-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 24
Add Google Summer of Code Working Group charter. #63
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
base: main
Are you sure you want to change the base?
Conversation
| - Board Liaison: | ||
| - Steering Council Liaison: |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
@tim-schilling a question popped into my header while reading your year in review.
Are some of the working groups/teams meant to report to just the Steering Council or is the board always included?
I ask this here as it would seem from an outside perspective GSoC is more technical in nature over requiring much from the board?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
From my understanding / perspective it is a and/or situation depending on the use case. GSoC and Djangonaut Space (if you think of it as a contributor WG) both are relevant to the technical aspect of Django. However, more of them are about community building which is the Board's purview.
So I think GSoC would report to the board, but would need a SC liaison for helping with project selection. Though that's not a strong preference.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
That makes sense. More broadly is there a case to be made for some WG's to only have a SC liaison and no board liaison?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Yes. I'd imagine if we had a dedicated team for handling the new-features repo (no plans atm), that'd be entirely in the SC's domain. Or a dedicated team that managed a particular component.
Concretely, the mergers, releases, triage and review teams, likely all will be SC domain rather than board domain.
|
Looks good to me, thanks for putting this together @tim-schilling ! |
This is a first draft of the charter. I tried to keep it inline with current efforts. I expect as the WG forms and iterates, it will be more ambitious and the scope will change.
cc: @DevilsAutumn @Apoorvgarg-creator