There were several tickets in the past (#359 #366 #397 #414), some of them reopened or closed too quickly where FAmSCo was asked to review the nominating process of new mentors. This ticket should resume them all and get into FAmSCo meeting soon, in order to work it out definitely.[[br]]
The wiki actually just states: "Regional Ambassador Mentors are a group of people - selected, proposed and appointed by people - not by a leveling system - based on trust (and a lot of soft facts). Prospective mentors are '''nominated by existing Mentors and confirmed by FAmSCo'''. If you want to be a mentor for the Ambassador group, be a good ambassador and if asked, volunteer to help, when needed. One great way to prepare is, to be a good mentor for the project as a whole."
The same for removing ambassadors, we need a process about how to achieve that, thinking about a global process and not per countries or regions.
Metadata Update from @robyduck:
- Issue close_status updated to: None
- Issue private status set to: False (was: True)
Metadata Update from @jflory7:
- Issue priority set to: 20
- Issue set to the milestone: Fedora 26
- Issue tagged with: policy
The actual mentor nominating process says, only FAmSCo members or mentors can nominate e new mentor and FAmSCo will vote if they want to approve him or not. There is no rule actually to remove mentors.
While this worked fine for many years, it seems the process now got stuck and I would propose a more dynamic process, where people can easier become mentor, but not for life. Mentoring is a rather hard job and sometimes very time-effording. After some years you do this you improve your personal process, but you could also burn out. Also, the wiki page where mentors are listed is editable by all contributors, and rarely gets an update.
So, my proposal would be:
Actually tickets are filed in the FAmSCo trac, but I would prefer if mentors vote about other mentors and tickets are filed in the FAmA trac. This should look like this:
In my eyes this proces has two main pros:
Finally, the wiki page where mentors are listed for new ambassadors, should be read only and only FAmA should be able to edit it.
FAmA will check mentor’s availability and/or activity once a year and update the wiki page accordingly. This can be done with a simple survey, where mentors can just flag their actual state. Mentors can also do the active part, by telling FAmA they are not available for some time.
Same as for nomination I would like to make also the removal process more dynamic. Same as for nominating:
Also, a mentor gets removed:
All actions made by FAmSCo should probably pass over to FOSCo, and I’d see the FAmA even as an appointed member of this committee.
It seems this proposal is ok for anyone, as we agreed on it by unanimity during today's meeting.
However, as this process is involving FAmA and Tuan stepped down, we need to appoint a new FAmA. I got all permissions to move the trac and set up the mentor's stuff, but even to create the new repo with all the helper files (need to be fixed too).
Given the new responsibilities, the FAmA role has become again very time-effording and requests a constant presence in the FAmA trac. FAmA will also be responsible for welcoming new ambassadors again (beside their mentor), and for closing tickets over the deadline which have no activity for more than 14 days. All administrative steps for new ambassadors and for mentors, but even the whole FAmA trac is under his wing. A constant presence even on IRC would be desirable IMHO.
As this is a new process, the FAmA needs to be a mentor and should be on FAmSCo (at least for the first time), and actually only me and Giannis are mentors. We should start with one of us.
It would be nice if we could make just a short voting here about the FAmA, and then discuss and mark actions to him during the next meeting. That would be:
Perhaps it would be helpful to throw this opportunity out to all active mentors too, in case there is someone with long-term experience as a mentor who might wish to lead in this role?
One problem I see with this is it seems like lot of work for one person to complete and be responsible for. My concern is that if a lot of reworking to the FAmA position is going to happen and it will become a time-demanding position, would it be better to have a group of people to fill these roles? Or perhaps would it be better for FAmSCo to cumulatively fill these duties and roles as a group instead of creating a new committee? I think by delegating these roles and responsibilities to FAmSCo, this does two things:
Admittedly, I still haven't had a chance to read the minutes or do a historical read on FAmA, but to me, if there is currently no administrator for FAmA and no appointees for a successor, I think this could be a good opportunity to accomplish the previous two points by combining these tasks into the duties and responsibilities of FAmSCo.
Just my 2¢. :grin:
No, the FAmA is the administrator, and this needs to be done by a person, as it implies several permissions we should not give to a group. Also, we have FAmSCo elections every 6 months or so, this wouldn't make sense. Historically FAmA did even more stuff; when FAmSCo decided to give most of his responsibilities out to mentors or ambassadors, initially it was a good idea. But looking at it now, I must say we lost control over mentoring and mentors, and some processes got lost or are now outdated.
Long term mentor is the best choice indeed, but it would be the best to start within FAmSCo and then pass it over to another FAmA. Oh, and currently both of us are offering our time to do that, so we are not in an emergency position.
I edited this page https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mentors/NewMentors.
I think we can keep that page in order to gather all the mentor's policies to make'em easy to find in the wiki sea.
Feel free to check and review any part of it.
Looks good and respects what we approved. Closing as fixed.
Metadata Update from @robyduck:
- Issue close_status updated to: Complete
- Issue status updated to: Closed (was: Open)
to comment on this ticket.