- Drupal-twg - lists.drupal.org

TWG Mandate description & Minutes for the call
by Jeremy Thorson 09 Jan '15

09 Jan '15

Hey all, The following was what I wrote in my notes today as a definition of the TWG mandate: *Technical Working Group Mandate:* - The role of the TWG is as the 'conflict resolution body for technical conflict' (similar to how the Community working group is the conflict resolution body for 'people' conflict). - The TWG also has a responsibility as the community 'curator' of technical policy, accountable for ensuring that community technical policies are documented, published, and maintained current. - The community perspective seems to be that we are responsible for 'authoring' policy; or driving the conversation and facilitating the process of gaining community consensus on all policy proposals (more specifically, all of the coding standards issues which were moved to our queue). - I don't feel that the working group is well positioned to actually take on this perceived role, as attempting to keep abreast of every potential technical policy proposal being made or debated within the community would quickly bury us ... and my view is that we are not looking to 'replace' the existing community consensus-driven approach, only augment it in order to guide the community when that existing process breaks down. *Meeting Minutes* As a rough 'meeting minutes' for the call, I also jotted down the following: *Perceived operational issues:* - Ability to comment within the issue queues, and fear of 'own' comments being mistaken as an authoritative comment on behalf of the 'TWG'. - Working group members not subscribed to notifications of new issues being opened or commented on within the TWG queue - Lack of transparency regarding the working group within the larger community (administrative foundation, policies and procedures regarding how we operate and interact with the community) - Lacking a working group 'chair', who assumes responsibility for the administrative and facilitative operation of the working group (i.e. scheduling meetings, setting agendas, establishing milestones and/or deadlines, etc) - Availability, interest, and initiative of existing working group membership in the absence of an official chair driving active working group progress *Actions and Next Steps:* - Need to appoint a chairperson. Howard to consider the role, and touch base with Dries within a few days - Mark stepping down from the working group. Everyone to consider potential replacement suggestions (provide to Dries). - Need to ensure we have a regularly recurring meeting slot scheduled in everyone's calendar. Suggested frequency is monthly. Accountability for the action to be assigned to the new working group chair. - Suggested that next meeting include a discussion to ensure working group member alignment on the group's perceived mandate. - Jeremy to forward his interpretation/description of the TWG mandate to everyone on the call. Thanks again for the call ... good to hear from everyone again. :) - Jeremy

1 0

Project Applications Process - Security working group counter-proposal
by Jeremy Thorson 07 Jan '15

07 Jan '15

Hey all, The Security Working Group has provided a counter-proposal in response to our discussions regarding the Project Applications process; which can be viewed at the following location: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1lxnr6pxIrzIv7cRsuEA2RBHiBg590-XGTRx3UlB… Essentially, the policy changes would be: - non-git vetted users would be allowed to create a maximum of one full project, but no tagged releases. - All projects must be created as sandbox projects until they can pass an automated review (essentially the PAReview scripts used in the project application process), to guard against mass namespace squatting and spam. - Project pages would include a visual indication of non-git vetted status - Manual review would still apply to get the 'git vetted user' status. I don't anticipate anyone on the working group being proposed to the option ... despite it not going as far as our proposal does, it is an improvement over the current situation; and a small step in the right direction. Any strong objections to the proposal as written? If I don't hear anything by the end of this week, I'll assume we can provide a TWG stamp of approval, and take the proposal out to the community. - Jeremy

1 0

Omega Theme - Resolve Ownership, Agree on Roadmap or Fork?
by Donna Benjamin 17 Jun '14

17 Jun '14

Hello Technical Working Group :) This is the community working group calling! We would like to delegate this issue to you https://drupal.org/node/2259035#comment-8886585 https://drupal.org/node/2261455 It seems like everyone has been pretty respectful so far, so it's really a technical issue but there is a grey area of overlap - and it might be worth thinking about CWG/TWG having a combined meeting at some point to sort out how/when/why we might want to deal with overlaps. cheers Donna -- Donna Benjamin - Executive Director Creative Contingencies - http://cc.com.au ph +61 3 9326 9985 - mob +61 418 310 414

1 0

TWG Meeting dates
by jthorson＠sasktel.net 15 Apr '14

15 Apr '14

Hey all, I just noticed I didn't have a TWG meeting entry in my calendar for April .. after having switched Google calendar email addresses yet AGAIN at work (enterprise bureaucracy at its finest!) Knowing it had to be coming up soon, I went looking; only to find that it was originally scheduled for today. I see now that it's been rescheduled to April 21st, but I don't see the reschedule notice. Not sure if that occurred earlier, or due to lack of attendance today. If the latter, and recognizing that I volunteered to pull together the relevant project application queue information before this meeting ... my sincere apologies! Unfortunately, I won't be able to attend the April 21st timeslot, as that is a travel day for me ... I'll be on a plane to Orlando (Disney vacation with the kids until April 30th). I'm not sure if there is another day which will work given everyone's calendars; but I'd be happy to try and work around any other available timeslot. - Jeremy

1 0