Additionally, I renamed the original thread to replace “team” with “maintainers”. Cause I think it’s important to stress that it’s mostly about doing the work, not about having the prestige of being in some “core team”.
For that, establishing the different teams like web team would also help of course.
Yep Open Collective admin rights is also a thing some core maintainers have which allows for the 2 person approval of invoices and expenses and moving donation money around between specific projects there too.
Additionally to the access there’s like access to social accounts, access to web hosting, other infrastructure etc. etc.
I think there’s also some clarification that could be done around advocacy/sustainability of open source design as a community that i would define more of a ‘optional responsibility’ for maintainers e.g. I would hope that maintainers are taking on some responsibility for ‘spreading the word’ about open source design as a community and also just as a thing generally.
But i think it’s good to clarify that that is not an explicit criteria for maintainers and more of me expressing an expectation i have that could (should?) be challenged
I would not include advocacy in formal rules, since the only instances where advocacy is accountably-visible is talks and similar event participations and these are only open to people who have travel budget etc.;
I think there are many ways to do advocacy that don’t require budget/travel that are also evidence-able/accountable. Doing online videos/livestreams, writing blogs/articles, advocacy in OSS project repos via comments/issues etc. I wouldn’t want this suggestion to seem that doing ‘advocacy’ is a requirement, that is not for sure not appropriate.
I think it is a valuable contribution though, spreading knowledge of the open source design community and i would want it to be recognised as a valuable contribution. But that it beyond core team maintenance responsibility and also inclusive of any other maintainer maintenance tasks.
I mean if we were an org that had titles and positions it might be called ‘something-rels’ or OSS community rels, or i think an older term is OSS evangelist.
I buy the community “buy in” requirement for core members.
We expect it on other OS projects, our civic leaders running your town/city/state/country, board members at companies, sports coaches, etc.
Here’s a tweak to “Bring Others In”: Bring others in. Help people learn the game, make things, and spread open source design.
I feel the term maintainers is mostly useful when speaking to the FLOSS audience but i absolutely agree this term means zilcho to any designers from normal regular design land.
Would be pro adopting a non-OSS-friendly term to encourage designers more so
So we have “core members” since everyone can become a member of the general community. Being part of the community in general should be exciting, being part of what is now core is administration and maintainance. What about community caretaker, administrator or steward?
jdittrich
(Jdittrich (he|they))
Split this topic
15
love the statement - it’s got big hype energy