mainSavannah Administration - Support: sr #107497, "Request for Inclusion"...

 
 

sr #107497: "Request for Inclusion" is too vague

Submitter:  Stefan Monnier <monnier>
Submitted:  Fri 15 Oct 2010 07:17:35 PM UTC
   
 
Category:  None Priority:  5 - Normal
Severity:  3 - Normal Status:  Done
Privacy:  Public Assigned to:  None
Operating System:  None Open/Closed:  Closed
* Mandatory Fields

Add a New Comment Rich Markup
   

Jump to the original submission

Tue 01 Mar 2011 06:38:00 PM UTC, comment #13: 

I committed this small revision, hope it suits.

"Type below the name of the project you want to contribute to. Joining a project means getting write access to the project repositories and trackers, and involves responsibilities.  Therefore, usually you would first contact the project developers (e.g., using a project mailing list) before requesting formal inclusion using this form."

Karl Berry <karl>
Site Administrator
Mon 15 Nov 2010 08:47:04 PM UTC, comment #12: 


> So I end up having to compose personal email to them,
> asking them for their background, interest, what they
> want to work on, etc. Takes nontrivial time.


Hmm, don't you also do that when they write to the list? %)

> you need not join to make significant contributions


Well I guess that people will need to join the project to make significant contributions, unless they're happy to get each and every contribution delayed by patch review.

> you should


Probably my personal taste or bad english getting in the way, but I dislike the sense of obligation and constraint behind the word "should".


Anyway, I suggest you make a considerate commit to the savane-cleanup code, it's probably not worth discussing this at length.

Sylvain Beucler <Beuc>
Mon 15 Nov 2010 12:17:51 AM UTC, comment #11: 



Hi Sylvain,

    > I added you to the project.

Thanks.

    > Maybe you could argue about your additions?

Ok :) ... sorry this got long.

    > However I don't like to insist on not joining for
    > contributing,

I agree.  I didn't intend the new text to "insist" on
that any more than the existing text does.

    > the numerous small projects that we host.

Even for small projects, don't you think project admins
would like to be contacted beforehand with a greeting
instead of just seeing some unknown person show up as wanting to be a member?  The current setup puts the burden on them
(the admins) to talk to the prospective member.

Speaking as the admin of several small projects myself,
I dislike seeing people I have never heard of show up
in the "want to be a member" lists.  I don't want to be
unfriendly and just silently reject them, since they
might be a useful contributor.  But I don't want to
jump the gun and just let them commit to my source
repos, either, since it usually turns out they
think it would be cool to be part of the project but
don't actually have the skills or time to contribute
at that level.  So I end up
having to compose personal email to them, asking them
for their background, interest, what they want to work
on, etc.  Takes nontrivial time.

So, sure, we shouldn't "insist" or technically
enforce that they email anyone first, but the current
submission process is actually something that takes
time away from project development rather than
assisting it.

This actually all seems the same to me regardless of
how big or small the project is.

In this regard, it actually seems it would be ideal for
the interface to allow sending a message along with the
request to join, but I know that involves another whole
level of work and thus isn't (IMHO) worth it.

    > Also members do not get merely access to the
    > repo, but also to get trackers privileges.

Yes, I am aware.  That is why I wrote "project
repositories", figuring that "trackers" could be seen
as included in that.  I don't have a problem with, say,
"project repositories and trackers" if you prefer it.
I did that in the new draft below.

Also: the current text merely says "write access to the
code repositories" which definitely excludes trackers.
So that could be improved, one way or another.  That's
what I was trying to do.  (It's actually why I took the time to undertake a revision at all.)

Also: in the current text, "the" project mailing list
isn't right, since very often there is more than one
list.

Here's a slightly revised draft for your consideration
...

print _("Type below the name of the project you want to
join.  With most projects, you don't need to join to
make significant contributions; joining a project
specifically means getting write access to the project
repositories and trackers. Therefore, usually you
should first contact the project developers (e.g.,
using a project mailing list) before requesting formal
inclusion using this form.")."\n";


Karl Berry <karl>
Site Administrator
Sat 13 Nov 2010 11:01:13 PM UTC, comment #10: 

Hi,

I added you to the project.

However I don't like to insist on not joining for contributing, which is possibly right for big projects, but sounds wrong for the numerous small projects that we host. Also members do not get merely access to the repo, but also to get trackers privileges.

Maybe you could argue about your additions?

Sylvain Beucler <Beuc>
Fri 12 Nov 2010 06:31:31 PM UTC, comment #9: 

Hi Sylvain,

It seems I'm not a member of the savane-cleanup project.  Can I add myself?  In any case, here is a slightly-revised text:

print _("Type below the name of the project you want to join.  However,
with most projects, you need not join to make significant contributions;
joining a project means merely and specifically getting write access to
the project repositories.  Therefore, usually you should first contact
the project developers (e.g., using a project mailing list) before
requesting formal inclusion using this form.")."\n";

Ok?

Thanks,
Karl

Karl Berry <karl>
Site Administrator
Sun 31 Oct 2010 03:13:04 PM UTC, comment #8: 


> Wonderful, thank you,


Great :)
I'm closing the ticket.

