This thread is to write down the ways in which we are organized. While we aim for as little hierarchical structure as possible, some core team is needed and this is to document it as transparent as possible. Feedback welcome
This post is a wiki, you can edit it! Click on the ‘ Edit’ icon at the end of the post
Open Source Design is a collective of designers and other design-minded people pushing to connect open source and design more.
Everyone is welcome and there is no formal membership. The core team acts as a sort of steering group.
Being in the core team is based on:
- Amount of time being active in the collective. At least a year of activity in whichever way: event organization, code, forum activity, advocacy, etc.
- Steady activity and engagement in the community.
- History of good decisions and commitment to openness.
- Other people of the core group having met them in person or having had a call with them and vouching for them.
The current people in this group are:
- Amit Nambiar @amit.lzkpa
- Anxhelo Lushka @AnXh3L0
- Belen Barros Pena @belenbarrospena
- Bernard Tyers @ei8fdb
- Dina Michl @dmichl
- Ecaterina Moraru @evalica
- Eileen Wagner @bumbleblue
- Elio Qoshi @elioqoshi
- Eriol Fox @Erioldoesdesign
- Georgia Bullen @georgiamoon
- Jan-Christoph Borchardt @jan
- Jan Dittrich @jdittrich
- Nimisha Vijay @nim
- Peace Ojemeh (Perrie) @Perrie
- Saptak Sengupta @SaptakS
- Victoria Bondarchuk @victoria-bondarchuk
- Victory Brown @brownie @x.com
Alumni:
- Brennan Novak @bnvk
- Sam Muirhead @cameralibre
- Simon Vansintjan @simonv3
- Charlie Kritschmar @Incabell
Being in the core team means that these people are
Core email address recipients
- core at opensourcedesign dot net – used for outside communication, and recipient of Code of Conduct mails
- We need to set up redirects for each person, firstname at opensourcedesign dot net so we can individually list people on the code of conduct page without leaking their email address.
- Additionally, for our application as affiliate of the Open Source Initiative, they are asking for one specific person of contact. We could define this representative and have an address representative at opensourcedesign dot net
Internal Signal group members
- Used for private matters which don’t go in the forum
- If we would have the possibility to have more admins on Discourse, we could possibly get rid of this group and instead discuss in a private Staff category of Discourse. (The 5 admins restriction is because our Discourse instance is graciously hosted by Discourse cc @erlend_sh)
Discourse forum admins
- Listed at About - Open Source Design
- Because we receive Discourse hosting for free, only 5 admins are possible: @Erioldoesdesign, @evalica, @elioqoshi, @jan, @jdittrich
- Everyone from the core group are in @core-group Core group - Open Source Design
- We should require Two-Factor Authentication being enabled for admins?
- Note: Discourse allows admins to read all content – including “private messages” – of this forum. This is for abuse prevention and legal reasons. See this thread on the Discourse meta forum for more details. We trust our admins, and they won’t do this unless they absolutely have to, but we thought you should know up front.
Github organization owners
- Listed at Members · People · opensourcedesign · GitHub
- For historical reasons, we have some people set as owners who are not in the core team anymore (Brennan @bnvk, Simon @simonv3) or never were (Andreas @andreasn, Danila @danila.pellicani, Felix @eppfel, Garth @GarthDB, Gilli @gilli, Jon @jon, Kristina, Lewis, Una, Roy @Roy). What do we do here? To adjust to this structure, it’s probably best to remove them and then people can get nominated for the proper core team? Then: Who of you would like to be in the core team?
- We should require Two-Factor Authentication being enabled for admins?
- Admins should set their visibility to public (Dina @dmichl, Charlie @Incabell)
OpenCollective core contributors
- Listed at Open Source Design - Open Collective
- This does not require financial donation, but is of course welcome.
- It does give the power to approve (or deny) expenses which are submitted.
- (Expenses which are submitted should be discussed before actually ordering, which it also says in the description.)