Gerald A schrieb: > It doesn't matter where the server is located. WMDE offers to > reimburse the > person paying for the server. We will not assume any responsibility > for its > operation, or the projects running on it, or the content on the machine. > > > Ok, fair enough. I did go through the page on Meta, and there was a > reference to > "don't commit beyond 3 months". Is this an experiment for 3 months, or > is it to be > bit off in quarterly chunks? I just don't want to spend a lot of effort > on something > that will only have a 3 month lifespan.
There's no pre-set time limit at all, we don't plan to discontinue the funding as long as the project works. "Things" may always come up, so I suppose I can only tell you that we won't withdraw from the project for at least a year (more likely, we will stick with it for much longer). However, in case it fails for some reason, it would be bad if someone got stuck for payments for an entire year. So, don't sign a hosting contract that is binding for more than 3 months, because 3 month is the max WMDE would continue to pay for in case the project fails. > Ok, we're moving the ball forward now. :) > The "WCR Sessions" had (and will have) a twofold benefit. First, it was > a learning project > in itself, finding out what needed to be done from a technical > perspective, and then putting > it together; and the sessions were information sessions, meant to bring > together various parts of the learning community. We had participants > "call in" worldwide, so from that perspective, I think it was successful. Sounds good. I'm (supposed to be) on vacation right now, I'll check out the projects you came up with next week. > Ok. I think we're coming up with guidelines, which I'm happy to enforce. > In my mind, > there will be a monthly report on all projects. Individual projects MUST > report in at > least every other month, and MAY report every month. Make that "SHOULD report every month". > If a project > doesn't hit it's > MUST report, it is temporarily suspended until it is brought up to date. > If we have this as part of the signup for a project, we can make it > clear that the > reporting is part of the project deal and hopefully won't have to run > after the contribs > too much. sounds good. > Agreed. Is there a minimum # you guys are looking to start with? I'm > willing to help out, to the limits of my time availability, with a > number of projects, but I'd like to see a few others step up and > champion projects too. Project "leads" don't have to be technical to > start a project and write the "progress" reports -- but they'll need to > get someone to commit to helping out on that side. I'd say three projects with two people committed to each would be a good start. More are better, fewer might still be acceptable, depending on details. > I just don#t want to have to deal with 6 people every month about > reporting. > > > Understood. I think it's best if we have a "primary" contact person (and > perhaps an alternate, just so people can go to the bathroom/do a > vacation/take a wikibreak). 6 people are too much, and if I were in your > shoes it would hurt my head. exactly :) > I still have a few questions that I'd like clarified, but I think I > could be the person that moves this forward. Now, we need more projects > and project leaders to make this practical. Excellent! Let me know when you have all the info. -- daniel _______________________________________________ Wikiversity-l mailing list [email protected] https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikiversity-l