Sylvain Beucler <Beuc>
Sun 31 Oct 2010 01:35:10 PM UTC, comment #7: 

I replaced the text with:

Type below the name of the project you want to contribute to. Joining a project means getting write access to the code repositories and involves responsibilities. Usually you will first contact the project developers (e.g. using the project mailing list) before requesting formal inclusion using this form.

How does it sound?

https://savannah.gnu.org/my/groups.php

(Karl: savane-cleanup.git is the current live version, savane.git is the next version)

Sylvain Beucler <Beuc>
Wed 27 Oct 2010 12:07:27 AM UTC, comment #6: 

Now I'm quite confused.  I thought the savane git repositories were for the "new" savane and not live on savannah.

On the other hand, I don't see any groups.php in the CVS administration repository, which is where I was hoping it was.

Since locate no longer works and there is no single system with everything combined, it's no longer easy to find a given file.

Sorry, guess I'm stymied.



Karl Berry <karl>
Site Administrator
Mon 25 Oct 2010 10:19:23 PM UTC, comment #5: 

Sure.

In frontend/php/ somewhere in savane-cleanup.git.

Sylvain Beucler <Beuc>
Sun 24 Oct 2010 10:07:42 PM UTC, comment #4: 

I agree it would be useful to state explicitly that being a project "member" is first and foremost about write access to the repos. (I suppose huge projects could use members who only work with bug reports or such.)

Sylvain, if it's ok with you, I'll see if I can figure out what file has those words and add something like what Stefan has suggested.  Please confirm/deny ...

Thanks,
Karl

Karl Berry <karl>
Site Administrator
Tue 19 Oct 2010 12:29:25 AM UTC, comment #3: 

My request is really limited to issues of wording: the functionality provided is perfectly fine for our needs.
I could suggest alternative wording, but I'm not sure if it would be correct in all cases, because I don't really know in the general case what is the consequences of being a member.
Based on what I see in the `emacs' project, it seems that being a member means having write access to the source repository.  If that's really all there is to it, then it would be great to mention something like "Being a member in a particular project gives you various privileges, such as write access to its repository".  In the case of Emacs I'd also add something like "To start contributing to the project, you do not need to be a member: you can simply submit your patches to the mailing-list for review", but since I don't know if that's the case for all projects, maybe it's better to leave it out.

Stefan Monnier <monnier>
Mon 18 Oct 2010 06:24:13 PM UTC, comment #2: 

I've thought about this as well, having been a requester on many occasions.  However, as a maintainer it takes on a whole new level of consideration.  The easiest solution working within the existing framework might be to have a selection requirement, where one requesting "inclusion" must select the squad(s) they are interested in, thus identifying their desired role(s), such as Technical Writers, Developers, Managers, Maintainers, etcetera.  This places responsibility on the Maintainers, however, to approach their projects in a formal way, exercising due diligence in creating logical squads for their members.  Alternatively, one could be required to select an unassigned task or bug they wish to work on; again, if no bugs or tasks exist...  It all comes down to work-flow and giving the Maintainer the most information up-front about a volunteer and what their intent is.  Will this person be of use to the project - that is the question :)

-Deleted Account- <chrisbryant_ucla>
Mon 18 Oct 2010 06:04:25 PM UTC, comment #1: 

I ack the issue.
We could implement a way for users to become "fan" of a project.
I don't plan to work on this straight away though.
If you have suggestions for a better wording, this can be done quickly, though.

Sylvain Beucler <Beuc>
Fri 15 Oct 2010 07:17:35 PM UTC, original submission:  

The Group Membership webpage is too vague about the meaning of membership.  I'm not sure what it entails in general, but at least in the groups I know, this membership mostly means "write access to the repository".  In "emacs" we get requests every once in a while from people who basically just want to subscribe to the mailing-list and "declare" their interest, but who have never contributed anything and may not even have anything to contribute yet.  So I think the wording of that "Request for Inclusion" should be changed to make more clear what it's about.

Stefan Monnier <monnier>

 

(Note: upload size limit is set to 16384 kB, after insertion of the required escape characters.)

Attach Files:
   
   
Comment:
   

No files currently attached

 

Depends on the following items: None found

Items that depend on this one: None found

 

Carbon-Copy List
  • -email is unavailable- added by karl (Posted a comment)
  • -email is unavailable- added by chrisbryant_ucla (Posted a comment)
  • -email is unavailable- added by Beuc (Posted a comment)
  • -email is unavailable- added by monnier (Submitted the item)
  •  

    There are 0 votes so far. Votes easily highlight which items people would like to see resolved in priority, independently of the priority of the item set by tracker managers.

    Only logged-in users can vote.

     

    Follow 4 latest changes.

    Date Changed by Updated Field Previous Value => Replaced by
    2011-03-01 karl Assigned toBeuc None
    2010-10-31 Beuc StatusNone Done
        Open/ClosedOpen Closed
    2010-10-18 Beuc Assigned toNone Beuc

    Back to the top

    Powered by Savane 3.13-d3ae.
    Corresponding source code