Hello, In today's IRC meeting, we discussed about the criteria of core members and active members. Here are some outputs. If you don't joined the discussion, please comment here. -------- I18n Core Contributors The coordinator of active language teams, who coordinates Dashboard translation or two documents translations during the previous two release cycles and attend team meetings at least once a month, will be granted as "I18n Core Contributors" I18n Active Contributors Translators or reviewers, who translate or review more than 200 words during the previous two release cycles, will be granted as "I18n Active Contributors" Best regards Ying Chun Guo (Daisy)
Hi, I agree with this criteria, as I said at the last meeting. Any other thought? Can we agree? Thanks, KATO Tomoyuki
Hello,
In today's IRC meeting, we discussed about the criteria of core members and active members. Here are some outputs. If you don't joined the discussion, please comment here.
-------- I18n Core Contributors
The coordinator of active language teams, who coordinates Dashboard translation or two documents translations during the previous two release cycles and attend team meetings at least once a month, will be granted as "I18n Core Contributors"
I18n Active Contributors
Translators or reviewers, who translate or review more than 200 words during the previous two release cycles, will be granted as "I18n Active Contributors"
Best regards Ying Chun Guo (Daisy)
+1 Seems like a reasonable starting point :) We can always optimise later, right? Regards, Tom On 12/06/15 19:39, KATO Tomoyuki wrote:
Hi,
I agree with this criteria, as I said at the last meeting.
Any other thought? Can we agree?
Thanks, KATO Tomoyuki
Hello,
In today's IRC meeting, we discussed about the criteria of core members and active members. Here are some outputs. If you don't joined the discussion, please comment here.
-------- I18n Core Contributors
The coordinator of active language teams, who coordinates Dashboard translation or two documents translations during the previous two release cycles and attend team meetings at least once a month, will be granted as "I18n Core Contributors"
I18n Active Contributors
Translators or reviewers, who translate or review more than 200 words during the previous two release cycles, will be granted as "I18n Active Contributors"
Best regards Ying Chun Guo (Daisy)
_______________________________________________ Openstack-i18n mailing list Openstack-i18n@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-i18n
Hi, Generally spaking, it is a good start line. Some comments inline. 2015-06-04 18:25 GMT+09:00 Ying Chun Guo <guoyingc@cn.ibm.com>:
Hello,
In today's IRC meeting, we discussed about the criteria of core members and active members. Here are some outputs. If you don't joined the discussion, please comment here.
-------- I18n Core Contributors
The coordinator of active language teams, who coordinates Dashboard translation or two documents translations during the previous two release cycles and attend team meetings at least once a month, will be granted as "I18n Core Contributors"
In addition to the above, we need to take into account folks who works for I18N infrastructure and so on. They don't lead translation teams and may not join I18N team meetings. I think it is good that the PTL decide they are core (or active) contributors for this kind of special cases.
I18n Active Contributors
Translators or reviewers, who translate or review more than 200 words during the previous two release cycles, will be granted as "I18n Active Contributors"
Several points. I am not sure we can consider the number of reviews and translations equally. generally speaking, reviewing is a bit easier than translating. one idea is 200 translation or 400 translation. I am not sure the number of words is appropriate, but I think it is a good start. When thinking about ATC of openstack projects, a contributor with a single patch submit is regarded as ATC, so 200 words sounds good as a start point. Another point we need to take into account is how many folks will be qualified as Active Contributors. Anyway, we need to continue to asses this number. Regarding the definition of "Active", it is better to follow the general ATC definition. For Vancouver summit, contributors who submitted patches in the recent one cycle were recognized as ATC. I don't see any reason we have different criteria to qualify "Active" contributors. Akihiro
Best regards Ying Chun Guo (Daisy)
_______________________________________________ Openstack-i18n mailing list Openstack-i18n@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-i18n
On Fri, Jun 12, 2015 at 9:10 AM, Akihiro Motoki <amotoki@gmail.com> wrote:
In addition to the above, we need to take into account folks who works for I18N infrastructure and so on. They don't lead translation teams and may not join I18N team meetings. I think it is good that the PTL decide they are core (or active) contributors for this kind of special cases.
