>a community driven site if the initial developers decide to say users
>can't do things like edit templates.
>
>
>4) Goals.
>
>This can go back into PM, but really deserves it own are to talk as
>well.  We have been looking at the immediate time and seeing what needs
>to be done and deciding on edits and routes to go from there. Um, this
>is wrong.  Do we get in a car most of the time and just "go"?  No, we
>have a place we need to get do and we decide on a route from there.  So
>why the hell are we trying to get things done without knowing where
>we're going?...  Let's talk about a topic that no one is really sure
>about, dropping Alpha. We need to decide what we want to achieve in
>order to drop the Alpha label and move into full release.  Honestly,
>lets run this like software and do a real release cycle, full with
>Beta's and actual milestones, not really time-based (although having
>target times to complete things is still good in most cases.)  We need
>to decide what we want to have as an end result and figure out what
>needs to be done back to what we work on now. With an end-goal that
>everyone knows and can see then it could encourage editors more, if not
>we at least have set goals and aren't looking around each week for
>things to do.
>
>
>5) Feedback.
>
>We have been using the IRC and Mailing List for most feedback.  The
>comment system has basically been purposed by some for giving feedback
>since they don't want to use (or don't know of) the other methods.  We
>really need to find better ways of getting feedback from the community.
>I for one think a good idea for now would be to get a few people who can
>keep up with feedback and respond appropriately and let people know how
>to get in touch with them. Basically creating community relations people
>to get feedback.  I for one don't mind helping with this type of
>solution.  If anyone has an idea for a better solution, let me know.
>(Yes, we can have a feedback form on the site either go to a mailing
>list of people who want to deal with it or eventually if we use The Bug
>Genie have it autosubmit a report there. So those are some options at
>some point to think about.)
>
>
>Plain and simple though, these issues are in no way tied to any one
>person.  We all failed here and need to look into solving this before
>the project can really move forward.
>
>If responding it would be best to respond to a single item and append it
>in the subject line by the number that identifies what item you're
>responding to (ex. Re: Project issues - 1).  This will help keep
>responses clearer.
>
>Thoughts on any of this?
>
>Thanks,
>-Garbee
>
Received on Tuesday, 4 December 2012 05:01:39 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Wednesday, 8 May 2013 19:57:36 UTC