(Pre-comment : Sometime soon we're going to need to decide if we want
to keep these infrastructure discussions on this
list. I like the transparency and input from everyone,
over all, but worry that we're going to start scaring
people away. Clearly this topic is important for some
of us here, but maybe not all of us?)On Sat, Feb 19, 2011 at 10:35:25AM -0500, Matthew Jadud wrote: > 2011/2/18 Karsten Wade <kw...@redhat.com>: > > One important thing in open source culture that we seem to be > > forgetting here is that "the person who does the work, decides how > > that work gets done." > > I can easily see how OSUOSL, with substantial support in terms of > people, resources, etc., can meet many/all of the needs articulated in > your swim lane chart. I don't see how two, possibly three volunteers > can. This seems to be the core of our misunderstanding here. I don't think a proposal has been put forth to have two or three volunteers provide everything in the swim lane chart. I don't think there is a proposal to have every single aspect of TOS infrastructure run by a TOS community infrastructure team, at least not to start, although that *is* the starting (current) position. Ian has suggested that, over time, we could grow a volunteer sysadmin community similar to what the Fedora Project has. The reason for this, as articulated by Ian, myself, and Chris, is to provide another scaffolding for real world participation experience for students from any school. Community sysadmin work is as important as coding work, and volunteers there are as scarce as other non-programming disciplines (writing, UX/UI design, etc.) > That's my concern. Your chart spells out the needs that POSSE > participants have articulated over the past year+ that they see as > useful both during and after workshops. I think it shows a bit more than just POSSE needs? "Events" are just a part of the services we need to cover: http://teachingopensource.org/pipermail/tos/2011-January/001956.html > The nascent TOS infrastructure team has articulated that most of > that belongs "in the community," thrown out the swim lane chart, and > made a feature list of their own that they're prepared to > implement. (I haven't seen IRC logs or documentation that suggest > otherwise, but I'm buried rather badly, and admit freely that I may > be wrong/have missed something.) I haven't seen anything thrown away, but as you said, maybe I'm not looking in the right locations? I don't draw that conclusion from this page ... http://teachingopensource.org/index.php/Infrastructure_Team#Members ... and I don't see any other relevant pages, including a feature list that is specifically implemented on TOS-team-only systems, as you describe. Can you help me with a URL? Perhaps it would help if we could get Ian's succinct, personal vision included here? That's not him deciding or speaking for everyone, just his idea of what we are doing. Bottom line - work in parallel. We can be doing some work under a shared-root VM, some using OSUOSL services, some using CDOT services, etc. Based on my analysis to date, I'm pretty sure that OSUOSL services cannot ever be a 100% coverage solution. Maybe it's good enough in some cases, maybe not in others. I do not think it's a good idea to assume that OSUOSL can cover us in all ways from diaper to coffin. Nor will I stand by and watch work be derailed because of that flawed assumption. > I do not think we have proceeded in a user-centric manner, and I don't > think we're going to meet the needs of POSSEs or their alumni by > proceeding down a thinly provisioned, do-it-from-scratch path. But > then again, FOSS communities are (as you say) fundamentally > developer-centric, not user-centric. I don't think that's a fair representation or paraphrase of what I said -- developer v. user is your strawman, not mine. Thinly provisioned DIY is your strawman. How are we proceeding in a non-user-centric manner? Does Ian have to cut the vegetables in the order the diners prefer for him to make a delicious and filling dinner? Not even if the diners are all chefs. Your focus in this discussion seems to be entirely about POSSE infrastructure; are discussing the same scope of work here? My swim lanes attempted to split-out events, which POSSE is just one of with its own set of needs that are possibly quite different from other event needs, and certainly different from other service needs. Is your concern about how infrastructure is handled entirely in the domain of POSSE? I.e., you don't care how the public website, mailing lists, planet, source management, task tracking, etc. are done where it's not about POSSE? > Those are my concerns. But, as you say, I'm not doing the work, so > I'll keep quiet. Honestly, I'd prefer you not to be quiet, but I'd also prefer us to not derail work. - Karsten -- name: Karsten 'quaid' Wade, Sr. Community Gardener team: Red Hat Community Architecture uri: http://TheOpenSourceWay.org/wiki gpg: AD0E0C41
pgpV23Fa4OhTC.pgp
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ tos mailing list tos@teachingopensource.org http://teachingopensource.org/mailman/listinfo/tos
