On Mon, 19 Feb 2018, Daniel Pocock wrote:


being the new one here (first time as administrator of an org), I can't say
much about the real workload of the admins. However I will try my best to
add some input. I also can't say anything about outreach. 

> Nicolas and Sylvestre both resigned and gave us plenty of warning to
> update the delegation[1]
> Molly put out a call[2] for names to put in the GSoC application but it
> wasn't clear if that was a call for people to be part of the new
> delegation or just the urgent request to fill out the form.
I don't care being part of an upcoming delegation, I think gsoc is too
important to leave it behind. 

> The DPL also mentioned it in bits[3] but as far as I know, this comment
> means he was just responding to queries about the process and is not
> actively talking to potential candidates.
> Four people, including Molly and myself are in the GSoC system as
> administrators now, our names haven't been announced and personally I'm
> a bit cautious about not wanting to declare myself an administrator or
> pre-empt the new delegation unless there is consensus about the way the
> team is formed and how it wants to work.
> As mentioned in the other thread, this is something we need to clear up
> before deciding how many projects and how to prioritize projects.
Ack, that would be good. 
> Personally, whether I take an active role as admin may impact the way I
> respond to student inquiries for my projects so it is also important to
> clear up before the end of February.
> Based on my experience as a previous admin (Ganglia) and mentor, I feel
> that a bigger admin group is needed to preserve organizational memory
> between rounds and cope with all the deadlines (there are many more
> deadlines for admins than mentors), maybe 3-5 admins in the GSoC system
> and at least 2 separate admins to Outreachy (because it happens twice
> per year and has lots of little differences that you can easily trip up on)
I would prefer to be involved in gsoc only.

> Having many admins in any team brings new problems but one potential
> solution is using the Kanboard as used by the DebConf team and
> discussed[4] in another thread on this list.  If both mentors and admins
> use a single Kanboard (or equivalent) it will be much easier for people
> to move around between roles and share the burden, avoiding burn-out,
> making vacations and other things easier during the summer.  Admins and
> backup mentors need to be able to drop into a project at any stage if
> the main mentor has an accident or something and using a common tool
> like that can make it more seamless.
Some kind of tool is probably a good idea, but I am unsure which one is the
right. Hopefully one of the more experienced admins has a good idea. 

> Another question is whether or not we want to have any policy on admins
> acting as mentors - if there are only 2 admins then it is harder for
> them to mentor due to admin workload but if we operate with a large
> admin group then it may be possible for some to mentor.  Then there are
> questions about the conflict of interest if we have to choose between
> projects.
I applied as an admin to make sure that my project will get realized, so I
can only speak for myself when I say: I would step down as admin if I
wouldn't be able to mentor my project otherwise. 

> How do other people feel about the current status, including those of
> you who are also listed in the GSoC system as admins today?
> Who would potentially want to be an admin, would it be more attractive
> to you if the team was bigger and the workload distributed more?
Distributing workload is usally a good idea :). Another option would be to
limit the number of slots we request, if we don't have that much students (or
only the really promising ones) the workload will also be smaller. 

Just my 2 cents


Attachment: signature.asc
Description: PGP signature

Reply via email to