Hey, hello Alright, so it's let's get started. So I don't know if maybe you want to share your screen because I think mine as usual is just not working
yeah sure so should I.
Yeah, if you could share, shout the board because I don't know if you're on the chat so that everyone can look if they want. So besides the usual version that that we have in the wiki The only things I have actually moved like most of the agenda items to individual tickets, because they tend to be like ongoing issues in a lot of cases that that popped over from one meeting to the next source. issues will be a bit easier to keep track of. And we know we'll have a board also to go through that. So yeah, you can load that in. Share. Screen can go about that list.
All right, perfect. Thank you. So it's a little small, but maybe we can start with the ones in progress because those were from previous meetings. So the one was, is an ongoing task from engineering but I think tank I see you, you're taking over from my earliest work on this great thing about like, analyzing the feedback, and maybe coming up with better ways to do the Call Report like the one that you did today.
Yes. So Ellie is actually so we've decided that I'll be taking over this and he's just working on this. So there's no context switching. So just jump in while she knows everything. But she has just let me know, in terms of feedback today, that she's busy putting together a survey to see Natalie the core contributors just to get further feedback on everything. So I know, I don't know if that document was shared. I know you and her had some back and forth. I don't know. She said that that hasn't been shared with the larger core contributors. The
most I think the document has been shattered similar forms, but I don't think we had a lot of additional commands on top of it. Yeah.
Okay. The key takeaways and possible solutions document. Yes. So we've been busy doing a she's busy doing a survey on that. And then as soon as that sent out, we'll get more feedback and then we can hopefully Yeah, but that was my first sprint chicken today tween pretty smoothly but uh, yeah, I think the document the working group document, yeah.
I mean, is that is there anything looking? These are any questions that
no, no at the moment is just about getting out. Just get find the time to finish the survey. And then as soon as we sent it out, we'll just keep tabs on how many people stopped responding. And we might have to just push that a bit so we can get through this faster. And so we can Yeah, so we can actually get somewhere. So I'll let you guys know probably in the next two weeks, hopefully, we'll have some more feedback. Hopefully this survey sent out by that stage and then we'll take it from there. But I'll keep you guys posted.
On this if anyone's as commands are stuff that have been overlooked and etc don't participate for a bit because some of the coordination work that we do here but also like passing on information between between everyone, better not drunk or collaborating a bit more.
Absolutely. Yeah. There's there's really anyone built in the form the chicken that's Matt this past month, so if possible, and so I think this will really help.
Yes, definitely. I mean, I'm sure past print. Christmas was like we could have but yeah, it's true that there have been a downward trend over the past few months. I see that. All right, next item, I guess. So that is an no point. Um, about the MFPs. So this one is something on which You've given updates in the past. I don't know if that's solved or not, because I haven't followed since the last update. But there may be documentation and review I'm
not sure if I have an update. I do know that. There's going to be a meeting on Thursday to decide on Redwood so that we solve some of the problems that have been reported regarding, you know, the introduction of new MSPs in the past, right. The idea is to this has been led by by Jana and the product working by the way. And, you know, to make it clear what's going to be in red world and what's not, that's the main, the main goal if I figure and then to figure out how to get there, and make sure all the features are ready in time and tested and document. Right. So it's, I guess it's tangential to this. Like it's part of the efforts to improve MFP documentation and reviews. So Oh, yeah, that's that's actually an action item in the ticket. Oh, yeah. That's actually happening.
Yep, that's, that's perfect. Yeah, also talk to these on the last product working groups does look at that's where other things are going to go unless they start being like a bit of follow up on the product side and maybe some coordination around that thing. That's probably seen an open question as how the technical coordination will happen on this because I'm guessing not everything will be the purview of the product working group, but at least having any coordination at all, I think will be a big step. Yeah,
this this first meeting is very, very open. It's I shouted it out, and the BTR and the front end Working Group channels. So anybody that's interested, can and should join, but I did invite some people specifically so that you know, particularly the BTR leads and leaders and people that are involved, but anybody that's interested in this topic can join that.
Yeah, I was gonna say, there are always technical details that the engineers are going to be best placed to prioritize and understand how they should get done and why they should get done. But I think that the one of the purposes of this is to kind of cement the product lead organization that we want to have and it's based to an extent on feedback that we've gotten from VTR about, hey, we pulled in this MFE because somebody wanted it, right. That's not enough product management discipline to run the project successfully. So we want to do is get those conversations as early as possible in the release cycle. informed the conversations based on like all of the product management research that we do in advance. And ideally, like when we have engineering lead changes that are making it into the releases that they would actually be reflected in the same release plan as the product lead changes so that we would have one place where we could see everything that we aspire to have in the next release.
That sounds great. I'll be back for that training is probably a good iteration in case. So I think that takes care of most of the action items in there. Maybe one which is slightly tangential. Is that you had one about three papers that are in the GitHub organization that started with the prompt and I don't think you got a chance to get on what those were.
