Having a module would provide us with a formal, designated home, and documented ownership structure that complies with the rest of Mozilla.
Organisationally at this point, the work we are doing fits under MCS, but it's really unclear where MCS "formally" exists. This is about writing down what's already happening. I absolutely don't see a need for us to reevaluate our work before the module exists, and in fact this might harm us. With no formal entity that we can assign things to within Mozilla, over the years, ownership and authority has become unclear. We're now working in line with our planning that Kensie referred to earlier on, and a module will allow us the formality of such authority being assigned to a real structure within Mozilla. (quoting because in-line isn't ideal with gmail) "Can you explain what you would do as module owners that you can't do today, and/or whose code or actions you seek to influence as module owner?" Kensie might want to add to this, but this is largely about our own work, not about other people's work. We manage the review/triage process for these sites, and we handle service provision. There's no clarity or documentation on who specifically "we is", and that's what I'd be excited about correcting here. -- *Tom Farrow* * Participation Volunteer* Mozilla On Wed, Feb 17, 2016 at 6:08 AM, Michael Kelly <[email protected]> wrote: > I think approving a module for Mozilla Communities Web Services would be a > great low-cost way to support the community sites that we're already > providing resources for. That this is just writing down a process that's > already happening is a good sign for it's viability, I think. > > I also really like the proposal to start with a single module and > experiment with what structure works for your purposes. We should totally > do this! > > - Mike Kelly > > > > On 2/16/16 8:41 AM, Majken Connor wrote: > >> I have been working with Tom Farrow (tad) and some other community members >> to put together a proposal for better delivering Web Services to >> Communities.This would restructure the delivery of services like hosting, >> domains and emails which are currently provided to communities. Creating a >> module would provide clear authority around these services, as well as >> allowing communities to be equal stakeholders in what services are >> delivered, and how. >> >> The module also creates accountability on the part of communities which >> will allow for better communication between resource owners and the groups >> that provide them (eg Community Ops), faster problem solving (eg downtime >> recovery), and impact (better supported sites are better quality sites). >> >> This document is what we think is realistic plan for implementing the >> module. >> >> https://docs.google.com/a/mozilla-community.org/document/d/1zXuNp8dwyLOW-UqZ4FqcRVxhszHWYqgjClDKZ5kYrTQ/edit?usp=sharing >> >> This document is a our vision of what the module could become once fully >> implemented: >> >> https://docs.google.com/document/d/1YdNWOy7QNc1xXcnHGN5IW4HhRgRJCjOdKMu_gHFjUM4 >> >> We are proposing that the module be called Mozilla Communities Web >> Services, that Tom Farrow be the module owner, and that myself and Michael >> Kohler be peers. Suggestions for additional peers are welcome, but the >> intention for now is to add people as they take on leadership roles. >> >> Questions and suggestions are of course welcomed. >> _______________________________________________ >> governance mailing list >> [email protected] >> https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/governance >> >> _______________________________________________ > governance mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/governance > _______________________________________________ governance mailing list [email protected] https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/governance
