[advocacy-discuss] Re: Need help of UG Process

[Raju Alluri]

> hey ... sorry if this is confusing. We are doing
> several things at once 
> here, but it will get sorted out. :)
> 

Not really confusing, I am just getting used to the paradigm shift.
I am actually helping a remote town to come up with their own user group in the midst of this change, hence the confusion.

- The notion of "Advocacy Community Group" being the sponsor of the projects-turned-usergroups  is great. That takes care of lot of logistics related questions I had.

- I need some "how to" help when we migrate our HOSUG to project status. I will work with you offline.

- I seem to get the hang of project status vs. project. Getting closer :-).

Thanks for your patience in answering our questions Jim!

Regards,
- Raju

> Raju Alluri wrote:
> > I am reading the new and updated process regarding
> new UGs and need help annotating some key items.
> > 
> > Most quotes are from 
> >    [a]
> http://opensolaris.org/os/community/ogb/policies/proje
> ct-instantiation.txt
> >    [ b ]
> http://opensolaris.org/os/community/os_user_groups/
> >    [c]
> http://www.opensolaris.org/os/community/ogb/governance
> /
> > 
> > - [b] says New User Groups go thru project
> instantiation process.
> >   I feel that (I could be wrong) [a] and [c]
> mandate that a project requires
> >   i. a Community Group support (at least one)
> >   ii. a Project Team that works on an end goal.
> >   Does the above mean that a UG should get a
> support from one or 
> >   more existing community groups or start a
> community group of their own?
> >   Or eventually the Community Group and User Group
> will be the same
> >   and may work on one or more projects?
> 
> 
> All the user groups will become projects. The /new/
> user groups being 
> proposed will start out as projects and need to go
> through the new 
> project creation process, whereas the /existing/ user
> groups will be 
> migrated to project status as part of the merger
> approved by the OGB.
> 
> The Advocacy Community Group will be the sponsoring
> Community Group and 
> the facilitator (currently, me) will send the OGB our
> approved project 
> proposal after we, as a community, discuss it and
> approve it. The only 
> reason I'll be sending these to the OGB is to make
> sure that the 
> Advocacy Community Group has one consistent face to
> the OGB. The OGB 
> requires that each Community Group have a
> facilitator, so I just figured 
> that if one person sends each proposal to the OGB it
> would make an 
> already complex process a little easier. If we want
> to add 50 or so user 
> groups to our community this next fiscal year, we
> really shouldn't have 
> 50 new people sending the OGB proposals. One would be
> better.
> 
> So, the leaders of a new user group get together and
> send a proposal to 
> advocacy-discuss, we all discuss it and update it as
> needed, we approve 
> it (or not), and then I'll take it and send it to the
> OGB, and then we 
> get a project if we've done everything correctly.
> Each step is manual. 
> In the future, this will be automated.
> 
> 
> 
> > - Can a project be non-code contributing? For
> example, meetings
> >   of Open Solaris members in an area (current user
> group model)
> >   are more towards best practices sharing and
> awareness building
> >   than code/intellectual property sharing. Can that
> activity be called
> >   a project?
> 
> 
> Yes, we can have non-code projects. You are meeting.
> Getting speakers. 
> Giving talks. Bogging. Producing presentations and
> other content. Video. 
> Audio. Etc. You need a list for conversations and a
> project space to 
> post/share materials.
> 
> 
> >   If we are NOT calling that as a project, will a
> new UG be fit to be
> >   in the proposed model?
> 
> 
> The OGB approved the proposed model for user groups
> as part of the 
> community merger deal.
> 
> 
> >   If we are calling such activity as a project,
> then a new UG is nothing but a formal project
> sponsored by one or more community groups. Is my
> assumption correct?
> 
> 
> Yes.
> 
> 
> >   In such case, the old UGs should go ahead and
> find one or more community groups to sponsor a
> geo-centric-project and get the proposal to
> advocacy-discuss. Correct?
> 
> 
> Almost. The old user groups are part of the merger
> package of our 
> proposal. They will be moved to project status one at
> a time via alpha 
> order. Actually, they have to move themselves since
> this is all manual, 
> but Eric and I will work with each group to make it
> happen. It's not 
> hard. Since they are already user groups, they are
> already sponsored by 
> the User Group Community, and since the User Group
> Community has been 
> merged into the Advocacy Community Group, than the
> Advocacy Community 
> Group is the sponsoring CG. So, the old user groups
> don't have to find a 
> sponsoring community since they already have one.
> 
> In fact, *all* user groups -- old ones or new ones --
> need not find a 
> sponsoring CG outside the Advocacy Community Group.
> You can't get a user 
> group project space without coming to the Advocacy
> Community Group. So, 
> that's your sponsoring CG. Sell your group there and
> you are all set. 
> Now, in some cases, I'm sure other communities may
> want to endorse a 
> given user group, which is cool, but it's not
> necessary to start the 
> process of creating a new user group. The Advocacy
> Community Group is 
> the sponsoring CG.
> 
> 
> > - To look at things from a different perspective,
> the current UGs are some sort of community groups and
> we are encouraging them towards more project centric.
> Is that right?
> 
> 
> Close. They are currently user groups within the
> Advocacy Community 
> Group. They used to be user groups within the User
> Group Community, but 
> that community is going away. We are not encouraging
> them to be 
> projects, actually. Over time they'll have to move to
> project status or 
> we can't close the old User Group Community, and we
> have to do that to 
> complete the merger we all discussed and approved,
> which also is part of 
> the OGB mandated community re-organization. I pinged
> each individual 
> user group list about the overall conversation, and I
> think most are 
> looking forward to having their own project space.
> Most UGs are not that 
> active, quite frankly, so this shouldn't be a big
> issue. We are trying 
> to clean up the structure now, so we can grow this
> community 
> significantly. In other words, I'm thinking that
> there will be hundreds 
> of user groups as part of the Advocacy Community
> Group. All of them will 
> be projects.
> 
> 
> > I may have more fine grained questions, but any
> help around these high level questions would be very
> helpful.
> 
> Shoot 'em out ...
> 
> 
> > Regards,
> > - Raju
> > --
> 
> 
> 
> Jim
> -- 
> Jim Grisanzio http://blogs.sun.com/jimgris
> _______________________________________________
> advocacy-discuss mailing list
> advocacy-discuss at opensolaris.org
> http://opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/advocacy-discu
> ss
>
--

This message posted from opensolaris.org