Think. I think two of them have been resolved and one of them is still a bit stuck and I should go
if you learn something, yeah added to the ticket to inform for the next one is.
Next ticket after that will be the debugging system grade issues. So there there was some follow up in the thread itself, the farm thread in the meantime, there, Peter replied, is not here today, right now, but he did mention that like, potential cause I think in the forms right I didn't look anything up especially in pull requests that he thinks needs feedback, per se. They review it in the chat. Anyone is able to review this
the chat so I don't know if anyone knows a bit more about this issue and is about to talk about it because I got the study not the fine details.
know nobody knows. Anyone can give a review to Peter maybe
not something I can review but I can ask. See if Dave Ormsbee or Kyle are able to spare some cycles to review I think they'd probably be best placed thanks.
Right next step, probably swan. Then there was the translation issue that originally Yeah, report that's an extreme from from to trans effects. So there was a bit of back and forth during like PR unfortunately, is leaving the community so I couldn't really keep following on that. Omar meant that for him, it's fixed. Or at least he doesn't know of any new issue with that, but I still have some outstanding questions for him. Again, I don't really know that issues. I can only ask questions, but I remember that. I mentioned that there was a permission thing going on with crumbs, if not all translator and access to the new content. And I'm not completely sure if already like everyone has everything to do their work and it's just a matter of waiting for translations to be done. Or if there are still technical blockers. But Omar is not here. And and we help Yeah, so I don't know. Does anyone know anything about this?
This is this is something I worked on, somewhat indirectly with Omar. So I can say I'm gonna ask Brian and then it's the last Omar So Omar it's really the right person's wife here, but I can I can insist on Slack. The there's Is there any issues there? I'm not aware of any issues as far as I'm concerned. As of Quinn's Frontenac communications is translated and translatable using Apalis and it works. But yeah, I I didn't try translating it myself. I'm gonna
alright. Yeah, because sometimes that can be also the defeat when it works technically. But for users or translators or whatever, there is a blocker somewhere so that I think the best would probably be having the last word from the translation working group. I think, right. Yeah, it's is it Eden's young boys leaving the translation working group?
Yeah, I think this was like taking it to eat and it would be the right next step and there's some technical details we know we need then Brian Smith. would be the right person.
Since the translation working group should be involved in the next releases, inviting her to the meeting on Thursday. Could it be a good idea for her like to be aware of of the scope right or? But I think
could be for sure. Because especially not that we want to appear around to keep an eye on translations. I think having someone more that might help. Yeah, okay.
It's always good to hear today, so I will just put that as a as a next step. Good.
All right. So then there was Lana for Project UX. Meeting, but I think that has been mostly so maybe I shouldn't ask Andy. That's that's the case. But I think the plan is for your ex to join the project. Working Group meeting, at least, your ex one and having Paragon working group, training that from time to time, but I'll take an action item to to double check with Allium this lets you know Casey and online
I've No we haven't. We haven't discussed it but I am having a meeting with her tomorrow. So I can I was gonna say I can follow up with her if you want. We'll just make up put some comments in this in getting in Yeah. In the comment section.
Sounds good. All right. So then I think before getting to the less important one or one from the progress we could go through the new topic. Because there are a few of them that avoided five you meetings we didn't really get a chance to go see them. So if we look at the first one of the upcoming meeting agenda column. So that's just basically a recap that I've moved stuff over from the wiki. I've also closed a bunch of issues on the on the on the ball on the working group coordination project. So if you saw anything that seemed to have been closed a bit too quickly, didn't get the right update. Don't hesitate, because there were a bunch of issues and I think close on me the ones that don't need to be worked on anymore, but yeah, let me know. My bounds there. And in general, that means that now if you want to add a meeting to this, an agenda item to this meeting, you can of course still use the wiki page, that's fine. But you can also actually open a ticket on this project on this column. That will be exactly what we'll be looking at afterwards. All right. Second issue. Yeah, there is the something that we've discussed some time ago, which is to try to call contributors to take on more responsibilities, whether it's additional permission around some different repositories to be able to review merge things, but also maintainer ship. So there has been like a round of additional maintenance for the current phase of maintenance and working. Maybe you'll want to talk a bit about that. But yeah, like he might, like we also had talked about very simple action items like posting performance read, posting on the meaning needs to be the contributors to ask people to take over, maybe, in general, it might be good to have a look at people who haven't found work to do recently, but were contributors who maybe suggest some SOP and don't know if anyone would like to help a bit with that. I could take an action item to goes to one of the threads and forums and on the mailing list. If anyone wants to help with those.
No, all right. I guess I'll start with that first and we'll see what comes out of it. I mean, in general, what could be good would be for each organization to try to have a look if there are other I don't know maintainer ships or repositories on which it would be good to have more rights and maybe try to extend that because what's also behind that is also things like review of pull requests and being able to accelerate to be able to stream reviews, our environment or parts of the code base that activity maintain. So that's quite important to the project.
