[ogb-discuss] OGB/2007/002 Community and Project Reorganisation

[Jim Grisanzio]

Stephen Lau wrote On 04/20/07 02:47,:

> 	3.3  Re-classify the following communities as projects:
> 		- BrandZ, Xen, & Zones endorsed by Virtualization
> 		- 'Chinese Users' renamed to the 'China Portal' project and
> 			endorsed by 'Internationalization & Localization'


The Chinese Users Community came about right after we launched and 
before we even had the initial community/project proposal process. 
Subsequently, three Chinese User Groups -- Beijing, Shanghai, Shenzhen 
-- formed, and there is now a significant amount of activity around 
them. And we have a China Portal under development with the other 
portals as well: http://opensolaris.org/os/project/portals/

So, I agree that the Chinese Users Community can be merged but it should 
be merged with one or more of the three Chinese user groups -- or become 
a fourth user group given the geography. There should be a pretty tight 
relationship between the portals and the user groups in non English 
areas. That's what we are doing in Japan. Language is a big barrier 
here, so we have a new portal. But that portal will ultimately be 
maintained by a Japanese user/developer community that needs it as a 
tool to build community in the first place. So, in that sense, the China 
Portal (which is not open yet) can be a major tool for each Chinese user 
group to engage developers.


> 
> 	3.5  Community mergers:
> 		- Marketing and 'User Groups' communities merge under a
> 			  yet to be determined name (currently under
> 			  discussion in opensolaris-mktg)
> 		- Performance & Observability communities merge under
> 			  a unified 'Performance & Observability' community





I certainly agree with merging the UG and Marketing communities and 
there is clear consensus to do it:

http://www.opensolaris.org/jive/thread.jspa?threadID=27547&tstart=0
http://www.opensolaris.org/jive/thread.jspa?threadID=27548&tstart=0

We need to figure out what to call the new entity, though. Several names 
have been proposed, so we'll have to bring the naming process to a 
closure soon.

Part of that merger conversation was the suggestion of migrating the 
existing user groups into individual projects so each group would have 
its own project space. Currently, each group has a list and a set of 
pages in the UG community and, as a result, there are about 100 
leaders/editors in the UG community, which is somewhat messy. I'm not 
sure, however, if the new project creation proposal being discussed by 
the OGB would fit for use with user groups being projects. Any comments 
on that? Any merger of the UG and Marketing communities will have to 
deal with the issue of what to do with the 50 or so individual user groups.

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