Hi Liam,

I went through the docs few times, and yes there is no restrictions about 
creating nested SIGs. Then I am fine if we create a mega-SIG and then split 
it to sub-SIGs if/when needed. So the structures may be the following:

   - A&O SIG => subSIG (GSoC)
   - A&O SIG => subproject (e.g. if we remove GSoC as a SIG)
   - A&O SIG => subSIG (GSoC) => subproject (GSoC)
   
My question then would be about the name. Would it be "Advocacy and 
Outreach"? I went through open-source project with SIGs, and there are not 
so many similar areas unfortunately (the most of projects have only 
technical SIGs). What I found:

   - Kubernetes: Contributor Experience SIG 
   <https://whs-dot-hk.github.io/k8sC-sigs-demo/sig-contributor-experience/>
   - Fedora: Join SIG 
   <https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/SIGs/Join?rd=Fedora_Join_SIG>
   - CentOS: Promo SIG <https://wiki.centos.org/SpecialInterestGroup/Promo>
   - Folio: Community Outreach SIG 
   <https://wiki.folio.org/display/OUTREACH/Community+Outreach+Home>
   - ... // whatever random stuff
   
Advocacy is not fully a part of that, but I have found many occurrences of 
"Advocacy and Community Outreach" and " Community Outreach and Advocacy" 
entries in the internet. If we are OK with the longer name, maybe it's a 
way to go.

Best regards,
Oleg



BR, Oleg


On Wednesday, December 5, 2018 at 7:58:49 PM UTC+1, Liam Newman wrote:
>
> "... related.  I'd rather keep them together even with the scope being a 
> bit broad."  
> (don't know what happened there. CTRL-X misfire.)
>
> On Wednesday, December 5, 2018 at 10:55:41 AM UTC-8, Liam Newman wrote:
>>
>> Oleg, 
>> I understand your point that Outreach and Advocacy feel like separate 
>> areas, but they are closely related.  However, I'd together even with the 
>> scope being a bit broad.  
>>
>> I think that everyone in an Advocacy SIG would need to also be part of an 
>> Outreach SIG - IMO a core aspect of advocacy for Jenkins is outreach.  To 
>> some extent, I think calling the SIG "Advocacy and Outreach" is almost 
>> redundant - except that, for the sake of new user outreach it is important 
>> to specify "Outreach" in the name of the SIG. :) 
>>
>> Reversing that, people that are interested in working on Outreach and new 
>> user experience will generally need to be involved in discussions around 
>> Advocacy. We have sub-channels (and SIGs) for some outreach projects 
>> already. 
>>
>> Does anyone else have strong feeling either way? 
>>
>> As a separate question: Who are potential owners of the SIG(s)?
>>
>> Some candidates:
>>
>>    - Oleg Nenashev
>>    - Tracy Miranda 
>>    - Liam Newman
>>    - (your name here - any voluteers?)
>>    
>>    
>> Thanks,
>> Liam N. 
>>
>> On Monday, December 3, 2018 at 11:03:16 PM UTC-8, Oleg Nenashev wrote:
>>>
>>> My preference for structure would be as 1 SIG (called Outreach or 
>>>> Outreach & Advocacy) which is an umbrella for initiatives like GSoC, 
>>>> Outreachy, Hacktoberfest. 
>>>>
>>>
>>> I definitely agree with such scope if it is an "Outreach" SIG.
>>> But I do not see a lot of "Advocacy" in this scope TBH (Wikipedia 
>>> <https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Advocacy>).
>>>
>>>    1. We do not manage social media
>>>    2. We do not work with Jenkins Ambassadors
>>>    3. This SIG does not coordinate JAMs, JOMs and other similar events
>>>    4. ... // whatever other stuff from the first message (scope is 
>>>    definitely bloated there)
>>>    
>>> Please correct me if I am wrong.
>>>
>>> Liam, your proposal was to actually have an Advocacy SIG IIRC. If we go 
>>> forward with the Outreach SIG, we still might create an Advocacy SIG. How 
>>> do you see it?
>>>
>>> Best regards,
>>> Oleg
>>>  
>>> On Tuesday, December 4, 2018 at 1:19:39 AM UTC+1, Liam Newman wrote:
>>>>
>>>> I'm also plus +1, Tracy.
>>>>
>>>> I'm a little concerned about over-broad scope.  But was can always 
>>>> adjust it as we go along. 
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Monday, December 3, 2018 at 8:49:35 AM UTC-8, R Tyler Croy wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> (replies inline) 
>>>>>
>>>>> On Mon, 03 Dec 2018, Tracy Miranda wrote: 
>>>>>
>>>>> > This sounds great. 
>>>>> > 
>>>>> > My preference for structure would be as 1 SIG (called Outreach or 
>>>>> Outreach 
>>>>> > & Advocacy) which is an umbrella for initiatives like GSoC, 
>>>>> Outreachy, 
>>>>> > Hacktoberfest. 
>>>>> > 
>>>>> > GSoC, Outreachy should maintain their own channels i.e. gitter, etc 
>>>>> so 
>>>>> > those who want to just focus on those can do so. But then at the SIG 
>>>>> level 
>>>>> > we cover more topics (as listed in the email) share best practices 
>>>>> and 
>>>>> > foster wider collaboration across initiatives for those who would 
>>>>> like to 
>>>>> > do so. 
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> This sounds good to me Tracy, +1 
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> -- 
>>>>> GitHub:  https://github.com/rtyler 
>>>>>
>>>>> GPG Key ID: 0F2298A980EE31ACCA0A7825E5C92681BEF6CEA2 
>>>>>
>>>>

-- 
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups 
"Jenkins Developers" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email 
to [email protected].
To view this discussion on the web visit 
https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/jenkinsci-dev/39668732-4543-43bd-bbe4-21bae00e0bef%40googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit https://groups.google.com/d/optout.

Reply via email to