GovernanceIssues: Difference between revisions

GovernanceIssues (view source)

Revision as of 20:26, 16 December 2009

485 bytes removed , 16 December 2009

no edit summary

Gerv

Account confirmers, Anti-spam team, Confirmed users, Bureaucrats and Sysops emeriti

4,925

edits

@@ Line 5: / Line 5: @@
 ==Open Issues==
-===Non-Code ("Activities") Modules===
-Issue: Do we need any more Activities modules? Who might own them? We should work out what makes a good module, and who makes a good module owner. Possible examples: SFX, mozilla.org (content vs. technical split?). Do we need to separate policy creation and implementation?
-* [https://wiki.mozilla.org/Module_Owners_Activities_Modules List of existing Activities Modules]
-* [http://groups.google.com/group/mozilla.governance/browse_thread/thread/208ee06876dc8517# Discussion thread on the "Policies" activities module]
-So Far: A call for ideas was issued; the following proposals were made: [http://groups.google.com/group/mozilla.governance/msg/3594d1e366ed64c5 Websites] (David Boswell), [http://groups.google.com/group/mozilla.governance/msg/fc99b634c1c0b628 Education] (Gervase Markham). Other suggestions that have been made in the past include "Events and Speaking", "AMO", "Mozilla Style Guide".
-Next Steps: discuss with Mitchell.
-"Create modules when there is a specific level of responsibility, authority and decision making that it would be helpful to invest in a person." - Mitchell
-"Makes modules to unambiguously place things in the arena of stuff which we apply open source and transparent principles to." - Gerv
-Module owner for transparency?
-What are the policies about acceptance or rejection of extensions? How are they determined? Where can the community find them? How might they change?
-Mitchell to talk to Nick
-Module owner for monitoring/tracking community involvement across activities. Define the metrics. Asa and Daniel?
-Mitchell to drive
-No actions for Gerv
 ===Commit Access Policies: Dormant Accounts===
@@ Line 37: / Line 12: @@
 So Far: We now have a [http://groups.google.com/group/mozilla.governance/msg/73389b3f4c4f5de9 policy], and we are in the middle of implementing it. [http://hg.mozilla.org/users/gerv_mozilla.org/active-accounts/ Scripts] have been written to extract the dormant list, and refined based on a first round of feedback.
-Next Steps: get updated list of active accounts from IT; disable inactive accounts.
+Next Steps: Final list generated; IT to disable.
-Blog a warning; this is what you do if you have problems with your account. Refined a few times, but there are edge cases.
-Beginning of a work day
 ===Commit Access Policies: Harmonization===
@@ Line 49: / Line 20: @@
 * [https://wiki.mozilla.org/Commit_Policy:Current_Procedures reed's long list of what happens now]
-So Far: Gerv has assessed the current state of things, and written a [[Commit_Policy|draft]] of a unified policy.
+So Far: A [[Commit_Policy|draft]] of a unified policy has gone out for feedback, and received it.
-Next Steps: public review (ongoing).
-Ascher: simple enough?
+Next Steps: Gerv to take feedback into account and make policy simpler.
 ===Committer's Agreement===
@@ Line 86: / Line 55: @@
 Next Steps: Gerv is working on a proposal for change.
+===Non-Code ("Activities") Modules===
+Issue: Do we need any more Activities modules? Who might own them? We should work out what makes a good module, and who makes a good module owner. Possible examples: SFX, mozilla.org (content vs. technical split?). Do we need to separate policy creation and implementation?
+* [https://wiki.mozilla.org/Module_Owners_Activities_Modules List of existing Activities Modules]
+* [http://groups.google.com/group/mozilla.governance/browse_thread/thread/208ee06876dc8517# Discussion thread on the "Policies" activities module]
+"We should create modules when there is a specific level of responsibility, authority and decision making that it would be helpful to invest in a person." - Mitchell
+"We should make modules to unambiguously place an activity in the arena of stuff which we apply open source and transparent principles to." - Gerv
+So Far: A call for ideas was issued; the following proposals were made: [http://groups.google.com/group/mozilla.governance/msg/3594d1e366ed64c5 Websites] (David Boswell), [http://groups.google.com/group/mozilla.governance/msg/fc99b634c1c0b628 Education] (Gervase Markham). Other suggestions that have been made in the past include "Events and Speaking", "AMO", "Mozilla Style Guide", "Transparency".
+Next Steps: Mitchell to propose a model for Community Metrics.
 ==On Hold==