I can I can, I can join you can join you for for this one. But I would like to, to be in another meeting or in Slack but I could. I would like to start from like from the need like, what are the reports that are currently not assigned to any contributors or, or? Yeah, that's
the one. The working group is that finial is working on producing that list of repos now, so it sounds like that. The need is we should work with Neil to get the description of the need, as Jorge described it, because I think that's the place to start right. Relatedly Bobby, I was going to ask like, how is how is List of flow going like do we feel like we have a sense of on average, how much time we're contributors are spending on average, like how many what percentage of core contributors are meeting their their obligations versus not do we have that sense?
Like consent lately, it has decreased a bit over the past few months. So so if we take maybe before like just the December one, which was particularly low during the holidays, I think we add about see, like, correct me if I'm wrong, but about half of core contributors, replying and doing any hours basically. So it is possible that there are some people who did not reply and actually did ours too. But most likely, most of the areas should be the ones with the reporting. I think. If I remember correctly, it's about 300 hours or something like that. Every couple of weeks a restaurant. So, so you can find some of the stats actually in in the last ones. So I think more or less like a like the vast majority, I would say of contributors don't do all of the house. thing. There is also good proportions of people would do a significant amount. But I would say probably, if I had to do just a blind guess right now, that would be worth like looking into numbers a bit more, but probably a third of our contributors would actually if not fulfill all the house do like we cannot work and maybe like half of them as is kind of my thing. Something like that. But, but again, it's it's something that we we can look at a bit more closely. I know that we had done a round of discussions with our core contributors on this a year and a half ago or something like that. And and he did a few more recently. So there are also some stuff that can be read about that. In the Republic posted. But I think in general we have a lot of activity between what people organization committed and what what is being done. There's a bit of a gap and I think, I mean, the fact that few people do a lot of the work and that a lot of people don't necessarily do their commitment is not something that's specific to openedx I think this happens in every open source project that I know of like it's always a bit like that. I think the important bit, I think for me is to kind of just acknowledge and recognize that like maybe, like keep the status quo people who are inactive maybe something that we had discussed at some point was to have another intermediate statues, probably people who contribute but maybe not as much as a core contributor towards to a molecule contributor label for that, and also maybe you also have some people get time at one point but less later on so we could have like a kind of an inactive status like Alemany alumni contributor and then if they want to reactivate the activate so rather than necessarily like whipping everyone to this to make sure that the work is done because it's volunteer work so we not really have a lot of low rate would be more to like maybe clarify who is reactive who is not active so that typically when you have this kind of question that it's it's more clearly currently look, the number of core contributor would be the ones who are actually active versus having a bit of a mixed bag, something like that. So good to see both of you. Yeah, I
wanted to ask about that gap or lack of whatever. So the question is, is it the lack of what is it a self reported activity, which is like not enough to be a contributor, or it's a result, which like, we don't see a result of that. We don't know how many hours is spent. So how do you measure that contributor is actually doing something?
It's always a really difficult question. Right? Right. Yeah, we base it basically on on like voluntary reporting, because it's, that's, I mean, maybe there are other better solutions, and it's quite possible, but it's quite difficult. I find him general to really track everything that everyone is doing, because there's so many different types of contributions, so many different types of skills, technical or not, and etc. So, yeah, we're currently it's like basically we ask the people like, how much time do you spend doing contribute to the work or the amount and we take that at face value so people could even lie, but I don't think generally people do for that. And it's true that one hour one person is not going to bring the same result than one hour of another person, but they will have both spent an hour trying to do something. So it's, that's kind of like the base denominator that I see. But, but what do you have in mind? Do you think I'm missing like that? Probably.
What I have in mind, I don't really like have something definitive in mind, but a rough rough question or maybe a rough idea is like, how the whole work is, whatever scheduled manage it, whatever is it like some kind of sprints where contributors are committing to something that in a week or in a month, we will can bring that knowing that we will be spending that much of time we are committed to good to contribute or something like that. And resists maybe this volunteering contributing is very much similar to what we have in rock again, called like strategic work, and it's always deprioritized against some firefighting or whatever. So maybe we just well, it's not just but maybe we need to build up some sort of a cadence where people are actually working and knows that they have to bring something and so on and this will maybe contribute to the fact that they not they're prioritizing those hours against something else.
Sounds great. Yeah. Yeah, I
was gonna kind of extend on what Sergey was saying a little bit. I think I agree with him. I mean, I think that the answer has been in large part the core contributors like No 10% of your time figure it out. I think we have an opportunity in the case of maintainership we have a predefined set of expectations. We could potentially come up with like, let's say we have a rubric of repos that need maintainers and complexity and we say a complexity three repo requires like two hours a week of work. Something like that. Then we could say you know if you're doing a complexity three repo, then you're you're covered in terms of like your responsibility and if you improve the state of the art, you can do that in less time then so much the better, but we just give people clarity and more measurability in terms of what they're doing and also we make sure that people have an opportunity to focus on something that that everybody benefits from, like maintaining the resource.