Alex Leverington wrote: > > And by project... they are only using a webpage, forum, endorsements, > and roster...
These guys: http://opensolaris.org/os/projects/ > > Why is a UG a project.. UGs are projects because of site restrictions and because they outgrew their former home. Currently, we can only have CGs and Projects (and lists/forums) on the site. The new site will be able to handle a variety of groupings. But UGs as projects is a perfectly good solution to the problem we had previously, though, where we stuffed over a hundred pages inside one CG until everything broke. I'm perfectly happy to have the UGs as projects. I just want them to have top level billing, that's all. They do not really fit inside the Advocacy CG anymore, too. > Why aren't they "User Groups"? They will be. Eventually. :) > I mean really, they ARE user groups. Why are they called projects? > > The advocacy page should be listing the user groups it endorses > independent of the projects it endorses. Advocacy lists all the projects it endorses, which include the UGs. So, to clear the confusion, I maintain a separate list of UGs only: http://opensolaris.org/os/community/advocacy/usergroups/ug-leaders/ > The only "project" advocacy endorses, I see it, is the starter kit. > Community Innovation is a SIG endorsed by advocacy and Country Portals > is a SIG endorsed by advocacy and i18n but should technically also be > endorsed by website cg. It seems the only tool on the site the CG uses > that the UG/SIGs don't use is voting. (and only because CGs have CCs) > It seems this entire naming debacle has maybe been a limit of the > website having to call everything 'project' or 'community'. Or was > that an initial requirement? Yah, it's just legacy, that's all. It's not a big deal. Will get fixed with the community re-org and the site upgrade. This will be the first time we can sync up the governance with the site, actually. > I guess if everything is a generic group, and the site actually named > groups for what they are (and not be limited to project or community), > everything would be seamless. Perhaps not seamless, but getting better. :) Jim -- http://blogs.sun.com/jimgris/
