[discussion] rename the recruitment list

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
13 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

[discussion] rename the recruitment list

Peter Kovacs-3
Hello all,

I wonder if we can rename the recruitment list to something else. My
theory is that a lot of people do not understand OpenSource in general,
and recruitment is commonly strongly linked with Job offers. So have the
theory people write us with the hope on a job.

Maybe a better name would support a better understanding, on how we work
or what to expect.

Maybe something like [hidden email]?

Or simply [hidden email] or [hidden email]

what do you think? I am interested in all opinions, even if you are just
a passive reader or from other projects.


All the Best

Peter

--
This is the Way! http://www.apache.org/theapacheway/index.html

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [discussion] rename the recruitment list

Arrigo Marchiori
Hello Peter,

thank you for having raised this issue. I have some ``deeper''
questions about the philosophy of the project itself, and about its
organization. Please see below.

On Wed, Jan 13, 2021 at 09:25:14AM +0100, Peter Kovacs wrote:

> Hello all,
>
> I wonder if we can rename the recruitment list to something else. My theory
> is that a lot of people do not understand OpenSource in general, and
> recruitment is commonly strongly linked with Job offers. So have the theory
> people write us with the hope on a job.
>
> Maybe a better name would support a better understanding, on how we work or
> what to expect.
>
> Maybe something like [hidden email]?
>
> Or simply [hidden email] or [hidden email]

My quick reply to your answer: IMHO (as a non-native English speaker)
the term "recruitment" is already good enough to describe "enlisting
as volunteering". It's very clear that everyone here is a
volunteer. Moreover, you don't have to be a recruiter to write to
recruitment@, as you do not have to be a developer to write to dev@
(as it is happening for applications to test release candidate 4.1.9)

--- Longer pilosophycal reply starts here ---

This part is about "how we work and what to expect", as you wrote.

From my very short and limited experience, I have seen quite some
enlistings: people who wrote "hello, here I am, I am good at this and
that".

But I have hardly seen anyone working as a _recruiter_, in terms of:
"we have to do X and Y. Who is available to help?"

So my question is: can we use that list for actual recruitment, in
terms of gathering people around a sub-proect? Such as "let's refactor
module X", or "let's document module Y", or whatever we think:

 - would be a Good Thing for the project and
 
 - needs a coordinated effort because it's too much for a single
 volunteer.

Such coordinated efforts would need a... coordinator, with the ability
to tell volunteers "let's do X, let's not do Y". In other words, a
simple hierarchy.

I am asking this because I am not sure, from what I understood of "The
Apache Way", how much hierarchies or sub-groups are
tolerated. Moreover, the only "structured" process I have encountered
in my short experience is the preparation of a release, that involves
the full developers' community.

But from what I have seen so far, Open Office is a _huge_ project,
that carries the work of _many_ hands. It is IMHO unrealistic to
expect a real evolution of this software if we do not start working in
task-oriented groups.

If the answer is yes, that the Apache Way and the project's philosophy
have nothing against simple hierarchical working groups, then
"recruitment" is (still IMHO) a _very_ good name for the list, and we
should take full advantage of such name: _let's use it_ for hiring!
:-)

Trying to better explain my point, here is a fictional example
sub-project: translate all source code inline documentation into HTML
format. All names are fictional.

 1- J. Doe sends a [PROPOSAL]; we discuss it on the dev@ list and
 agree that it is a Good Thing.

 2- J. Doe and F. Bar take the responsibility of coordinating it,

 3- J. Doe sends a "recruitment" message to _both_ dev@ and
 recruitment@ telling "let's do this; contributors welcome; we start
 on Octember 36th, reply to dev@ if interested". He may also dig in
 the recruitment@ archives and directly contact people who introduced
 themselves in the past, may be fit for the job and may not be
 subscribed to the list.

 4- J. Doe, F. Bar and the other volunteers carry out the task, using
 the dev@ list when necessary. If recruited volunteer B. Etor says "I
 would like to do it bi-lingual: English and Klingon" then F. Bar has
 the authority to say "no thanks, please let us stick to English".

I hope I could explain myself clearly. Please do not see this as
hijacking your discussion thread, as I am just trying to fully
understand the term "recruitment" and therefore the role of the
corresponding mailing list.

If this topic has already been discussed in the past (and honestly, I
would be suprised if it had not :-) please send me the pointers.

Best regards,
--
Arrigo

http://rigo.altervista.org

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [discussion] rename the recruitment list

Marcus (OOo)
In reply to this post by Peter Kovacs-3
Am 13.01.21 um 09:25 schrieb Peter Kovacs:

> I wonder if we can rename the recruitment list to something else. My
> theory is that a lot of people do not understand OpenSource in general,
> and recruitment is commonly strongly linked with Job offers. So have the
> theory people write us with the hope on a job.
>
> Maybe a better name would support a better understanding, on how we work
> or what to expect.
>
> Maybe something like [hidden email]?
>
> Or simply [hidden email] or [hidden email]
>
> what do you think? I am interested in all opinions, even if you are just
> a passive reader or from other projects.

