By working group, I mean a relatively small group of people (like 5 or so) that are tasked with overseeing major areas of the Dojo 2.0 process. My main concern is that getting feedback from everyone is important but at the end of the day decisions need to be made and we aren't really set up to do that honestly. We tend to mill about talking a lot and moving in baby steps. Dojo 2.0 is going to require long-term (months) of coordinated work to pull it off.
So, I'm thinking that we might want to have a few teams, like Website, Video Production, etc., that would be volunteers who are willing to help steer the project and basically be the ones that would make tie-breaking decisions on issues that the Dojo is torn on. I do NOT mean that these few people are then responsible for doing all the work to get things done. I don't have specifics thought out yet but I wanted to put the idea out there and see what people think about it and ideas for what exactly it would entail.
Comments
There's merit in the
There's merit in the approach. It's how things get done around here (g.d.o, d.o) in general. I think as long as the channels for feedback remain open there will be no problem. There's a good history of Strong Listening Skills here, so I'm confident that listening would continue.
I tend to agree with you but at what costs?
I mentioned in our last Dojo 2.0 irc meetup that these decision arise out of the practice of DoOcracy and that the members that make no contested contributions will likely get their way. Obviously there are associated costs with the natural track of such a situation. Some of the obvious ones are falling short of potential, never getting things accomplished, etc... However, sometimes just the opposite occurs when someone has seemingly uninhibited decision making power by the nature of DoOcracy. We can only hope the later happens but I wouldn't hold my breath.
On the other hand, working groups are not immune to the same conditions that plague a straight up DoOcracy but there is a level of accountability associated with them, especially when such a group is made public to a larger population. The public expects results and by such pressure and hopefully desire of the working group these goals and ideas will come to fruition. However, in a DoOcracy what is the cost of employing such a working group? Do DoOcipants (participants of a DoOccracy) begin to feel left out of the equation? Does the participation diminish at the cost of an organized group? I could see it going either way actually. But by the nature of the Drupal community I feel that the people who will want to contribute and feel a burning desire to contribute to the work of the working group will make efforts to become involved. We should just be sure to leave the welcome mat out if such a group is formed.
Are there nominees for such a group how will the group be organized? I would imagine it needs to be abrupt and swift while not stepping on any toes as the sooner we can get started and acquire these individuals perhaps the better. These individuals will need to have a fair amount of time to contribute or have a set of users than can execute the ideas of the working group. Is there GHOP task possibility here? I don't know enough about the GHOP, other than what I've loosely read and heard on the most recent Lullabot podcast. Regardless of GHOP involvement, I think a working group that assigns "Community Tasks" will really get the ball rolling. We only assign one MANAGEABLE task to a community task user at a time. This insures completion of the given task. We issue as many tasks as we can and try to keep the cue low. The responsibility of the working group is to decide the course of action while documenting decisions and mapping out the course. The group needs to be responsible in the tasks issued. Being cautious as to not issue tasks that are cruft, start with a very decisive and targeted area of the dojo that first needs improvement. Accomplish that move on... Once all aspects of the desired dojo are completed, task members should be handed a polishing brush to make all the distinct areas of development seamless.
I would like to hear others opinions, but at this moment I support the idea of a working group. Please comment, keep me responsible, and let me hear your thoughts and ideas.
Peace,
-mpare
Pare Technologies
Drupal Consulting, Themeing, and Module Development
806.781.8324 | 806.733.3025
www.paretech.com
Figure Something Out? Document Your Success!
Peace,
-mpare
Pare Technologies
Drupal Consulting, Themeing, and Module Development
806.781.8324 | 806.733.3025
www.paretech.com
Figure Something Out? Document Your Success!
There definitely needs to be
There definitely needs to be some way for decisions to finally be made, otherwise discussion will continue going and going and DoOcracy or not, some things require that some kind of decision be made. Working groups is a great idea.
There are many things to consider when talking about this, such as the potential of the involved people to become otherwise engaged and unavailable for time, or simply move on, which has already happened in the dojo. A "nominated" approach may not work because of this, as the people involved in really pushing the dojo forward will likely continue to change. Otherwise, how would a person become one of the 5 or so people?
So how would such a group work, how would a person join?
One of the ways I can see this working is by following the way Drupal.org handles many of these same issues. That is, having people with various "roles", such as on the Website group, Video Production group, etc., but don't limit the number of people who can be part of each group. Keep it open and flowing. Similar to the Website maintainers of drupal.org, or Documentation team, etc. A person can volunteer to be part of that team and it's pretty much as simple as that, they are able to immediately pick up any issues or tasks and begin helping out where help is needed.
In these instances, decisions are almost always made by whomever is most involved or invested in that particular issue or task at the time and generally seems to work quite well.
THEN, in the instances where a decision cannot be reached, there does need to be a smaller group of people who CAN basically step in and have the final say. Otherwise, those instances will simply be unresolved indefinitely.
I think that the Dojo needs to become more organized to have any real longevity. It needs to have guidelines for members of the working groups, it needs to have some sort of "committee" or group to make these final decisions, and basically, needs to be taken more seriously. I've been a long follower of the Drupal dojo, while not very actively involved, and it's always felt a bit unstable to me. Blame that on video and audio issues, sure, but also because there's lots of ideas floating about, but not much that has been solidified.
Hm, I know I am the one who
Hm, I know I am the one who started this discussion, but upon really thinking about it maybe it is a bit ambitious right now. What I mean by that is that I don't know that we really have the people to do something that "fancy" (I mean seriously 5 people each for several groups is more than people we have right now.) We have very few people who are actively working on/discussing Dojo 2.0. So maybe for now, the people that are actually working on it are the de facto "working group."
brenda003 (and many others) definitely are correct in the perception of the Dojo being a sort of random herd of cats that sometimes do cool things and other times just sort of fizzle. So I think we end up in the situation where we need people to help but very few feel inclined to help a seemingly random "thing" because they don't want their resources "wasted."
So basically I like the idea but I'm not sure we can actually do it yet. Just bearing down and getting the basics working again will maybe (hopefully) put us in the position of having lots of people who are excited about helping!
Learn Drupal online at Drupalize.me
Well worth trying to define and figure out
Like anything, it's going to take a bit of effort to clearly define and figure out. I'd say it's pretty essential that we at least have people responsible/accountable for certain roles. In terms of creating 'dojo' working groups... yes, it we be helpful/beneficial to provide a way for people to learn/participate in various areas of specialty. The other thing I think people tend to forget is that there are already 'working groups' for just about every drupal related topic we'd want to touch. A lot can be accomplished by making it a responsibility of a dojo leader (for each dojo group) to seek out/interact/collaborate with other working groups, individuals, and even drupal shops.
Related ramblings/further elaboration can be found here - http://groups.drupal.org/node/8051
Gus Austin
PepperAlley Productions
Gus Austin
Drupalcon style tracks...
Couple additional thoughts on this topic...
Further elaboration on how/why to organize Dojo groups (and the Dojo in general) here.
Seems like the 'tracks' for Drupalcon could also provide inspiration for framing Dojo working groups:
http://boston2008.drupalcon.org/design-and-user-experience-track-descrip...
http://boston2008.drupalcon.org/site-building-track-descriptions
http://boston2008.drupalcon.org/community-and-core-track-description
http://boston2008.drupalcon.org/business-and-marketing-track-descriptions
We'll be able to accomplish a lot more by connecting/creating synergies between projects/ideals like Dojo and GHOP (see here).
Gus Austin
PepperAlley Productions
Gus Austin