#415 Improve mentor nominating and removal process
Closed: Complete 4 years ago Opened 5 years ago by robyduck.

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)

5 years ago

Metadata Update from @jflory7:
- Issue priority set to: 20
- Issue set to the milestone: Fedora 26
- Issue tagged with: policy

5 years ago

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:


Who can nominate a new mentor

  • A mentor or a FAmSCo member
  • A Region
    NOTE: Regions need at least 5 +1s and can nominate a new mentor if there is an objective need to have one more.

Where do they file a ticket?

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:

  • The nominating process starts with a ticket in the FAmA trac, where mentors get asked to give their +1/0/-1 to the nomination. As per lazy consensus, all votes with 0 or -1 have to be explained with a reason. Once the nominee gets at least 3 +1s, his nomination counts as mentor-approved.
    At this point who nominated the new mentor can file a ticket in the FAmSCo trac, adding the FAmA in CC for any notification.
  • Final approval is still done by FAmSCo, but there will be no extra voting session.
    FAmSCo will just ask if anyone raises any concerns about the new (and already approved) mentor. If nobody has concerns the new mentor gets appointed and FAmA can take all administrative actions to give him the correct permissions.
    If FAmSCo has a concern, FAmSCo will discuss the reason and make a final votation, as actually. 50% +1 is needed to make this decision, even in trac.

In my eyes this proces has two main pros:

  • More people can nominate a new mentor and we will not run out of mentors
  • Region specific mentors can vote about a new mentor, as they probably have a better view of the problems this region is facing than FAmSCo has. FAmSCo members sometimes are not part oft he specific region a new mentor comes from.

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.

Removal Process

Same as for nomination I would like to make also the removal process more dynamic. Same as for nominating:

  • Asking removal of a mentor can be done by a mentor, a FAmSCo member or by the region, if they have at least 5 +1s.
  • Tickets have to be opened in the FAmSCo trac and very clear reasons need to be provided!!!
  • Mentors are asked to provide feedback, which again can be region specific and therefor a feedback from a local mentor will help FAmSCo to make a decision.
  • FAmSCo votes about the proposal after at least 2 weeks, to give mentors time to provide feedback; if approved, FAmSCo asks FAmA to take action.

Also, a mentor gets removed:

  • If he asks to step down, filing a ticket in the FAmA trac (this is just to trac his decision, FAmA can immediately take action)
  • If a mentor is set as not available for 12 months, he will get removed by FAmA

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:

  • define the new process on the wiki
  • reach out to mentors to explain the new process
  • set the fama alias to the new FAS
  • Communicate the new process to ambassadors (and make sure all regions are aware of it)
  • whatever is needed to make this happen properly and as clear as possible

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:

  1. Involves a group of people into the task to allow for multiple people to help with the various duties and responsibilities as their time permits
  2. Helps avoid contributor burnout by placing too much work onto a single person (which might also require them to give up a significant amount of time in the Fedora community in other ways)

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)

4 years ago

Login to comment on this ticket.