On Tue, Dec 8, 2015 at 3:11 AM, Quim Gil <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> On the collateral topic of where to publish project concepts... it's
> complicated. I think this deserves its own discussion in the context
> of the WMF product development process in the drafts. I have created a
> topic at https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Topic:Su5sgwsd967s1nya.


Hi Quim. How are IdeaLab ideas related to the WMF product development
process?



> There
> are other ongoing discussions related to the first steps of proposals
> and experiments willing to be prioritized, and so far all of them are
> referenced at the related task
> https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T115659.
>
> On Tue, Dec 8, 2015 at 7:48 AM, Oliver Keyes <[email protected]> wrote:
> > As a long-time phabricator user (and long-time community member) I
> > really don't get the desire to push this to Phabricator. This is not
> > to say it is bad: it is good at what it is designed to do (handling
> > technical tasks in an all-encompassing sorta way). But lately it feels
> > like every conversation about a process involves debating whether that
> > too goes to Phabricator - in this case, a non-technical process.
> >
> > Funded IdeaLab projects /that are technical/ ending up on Phabricator
> > sounds great: treat it as we would any other code. But the
> > consultations and discussions themselves are very deliberately
> > oriented towards our community - because IdeaLab projects are - a
> > community that tends not to have Phabricator accounts, not to have
> > experience using the system, and tends to conduct discussion in a much
> > more prose-based and conversational style than Phabricator easily
> > supports: it's designed for bug-tracking, not 100-comment threads.
> > MediaWiki, however, is designed (for a given value of "designed" ;p)
> > for those sorts of discussions, and additionally is software that
> > literally everyone people reach out to about the IdeaLab is likely to
> > be somewhat familiar with.
> >
> > So I'd rather we kept the discussions there - in a venue that is
> > already used, for an audience that is familiar with that venue - than
> > shift them over to a project that isn't designed for these kinds of
> > interactions and doesn't offer familiarity to the users the IdeaLab
> > tries to reach. Phabricator should be for transparency and process
> > when a project with technical components is funded.
> >
> > On 8 December 2015 at 01:14, Rob Lanphier <[email protected]> wrote:
> >> Hi Chris,
> >>
> >> I wonder if we can use Phabricator as an incubator for IdeaLab
> proposals?
> >> We already have the #possible-tech-projects tag in Phabricator [1],
> which
> >> seems like a sensible place to discuss the ideas amongst the people who
> >> have ideas in this area.
> >>
> >> I know there is some cynicism about the upcoming Wikimedia Developer
> Summit
> >> in January, because it seems like a great opportunity to talk about
> what we
> >> want, but then not have a strategy for getting it done.  That seems
> >> justified, since "resourcing" seems a constant refrain in these
> >> conversations.  Would anyone from IdeaLab be available to be at WikiDev
> >> '16, looking out for appropriate opportunities to get from ideas to
> >> IdeaLab(tm) grant proposals?
> >>
> >> Rob
> >>
> >> [1]  The board: <
> >> https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/tag/possible-tech-projects/> and the
> >> description: <https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/project/profile/1042/>
> >>
> >> On Mon, Dec 7, 2015 at 12:54 PM, Chris Schilling <
> [email protected]>
> >> wrote:
> >>
> >>> Hey everyone,
> >>>
> >>> I've recently initiated a consultation to help decide on topics for
> IdeaLab
> >>> campaigns for the future, and I'm very interested in your input on what
> >>> technical issues, gaps, or general features we could consider focusing
> our
> >>> attention upon.  These campaigns can generate novel proposals for
> tools and
> >>> improvements to address needs in the Wikimedia projects to which you
> >>> contribute:
> >>>
> >>> <
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Grants:IdeaLab/Future_IdeaLab_Campaigns>
> >>>
> >>> You can offer feedback and add your own campaign topics through a
> survey
> >>> conducted through AllOurIdeas <
> >>> http://www.allourideas.org/idealab_campaigns>
> >>> in addition to participating on the IdeaLab talk page.
> >>>
> >>> I’m looking forward to seeing your feedback and exploring potential
> >>> directions we can take IdeaLab campaigns starting next year.
> >>>
> >>> Take care,
> >>>
> >>> Jethro
> >>>
> >>> --
> >>> Chris "Jethro" Schilling
> >>> I JethroBT (WMF) <
> https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:I_JethroBT_(WMF)>
> >>> Community Organizer, Wikimedia Foundation
> >>> <https://wikimediafoundation.org/wiki/Home>
> >>> _______________________________________________
> >>> Wikitech-l mailing list
> >>> [email protected]
> >>> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
> >> _______________________________________________
> >> Wikitech-l mailing list
> >> [email protected]
> >> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Oliver Keyes
> > Count Logula
> > Wikimedia Foundation
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > Wikitech-l mailing list
> > [email protected]
> > https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
>
>
>
> --
> Quim Gil
> Engineering Community Manager @ Wikimedia Foundation
> http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/User:Qgil
>
> _______________________________________________
> Wikitech-l mailing list
> [email protected]
> https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l
>



-- 
Jonathan T. Morgan
Senior Design Researcher
Wikimedia Foundation
User:Jmorgan (WMF) <https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Jmorgan_(WMF)>
_______________________________________________
Wikitech-l mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l

Reply via email to