Since it appears you are my only supporter, I feel my energies would be better spent devoted to acquiring a livable pension before I hit 70. Let's see what the board announces after its next meeting.
regards Steve On Jan 4, 2015, at 10:12 PM, Naomi Ceder <naomi.ce...@gmail.com> wrote: > Steve, as a user, but not a maintainer, of the site you have my support > (please fix the job board). > > +1 FWIW > > Naomi > > On Sun, Jan 4, 2015 at 3:04 PM, Steve Holden <st...@holdenweb.com> wrote: > Hi all, > > Most of you will be aware of the recent thread on the psf-members list. I > copy the latest message from a board member and will intersperse my remarks > therein. > > Begin forwarded message: > >> From: Nick Coghlan <ncogh...@gmail.com> >> Subject: Re: [PSF-Members] Why are we having people register at python.org >> Date: January 4, 2015 2:08:18 PM GMT >> To: "Steven D'Aprano" <st...@pearwood.info> >> Cc: PSF Members <psf-memb...@python.org> >> >> On 4 January 2015 at 21:13, Steven D'Aprano <st...@pearwood.info> wrote: >>> On Sat, Jan 03, 2015 at 09:36:58PM -0600, VanL wrote: >>> If the bottleneck is us, then what are we doing about it? I know the >>> board members are busy, and may have other priorities, and that's okay, >>> but can't they delegate? >> >> That's the brutally hard part of the problem: defining the ground >> rules for a delegation and wrangling the subsequent process of >> selecting a suitable candidate is almost certainly going to involve >> even more work than talking to PE/RevSys every week regarding the >> board's current priorities. >> > I'm going to go out on a limb and suggest that my extensive PSF experience > and my reasonable level of web technology knowledge would make me a suitable > candidate. > >> However, I realised during this discussion that it doesn't actually >> have to be a board member that writes such a document. I'd been taking >> it for granted that that was necessary, but I now believe that >> conclusion to be incorrect: someone else could write a website project >> management proposal based on the RFP and community feedback, and >> submit it to the board as a grant proposal. >> > True. This email seeks to persuade you to support a proposal to the PSF board > for onward active management of the python.org web site only embedding that > notion. The infrastructure appears to be perfectly adequately managed, so the > tasks facing us are (I would suggest) principally > > * progressing the task list on behalf of the board with the external > contractors > * suggesting new CMS functionality to allow much easier editing of specific > content areas > * recruiting and organizing content editors > * curating content not handled by other editors, as a backup > >> The parts of such a process that would specifically need board >> involvement are any final yes/no decision (as it would take a board >> resolution to put any proposal into formal effect), and any parts of >> the proposal that involve changing the communications arrangements >> with PE/RevSys (and hopefully they would be open to participating >> directly in any discussions of a community proposal on the >> pydotorg-www mailing list). >> > Should the board wish to retain direct communication with the PE/Revsys team > that would be OK, but I imagine they'd be just as happy to delegate that > relationship to the "webmaster". > >>> I would have expected that the board would have started a discussion >>> here to ask for a volunteer to take over management of the project and >>> report to the board from time to time. There's plenty of things to >>> discuss: what the manager is expected to do, make design decisions or >>> just prod the web devs and ensure they keep moving? How often do they >>> report to the board? Is there a stipend for the person doing this or is >>> it an unpaid volunteer job? >> >> If such a role description could be developed through an open, >> collaborative process on the pydotorg-www mailing list, I believe that >> would be a potentially great outcome. As you say, quite a bit later >> than would be desirable, but still a positive way forward that could >> resolve some of the current challenges around site governance. >> > So, where do we go from here? I'm prepared to commit effort (more than I'd be > paid for, if experience is anything to go by) to see this move forward. Do I > have any support? > > regards > Steve > -- > Steve Holden st...@holdenweb.com +1 571 484 6266 @holdenweb > > > > > _______________________________________________ > pydotorg-www mailing list > pydotorg-www@python.org > https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/pydotorg-www > > > > > -- > Naomi Ceder > https://plus.google.com/u/0/111396744045017339164/about -- Steve Holden st...@holdenweb.com +1 571 484 6266 @holdenweb
_______________________________________________ pydotorg-www mailing list pydotorg-www@python.org https://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/pydotorg-www
