Just a meta-observation. Generally it is better to define things that need to be done rather than the roles that will be responsible. The problem with defining specific roles that individuals fill is that those people are then seen to be responsible and others do not step up to help write as freely. I realise this doesn't seem entirely logical, but I have observed it many times.
I'm all for defining responsibilities, but it's usually not a good idea to define a leader as such. In an ASF project leaders are the ones who currently have the best ideas and the time to follow them through. Ross Sent from my mobile device, please forgive errors and brevity. On Oct 14, 2011 8:28 PM, "Dave Fisher" <dave2w...@comcast.net> wrote: > While discussing this month's PPMC Board Report we discussed making > volunteers from the PPMC responsible for certain roles. We quickly proceeded > with a Press Liaison due to the immediate need. Before settling on a larger > set of roles let's have a discussion and come to a consensus. > > Types of roles or teams: > > (1) External or Marketing Team. Involving the relationship of the AOOo > project community with the many communities in the OOo universe. > > - Press Liaison. (Don Harbison is currently filling this role.) > > - Security Officer. Responsible for security co-ordination with other > entities. > > - TDF Liaison. Dedicated to the special relationship between AOOo and LO. > (Would we have other special relationships?) > > - Brand Manager. Dedicated to the OOo brand. > > - Legal Affairs. Assure that copyright, license, and terms of use are all > proper. That the NOTICE and LICENSE files are correct. Seek copyright > assignments from authors where helpful. (Is this another team?) > > Regards, > Dave > > On Oct 12, 2011, at 12:51 PM, Rob Weir wrote: > > > On Wed, Oct 12, 2011 at 1:44 PM, Donald Harbison <dpharbi...@gmail.com> > wrote: > >> On Wed, Oct 12, 2011 at 1:28 PM, Dave Fisher <dave2w...@comcast.net> > wrote: > >> > >>> > >>> On Oct 12, 2011, at 10:18 AM, Rob Weir wrote: > >>> > >>>> On Wed, Oct 12, 2011 at 1:09 PM, Dave Fisher <dave2w...@comcast.net> > >>> wrote: > >>>>> Rob, > >>>>> > >>>>> On Oct 12, 2011, at 9:34 AM, Rob Weir wrote: > >>>>> > >>>>>> On Wed, Oct 12, 2011 at 11:48 AM, Dave Fisher < > dave2w...@comcast.net> > >>> wrote: > >>>>>> > >>>>>> <snip> > >>>>>> > >>>>>>> I think that "we" as the AOOo PPMC will need to find one or more > PPMC > >>> members to fulfill certain external roles. > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> I am emphasizing EXTERNALLY facing roles. These people would > generally > >>> be people with the talent of handling sensitive issues in a delicate > and > >>> appropriate manner on the list when they arise seemingly out of place. > >>> Knowing that there are volunteers available will help the rest of us > focus > >>> on code or migration. > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> Perhaps these roles are: > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> (1) Public face of Security for AOOo. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Work on handling security reports occurs on a private list, > >>>>>> ooo-security. It is not visible publicly, or even to the PPMC in > >>>>>> general. Where there needs to be a public communication, for > example, > >>>>>> to report a vulnerability, it comes from members of ooo-security. > >>>>>> This is all per the recommended process from Apache Security [1]. > The > >>>>>> PPMC is welcome to debate and adopt contract guidelines, but I would > >>>>>> not recommend it. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> The members of the ooo-security list are stated on our FAQ page [2] > >>>>>> > >>>>>> So I think that part is already covered. > >>>>> > >>>>> Given what just happened with LO, we made improvements. But I think > that > >>> some member of ooo-security needs to be watching for security related > >>> questions as they appear on ooo-dev and ooo-users. You and Dennis are > very > >>> vocal across the whole spectrum of AOOo issues. I think that there > needs to > >>> be someone we all know is on top of security and can publicly contact. > >>>>> > >>>>> The rest of us. Me, you, or whoever should refrain from answering > such > >>> questions (or answer with deferment and deference). This public facing > >>> person could generally speak for the group. > >>>>> > >>>>>>> (2) Liaison with the TDF. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Ideally, someone who is already both a PPMC member and a TDF member. > >>>>>> We have several. "Half liaisons" (someone who is a member of one > >>>>>> organization but not the other) don't work quite as well. > >>>>> > >>>>> Half or full is not really the issue. Diplomatic and measured > response > >>> that can both speak for the group and know when to defer back to the > podling > >>> is important. To me a non-TDF member might be better. > >>>>> > >>>>>>> (3) Press Liaison. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> As a podling we're a bit limited here, per Podling guidelines [3], > but > >>>>>> there is certainly some scope for doing good work here, if someone > >>>>>> wants to volunteer. > >>>>> > >>>>> Someone should be looking out at the real world and letting us know > >>> what's being said about AOOo and then striving to correct the record. > This > >>> needs to be someone on the PPMC. The person is this role would work > with > >>> press@a.o. They would establish relationships, etc. > >>>>> > >>>> > >>>> I don't think it works that way. I wish it did, but it doesn't. > >>>> > >>>> What we've seen is this: > >>>> > >>>> 1) Reporters are either monitoring this list, or more likely being > >>>> tipped off by someone, pointing them to threads where there is juicy > >>>> stuff. > >>>> > >>>> 2) The write an article, quoting participants on this list. They are > >>>> not picky. They'll quote members and non-members alike, me, Dennis, > >>>> Simony, whoever. > >>>> > >>>> 3) They then publish their article. They never post a note to the > >>>> list, send a note to Press@, ask who our press liaison is. They are > >>>> getting 50 bucks to write an article in 45 minutes, and that is what > >>>> they do. > >>>> > >>>> That is how it works. If we want to change that, having a designated > >>>> person is not enough, unless that person actually does the preemptive > >>>> outreach. If we wait for negative stories to be published we're too > >>>> late. > >>> > >>> Well it looks like a tough job. You do bring up one main benefit of a > press > >>> liaison "preemptive outreach." > >>> > >>> We need someone explicitly building the relationships, becoming someone > >>> that the press will know to ask when they want clarification before > they > >>> publish something negative or just plain wrong. > >>> > >>> I will volunteer to tackle this in concert with press@a.o, and Sally > >> Khudairi, VP Publicity, ASF. > >> Now where is that teflon suit? > >> /don > >> > > > > +1 for Don as press liaison. I've seen him do good work in this area > > in other organizations. > > > > But shouldn't we raise these roles, the call for volunteers, etc., in > > a new thread? Right now it is buried in a PMC report thread, which is > > not exactly a topic that attracts much attention. > > > > -Rob > > > >>> Regards, > >>> Dave > >>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>>> (4) Brand Manager / Cat Herder. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> You see those as the same thing? We've had a couple requests for > >>>>>> permission to use the OOo trademark and logo. We handled those > >>>>>> requests well, I thought. I don't think there is a volume of such > >>>>>> requests that would suggest we need a person dedicated to that. > >>>>> > >>>>> This is more about herding of wiki, BZ, blogs, fora, and websites to > >>> have proper branding. Looking out for the OOo and AOOo brand in the > wild. It > >>> is cat herding because each of these exist in both the legacy OOo site > and > >>> in various stages of migration. > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>>> With people in these roles who are active then perhaps the rest of > us > >>> can defer immediate responses to questions in these areas when they > occur on > >>> ooo-dev. With slight formality we might be able to stop the periodic > and > >>> damaging flames of misunderstanding. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Other areas where we could use some volunteer leadership: > >>>>>> > >>>>>> 5) wiki master > >>>>>> > >>>>>> 6) bugzilla master > >>>>>> > >>>>>> 7) web master > >>>>> > >>>>> These are more obvious roles that are as much internal to the project > as > >>> external. Never-the-less these are roles. > >>>>> > >>>>> (8) User Forum sys admins - supplementing the current proposal with > >>> individuals like perhaps Drew. > >>>>> > >>>>> On Oct 12, 2011, at 9:50 AM, Donald Whytock wrote: > >>>>> > >>>>>> On Wed, Oct 12, 2011 at 12:34 PM, Rob Weir <robw...@apache.org> > wrote: > >>>>>>> Other areas where we could use some volunteer leadership: > >>>>>>> > >>>>>> < snip > > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>>> IP master? Coordinating the re-licensing process, looking at > external > >>>>>> packages linked to, and being the go-to for future contributions? > >>>>> > >>>>> Sure - > >>>>> > >>>>> (9) Legal Maven. Clearing Terms of Use with Apache legal, checking > >>> NOTICE and LICENSE, requesting authors relicense source, etc. > >>>>> > >>>>> Regards, > >>>>> Dave > >>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Don > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> [1] http://www.apache.org/security/committers.html > >>>>>> [2] http://incubator.apache.org/openofficeorg/ppmc-faqs.html > >>>>>> [3] http://incubator.apache.org/guides/branding.html > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>> > >>> > >> > >
