El dilluns, 11 de desembre de 2023, a les 12:55:17 (CET), Joseph P. De Veaugh- Geiss va escriure: > Hi, > > as others already mentioned, the issue that prompted this discussion > seems to me not a tooling issue, but a usage one. Nonetheless, it is a > good opportunity to talk about communication channels at KDE and to > identify areas for improvement. > > On 12/9/23 13:00, kde-devel-requ...@kde.org wrote: > >> I had the idea for such a channel before. But I admit that I did not > >> search > >> whether such a channel already exists. > >> > >> I would subscribe to a channel which is readable via email and has > >> messages > >> like these examples: > >> [...] > > > > I think you touched an important issue there - we should define the scope > > of the proposed communication channel(s) and give guidelines for when and > > how to use them. > > > > There's no use in having another channel if people will end up > > sidestepping it because they were unsure if their topic was relevant. > > I like David's proposal of a community-wide channel only for > announcements, with a clear scope, moderation to keep it on-topic, and > links to channels for further discussion. And I agree with Johannes that > well-defined scope can help encourage contributors to provide content! > That said, I also see the issue of adding yet another channel to KDE's > communications infrastructure, at least not without looking at what > channels already exist and how they are used. > > I thought about the topic over the weekend. Personally I find it helpful > to identify the organizational structure and then map the tools onto the > structure, not the other way around. To illustrate what I am thinking, > here is a graph showing subset relationships between groups, starting at > everything under the node KDE COMMUNITY. The subsets are obviously far > from perfect, should be reconsidered, and just here as examples. (If > anyone would like to seriously discuss graphing the KDE organization, > please be in touch. I think it would be useful.) > > > KDE COMMUNITY > / \ > / \ > NON-TECHNICAL TECHNICAL > / \ / | \ > / \ / | \ > USERS CONTR.° VDG PLASMA [...] > / \ > [...] Int.Communities > > °Contributors > > Assuming this is a useful way of graphing the organizational structure > of KDE (that is just an assumption, I am not committed to this), the > questions for me are then: > > - What communication /within/ groups do we want? > - What communication /across/ groups do we want? > + Which tool(s) would best achieve what we want? > + Which tool(s) do we already use? Are they achieving what we want? > + Do we need to add/remove tool(s)? Which ones? > > Here are ideas of how I might apply the above approach, using some > examples from earlier in this thread: > > - planet.kde.org blogs: > + Used for communication from "TECHNICAL" to "KDE COMMUNITY". > + Which other channels (e.g., social media) are used for this > cross-group communication? Are there areas for improvement? > > - plasma-devel ML: > + Used for communication within the "PLASMA" group. Which other > tools are used for this group? Are they all needed? > + What advantages or disadvantages are there if we added/removed a > tool (e.g., moved this group to Discuss, closed the mailing list, etc.)? > + How do groups outside PLASMA communicate with this group? > (particularly relevant in this context) > > - kde-code-devel and kde-devel MLs: > + Both seem to fall within "Technical" group (as brought up by Carl) > + However, they have slightly different scope. Can they be merged?
They could probably be merged yes, there's been some timid attempts that didn't succeed but maybe it's time to try again :D Cheers, Albert > > - kde-community ML: > + Communication within "CONTRIBUTORS" group > + How can we move people from the USERS node to the CONTRIBUTORS > one? What communication is needed to achieve this? > + Would another tool (e.g., Discuss + ML function) be better suited > for this communication, in that it potentially is seen by more users and > the exposure may invite them to join in KDE's non-technical community? > > If others here find this a helpful way to discuss it, I am happy to > develop the idea further and make some concrete suggestions. This is > just a sketch for now. > > Cheers, > Joseph