Specifically as a member of the OpenStack Infrastructure team I want to mention that we're here to serve members of the community, from code projects to documentation writers to translators. I don't feel the need or see particular value in being included as a core/active members of the teams just because I'm working in that supportive role. The consideration is appreciated though, so thank you for including us in the discussion. -- Elizabeth Krumbach Joseph || Lyz || pleia2
Hi, Lyz In my mind, "active members" here are especially useful when distributing free registration codes for the summit. As a code/document developer, 1 patch may be deserved for a free code. As a translator, translating or reviewing a certain number of words may be deserved for that. "Core members" just like the leading/core team of I18n team. "Core members" are especially useful when we need to vote for something, just like code/doc developers vote for a patch. I don't have specific situations in mind when we need a vote, but sometime there would be a need for the vote. Of course, I hope the infrastructure could support these requirements. But it may need time to figure out how to get the list of active members or how to vote for a decision in I18n team. Your suggestions ? Best regards Ying Chun Guo (Daisy) "Elizabeth K. Joseph" <lyz@princessleia.com> wrote on 2015/06/14 16:42:00:
From: "Elizabeth K. Joseph" <lyz@princessleia.com> To: Akihiro Motoki <amotoki@gmail.com> Cc: Openstack-i18n Openstack-i18n <openstack-i18n@lists.openstack.org> Date: 2015/06/14 16:42 Subject: Re: [Openstack-i18n] Criteria of core members and active members
On Fri, Jun 12, 2015 at 9:10 AM, Akihiro Motoki <amotoki@gmail.com> wrote:
In addition to the above, we need to take into account folks who works for I18N infrastructure and so on. They don't lead translation teams and may not join I18N team meetings. I think it is good that the PTL decide they are core (or active) contributors for this kind of special cases.
Specifically as a member of the OpenStack Infrastructure team I want to mention that we're here to serve members of the community, from code projects to documentation writers to translators. I don't feel the need or see particular value in being included as a core/active members of the teams just because I'm working in that supportive role.
The consideration is appreciated though, so thank you for including us in the discussion.
-- Elizabeth Krumbach Joseph || Lyz || pleia2
_______________________________________________ Openstack-i18n mailing list Openstack-i18n@lists.openstack.org http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-i18n
On 06/17/2015 05:40 PM, Ying Chun Guo wrote:
Hi, Lyz
In my mind, "active members" here are especially useful when distributing free registration codes for the summit. As a code/document developer, 1 patch may be deserved for a free code. As a translator, translating or reviewing a certain number of words may be deserved for that.
"Core members" just like the leading/core team of I18n team. "Core members" are especially useful when we need to vote for something, just like code/doc developers vote for a patch. I don't have specific situations in mind when we need a vote, but sometime there would be a need for the vote.
The infrastructure team member do enough to get a free ATC, this shouldn't be a problem for Lyz or others. What I take from this discussion is that you need to experiment. Start with an initial set of rules and change them when we learn more. We'll all figure things out. And I expect that even if Lyz or myself would not be cores, you would still ask for our feedback in some areas and consider it.
Of course, I hope the infrastructure could support these requirements. But it may need time to figure out how to get the list of active members or how to vote for a decision in I18n team. Your suggestions ?
With Zanata up, we should be able to get some list of contributors, Andreas -- Andreas Jaeger aj@{suse.com,opensuse.org} Twitter/Identica: jaegerandi SUSE LINUX GmbH, Maxfeldstr. 5, 90409 Nürnberg, Germany GF: Felix Imendörffer, Jane Smithard, Dilip Upmanyu, Graham Norton, HRB 21284 (AG Nürnberg) GPG fingerprint = 93A3 365E CE47 B889 DF7F FED1 389A 563C C272 A126
participants (6)
-
Akihiro Motoki
-
Andreas Jaeger
-
Elizabeth K. Joseph
-
KATO Tomoyuki
-
Tom Fifield
-
Ying Chun Guo