Hey,

On 15/07/2008, at 10:09 PM, Jim Grisanzio wrote:
> I updated this again to reflect the removal of the Facilitator role,  
> and I'm also recommending the removal of the Emeritus role. This is  
> just an outline of an idea to give the infrastructure dev team the  
> minimum information (roles, structure, relationships) they've been  
> requesting for four weeks so they can continue working to build the  
> applications to upgrade the site and support the gate migration.

[snip]

As I said on Jim's blog, I like this a lot more than some of the others.

As I see it, we have a couple of formal roles within our community  
(which I've grouped accordingly) -

  - Contributor
  - Leader

  - Member
  - OGB

A Contributor is *everyone* in the context of opensolaris.org. No one  
would be involved or reading lists if they weren't interested, and  
contributing to the success of the community.

Leader are those people with a stronger position in the community.  
Leaders in the project sense may be ones making decisions and deciding  
the direction of a project. They have respect from their peers that  
has elevated them into a position of responsibility. Only leaders can  
elevate other people to that position, to share in the responsibilities.

Both of these roles have a set of attributes -

  - can edit web pages
  - can administer mailing lists
  - can commit code

Members are those who want to be associated with the OpenSolaris  
community, and care about its long term success from a social point of  
view. Membership is voluntary, and based on an individual's  
contribution to the community. Members are approved by a small  
membership committee (the tick boxers), but recommended (reference) by  
existing Members. They can vote in community wide elections, but don't  
necessarily have a say in many of the operational parts of the  
community (ie. Projects). Members elect OGB board representatives, who  
are given the responsibility for the long term success of the project,  
ensuring that it has all the resources it needs to be that success.

The rest of Jim's proposal starts to identify the high level groups. I  
also believe this comes close to my thoughts -

  - Projects
  - Communities/SIGs
  - User Groups

Very, very close. I've added Release Team and ARC as stand outs,  
because I believe those are fundamentally important in getting our  
software out into the hands of our users.


Glynn

Reply via email to