On Tue, Nov 5, 2013 at 6:57 PM, Erik Moeller <[email protected]> wrote:
> > Option D: We come up with some kind of open process for > designating/confirming folks as architects, according to some > well-defined criteria (including minimum participation in the RFC > process, well-defined domain expertise in certain areas, a track > record of constructive engagement, etc.). Organizations like WMF can > choose to recognize this role as they see fit (likely according salary > increases to individuals who demonstrate successful architectural > leadership), but it’s a technical leadership role that’s awarded by > Wikimedia’s larger technical community, similar to +2 status. > I think there's room for this to be hybridized with the existing 'Lead %s Architect' titles/roles, whereby the architects architect and the 'leads' steward that process. This seems to me like a sensible way forward. Right now, the architecting/RFC cabal is 'Senior Software Engineers' and others; but not every Senior Software Engineer may want responsibilities of being an 'architect' and the technical distinctions for what makes someone a 'Senior Software Engineer' rather than a 'Software Engineer' are not totally clear. One thing that we touched on during Tech Days was the notion that titles are independent of roles - perhaps the 'architect' designation is more of a role that can be occupied by Sr Software Engineers, people not on staff, etc, with some clearly defined responsibilities as well as criteria for occupying the role. -- Arthur Richards Software Engineer, Mobile [[User:Awjrichards]] IRC: awjr +1-415-839-6885 x6687 _______________________________________________ Wikitech-l mailing list [email protected] https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
