GovernanceIssues

From MozillaWiki
Revision as of 16:09, 14 June 2010 by Gerv (talk | contribs)
Jump to navigation Jump to search

This is a list of open Mozilla community governance issues. Please add suggestions to the scratchpad.

We also have a page listing existing policies.

Most of these issues are being tackled by Gerv.

Open Issues

Improve Module Owners List

Issue: it's often out of date, because it's maintained through despot, which takes a lot of work. We would like to make it hackable, parseable, easier to maintain and therefore more accurate.

Next Steps: new system built; waiting for the right moment to propose it.

Shouldn't-Be-Private Mailing Lists

Issue: Mozilla runs a large number of mailing lists, as well as our public discussion forums. We should audit that list to make sure no project discussion is private when it should be (at least) read-only public.

So Far: Gerv wrote a small script to extract a list of possibly-concerning mailing lists from mailman. He has had several iterations of the list from mzeier, refining the script each time.

Next Steps: contact the owners of possibly-concerning lists, and ask them politely about the purpose of their list and whether public would be a better option.

On Hold

Triage Stale Reviews

Issue: Review requests remain open and unloved in Bugzilla. This is bad for the (often new) contributors who make patches and see them ignored. Fixing the Module Owners List and mapping it to Bugzilla components allows us to nag module owners about their reviews - cancel, do or delegate.

Next Steps: blocked on "Improve Module Owners List". Then add mapping to list, and write nagging scripts.

Proposed

Change Bugzilla Workflow

Issue: the current Bugzilla workflow may not be optimal for the Mozilla project. Now that it's configurable in Bugzilla, we could have a discussion about what is best, implement it in the software, and educate the community to use the new workflow.

Other suggestions: open up EXPIRED, or collapse EXPIRED, WONTFIX and INVALID into INACTIVE or some other word.

Trim Super-Reviewers List

It has been suggested that there remain some people on the super-reviewers list who do not have sufficient recent activity on the project to continue in that role. So, in consultation with Brendan, the list could be trimmed (further; it was trimmed a bit recently).

Resolved

Switch To New Committer's Agreement

Issue: Transition to the new agreement by nagging those who have not signed and eventually disabling accounts.

  • There is a private Google Docs spreadsheet tracking the progress.

Status: List of people made; big efforts over the past two years to get people to sign; ultimatum issued and deadline passed. List of delinquents made and accounts disabled.

Governance Bug Triage

Issue: There are numerous open bugs in the Governance component in Bugzilla, which need to be triaged and, where possible, resolved.

Status: Open bug count reduced from 24 to 3. This is no longer an "issue"; the remaining bugs have owners, and Gerv will triage incoming ones.

Harmonize and Simplify Commit Access Policy

Issue: Our commit access policies are currently very diverse. We should harmonize them and make them consistent, understandable and easy to implement.

Status: new Commit Access Policy written and implemented, and infrastructure updated to match.

Disable Dormant SCM Accounts

Issue: We have many source code management system accounts which are no longer used. This increases our security attack surface.

Status: Done; 400+ accounts disabled, only a couple erroneously :-)

Monday Meeting

Issue: the Monday meeting is having an identity crisis. Clarify the purpose and most useful content of the meeting, and determine whether the current timing is optimal.

Status: Done; timing has been changed; Ten Forward has been rearranged; Gerv has written guidance; Jono is the new host and is making many other changes. Meetings are now fairly awesome.

Create More 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?

"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

Status: A number of modules have been proposed and created; Mitchell will create more as she feels the need.

Discussion Forums Technical Refresh

There are several issues with the current technical implementation - the unresponsiveness of Google re: Google Groups and so on. Need to look at whether to take the web interface part back in house, and/or put in place other anti-spam measures.

Status: On indefinite hold. It doesn't look like there's a suitable alternative web interface out there. :-( So it's hard to see how to proceed.

Update Super-Review Policy

Issue: super-review policy is out of date. mconnor is updating it.

Resolution: mconnor updated the super-review policy.