[advocacy-discuss] OSUG Discussion: OGB Reorg and New Webapp Issues

[Jim Grisanzio]

Kjell Högström wrote:
> I think it work well to live under the Advocacy community. 

It's certainly better than before, sure, but we can go one step further. :)

> But if the 
> new infrastructure can let us call the user groups "user groups" I think 
> that would be more logical. A user groups should have the same status as 
> a project.
>   

Ok. Agree. Currently, OSUGs /are/ projects, though, and they are listed 
here http://opensolaris.org/os/projects/ among all the other projects. 
People are used to me listing them here 
http://opensolaris.org/os/community/advocacy/usergroups/ug-leaders/ but 
I do that only to simplify matters and suck the UGs out of that 
meta-project list. So, in that sense, they have the same status as 
Projects, but I want to elevate them so the entire /group/ of OSUGs has 
the same level as the /group/ of all the other Projects. I think we are 
saying the same thing. :)


>>     * Move the OSUGs to opensolaris.com, which is supposed to be evolve
>>       into the central user site for the community. The big issue here
>>       would be that moving OSUGs to another site would remove them from
>>       the OpenSolaris governance system, and we don't know how OSUG
>>       members would feel about that.
>>     
>
> This seems wrong to me. opensolaris.com is about the binary distribution 
> and I think a succesfull usergroup should be about the OpenSolaris 
> project in general.
>   


I tend to agree, especially since many OSUGs pre-dated the distro by a 
long time. However, I can see that over time there will be many 
different types of OSUGs emerging and perhaps there will be 
distro-oriented groups on .com (though I don't know since I'm not really 
familiar with .com plans at this time).



>>     * Choose to assert that OSUGs should be their own collective along
>>       with Community Groups and Projects when the new webapp is
>>       implemented. The new webapp will allow this functionality. Also,
>>       this option would keep the OSUGs within the OpenSolaris governance
>>       system, thus preserving all the Contributor and Core Contributor
>>       grants. How we grant Contributor and Core Contributor status would
>>       have to be considered, but that issue is also being discussed as
>>       part of a potential OGB reorg.
>>     
>
> That would be kind of going back to how it was before we created the 
> advocacy community but have it more formally approved. 

Partially. Before the OSUGs became projects associated with Advocacy, 
they were individual pages inside the old User Group Community. We 
didn't even have projects back when we formed the User Group Community, 
so all we could offer was just a page or two, but that grew 
substantially and really messed up (and broke, actually) the User Group 
Community space since the site was not designed to handle what we were 
doing with it.


> I think this will 
> work well and is maybe more inline with my comments on the do nothing 
> point. What I didn't like was that we started to call user groups 
> project. 
Yah, this is a terminology issue. I agree. The fact that we gave OSUGs 
project spaces was great because that gave everyone their own dedicated 
space on the site, but the terms "UG" and "Project" were confusing. And 
also, many people don't want the OSUGs listed in the meta Project page 
since that's confusing, too. That's what we need to fix now. Fixing one 
thing at a time here.


> It just makes the project list look strange.
>
> Most important for me is that the user groups stay in the Governance system.
>   

Agree.


Jim

-- 
http://blogs.sun.com/jimgris/

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.opensolaris.org/pipermail/advocacy-discuss/attachments/20080618/421e2698/attachment.html>