There are two pages on the wiki (Template:FAD, How to organize a FAD) that contain outdated information about organizing a FAD, but the templates are still in use. To help make it easier for the Council to review and for organizers to plan, the existing resources should be updated.
To enable FAD organizers to plan effectively the first time and to help the Council review FAD proposals in a streamlined order
This follows up from a brief part of our discussion on Friday. There were a few issues with information included in FAD proposals that came up, and part of the issue is that the "official" templates are telling people to do things are either not helpful or irrelevant for planning one in the context for how FADs are being planned, organized, and executed today.
The current resources are:
Some discussion from the Council about where we might want to host this information could be helpful. I am self-assigning this ticket to do the heavy work, but it could be nice to push some of this into the contributor / community docs portion (cc: @bex) on explicit instructions / guidelines on how to organize one. The existing template on the wiki can be updated since I see it still being easiest to have FAD organizers plan their event on the wiki.
Metadata Update from @jflory7: - Issue assigned to jflory7 - Issue priority set to: Back Burner - Issue tagged with: events
I'd like to see this live in either the newly @mattdm created council docs repo for publishing on docs.fp.o or budget.fp.o.
Metadata Update from @bex: - Issue assigned to bex (was: jflory7)
When we clean this up, let's also not that budgetless FADs and vFADs do not require council approval, but should be widely advertised and reported on, just like regular FADs
Metadata Update from @bex: - Issue tagged with: policies
Metadata Update from @bex: - Issue priority set to: None (was: Back Burner)
Based on a conversation with @mattdm I'll write something up on this.
Metadata Update from @bex: - Issue priority set to: Waiting on Assignee
When we clean this up, let's also not that budgetless FADs and vFADs do not require council approval, but should be widely advertised and reported on, just like regular FADs +1 and also follow Fedora CoC too.
Metadata Update from @bex: - Assignee reset
I have to drop this due to lack of time, I encourage others to pick this up. This ticket should be reopened to Mindshare.
CC: @jflory7 @sumantrom
Metadata Update from @bex: - Issue close_status updated to: no action needed - Issue status updated to: Closed (was: Open)
While we are at it, I'd like to see what the previous template calls a "FAD" renamed to "Hackfest", please. "FAD" is jargon that is hard for people outside of the project to understand. Let's save FAD for its original purpose: one day of activity attached to a larger event, and make Hackfest be the thing for bigger purpose-focused meetings.
@bex: I have to drop this due to lack of time, I encourage others to pick this up. This ticket should be reopened to Mindshare.
Because the ticket was closed as "no action needed", my first impression is you not having time means it won't happen. This isn't the response I hoped for. :confused: If you encourage the ticket to be reopened to Mindshare, what does this mean? Should I open it or should you?
I know these are naïve questions but I am asking them for the benefit of the process. If I were in my first three months of contributing to Fedora, I would be confused about what to do next or how to feel like my request is being heard.
Because the ticket was closed as "no action needed", my first impression is you not having time means it won't happen. This isn't the response I hoped for. 😕 If you encourage the ticket to be reopened to Mindshare, what does this mean? Should I open it or should you?
My wording was intended to convey that if someone has time to work on this they should do so via Mindshare. No one has stepped forward to do this work at this time.
Okay. I understand this. I'm sorry if my original comment came off frustrated.
However, I still believe the Council should drive this work because the Council is responsible for reviewing FAD proposals and writing better documentation makes these events more accessible to more teams in the community.
I am still confused why this is a Mindshare task. I see Mindshare leading and coordinating with outreach-focused teams in Fedora. A FAD or hackfest is proposed by any team in Fedora, like the 2018 Infra Hackfest. Guidance is needed at the Council level because the Council reviews FADs / hackfest proposals.
I am also concerned this will get lost in the Mindshare backlog. The Mindshare ticket queue is over 35 tickets. It is difficult to get responses to tickets that are not funding requests.
Additionally, I saw discussions elsewhere about concerns about under-spending. Curating resources about proposing a FAD / hackfest makes these events more accessible to more teams. Improving documentation on FADs / hackfests runs parallel to under-spending concerns.
Login to comment on this ticket.