Open Stack

There are already clearly established metrics for AUC recognition which
were defined as part of the development of the AUC process, and which have
been voted into the governance charter by the board. If you look at the
governance https://governance.openstack.org/uc/reference/charter.html, and
look at the scripts which check active working group members
https://github.com/openstack/uc-recognition/blob/master/tools/get_active_wg_members.py,
then you can see what those metrics are.

On Wed, Feb 15, 2017 at 11:18 PM, MCCABE, JAMEY A <jm6819 at att.com> wrote:

> Out of the submission of proposed Active User Contributors, we (mostly
> me)  started an outline of potential guidelines for determining what kind
> of contributions qualify to add up to an AUC recognition for an
> individual.  Proposed we have some ML style brainstorming/debate on this
> and then determine actionable steps at the next User Committee meeting on
> February 27.
>
> Going in goals/guidelines:
> 1.  The AUC is intended to encourage those who are not in development
> roles (though also those who are in development roles) to participate in
> the more user oriented activities.
> 2.  We want to encourage actual community advancing contributions rather
> than just attendance/words at meetings.
> 3.  We want those who are actively contributing being the ones to elect
> our leaders
>
> Alternatives:
> A.      Identify contributors where there is an output that gets used.
> For clarity but only example, from the user perspective:
>         a.  Infrastructure around the User Input Gathering process (e.g.
> Personas, processes, gatherings)
>         b.  User Stories and their subsequent maturation including reviews
> and gap analysis
>         c.  Usage (installing, using and providing feedback on the
> documentation, training and projects)
> B.      Anyone who attends a Working Group, some alternatives here:
>         a.  and provides their identity
>         b.  who spoke (perhaps spoke more than once or led on an actual
> topic).
>                 Not that this would have to get recorded - maybe a star
> next to people's names in the minutes
>         c.  attends again
>         d.   takes an action item or completes and reports back
> C.      None unless it is IRC based and then follow IRC contribution rules
> the same as for ATC
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: MCCABE, JAMEY A
> Sent: Monday, February 06, 2017 10:01 AM
> To: 'user-committee at lists.openstack.org' <user-committee at lists.
> openstack.org>
> Subject: AUC Requirements/WG Submission
>
> I wanted to share with the rest of the Working Group leads (and all
> following progress of the UC) that as the LCOO WG Chair I am submitting a
> list of contributors who have been active in the LCOO so that they aren't'
> left out of the upcoming vote and in general feel recognized for their
> efforts.  This list for LCOO will come from LCOO Etherpad and Atlassian
> meeting minutes. Only from publicly facing contributions seems
> appropriate.  Let me know if any questions.  I'll submit to Tom today.
>
> If interested: Relevant Links on
> UC: https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/Governance/Foundation/UserCommittee
> AUC: https://wiki.openstack.org/wiki/AUCRecognition
> Election: https://governance.openstack.org/uc/reference/uc-election-
> feb2017.html
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> User-committee mailing list
> User-committee at lists.openstack.org
> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/user-committee
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/user-committee/attachments/20170216/99989fde/attachment.html>