I've also the impression that the expectation of this mail address is
different to the one we have.

The best is when the name itself says all.

So, what about renaming to "volunteering@" or "IwantToVolunteer@"?

My 2 ct

Marcus


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [discussion] rename the recruitment list

Dave Fisher-2


Sent from my iPhone

> On Jan 13, 2021, at 9:55 AM, Marcus <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> Am 13.01.21 um 09:25 schrieb Peter Kovacs:
>> I wonder if we can rename the recruitment list to something else. My theory is that a lot of people do not understand OpenSource in general, and recruitment is commonly strongly linked with Job offers. So have the theory people write us with the hope on a job.
>> Maybe a better name would support a better understanding, on how we work or what to expect.
>> Maybe something like [hidden email]?
>> Or simply [hidden email] or [hidden email]
>> what do you think? I am interested in all opinions, even if you are just a passive reader or from other projects.
>
> I've also the impression that the expectation of this mail address is different to the one we have.
>
> The best is when the name itself says all.
>
> So, what about renaming to "volunteering@" or "IwantToVolunteer@"?

I like volunteer@ - it is a call to action. It is the proper verb.

Regards,
Dave

>
> My 2 ct
>
> Marcus
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]
>


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [discussion] rename the recruitment list

Moderator
On 13/01/2021 18:05, Dave Fisher wrote:

>
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
>> On Jan 13, 2021, at 9:55 AM, Marcus <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>
>> Am 13.01.21 um 09:25 schrieb Peter Kovacs:
>>> I wonder if we can rename the recruitment list to something else. My theory is that a lot of people do not understand OpenSource in general, and recruitment is commonly strongly linked with Job offers. So have the theory people write us with the hope on a job.
>>> Maybe a better name would support a better understanding, on how we work or what to expect.
>>> Maybe something like [hidden email]?
>>> Or simply [hidden email] or [hidden email]
>>> what do you think? I am interested in all opinions, even if you are just a passive reader or from other projects.
>>
>> I've also the impression that the expectation of this mail address is different to the one we have.
>>
>> The best is when the name itself says all.
>>
>> So, what about renaming to "volunteering@" or "IwantToVolunteer@"?
>
> I like volunteer@ - it is a call to action. It is the proper verb.
>
> Regards,
> Dave

+1

>> My 2 ct
>>
>> Marcus


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [discussion] rename the recruitment list

Czesław Wolański
In reply to this post by Dave Fisher-2


On 2021/01/13 18:05:26, Dave Fisher <[hidden email]> wrote:

>
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
> > On Jan 13, 2021, at 9:55 AM, Marcus <[hidden email]> wrote:
> >
> > Am 13.01.21 um 09:25 schrieb Peter Kovacs:
> >> I wonder if we can rename the recruitment list to something else. My theory is that a lot of people do not understand OpenSource in general, and recruitment is commonly strongly linked with Job offers. So have the theory people write us with the hope on a job.
> >> Maybe a better name would support a better understanding, on how we work or what to expect.
> >> Maybe something like [hidden email]?
> >> Or simply [hidden email] or [hidden email]
> >> what do you think? I am interested in all opinions, even if you are just a passive reader or from other projects.
> >
> > I've also the impression that the expectation of this mail address is different to the one we have.
> >
> > The best is when the name itself says all.
> >
> > So, what about renaming to "volunteering@" or "IwantToVolunteer@"?
>
> I like volunteer@ - it is a call to action. It is the proper verb.
>
> Regards,
> Dave
>


+1 for volunteer@

BTW:
Mailing Lists page - section "Recruitment Mailing List (Public)",

https://openoffice.apache.org/mailing-lists.html#recruitment-mailing-list-public

There is a typo: "contributer". Any volunteers?   ;‑)

Regards
Czesław






---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [discussion] rename the recruitment list

Jim Jagielski
In reply to this post by Dave Fisher-2


> On Jan 13, 2021, at 1:05 PM, Dave Fisher <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
>
> I like volunteer@ - it is a call to action. It is the proper verb

+1
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [discussion] rename the recruitment list

Keith N. McKenna
In reply to this post by Dave Fisher-2
On 1/13/2021 1:05 PM, Dave Fisher wrote:

>
>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
>> On Jan 13, 2021, at 9:55 AM, Marcus <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>
>> Am 13.01.21 um 09:25 schrieb Peter Kovacs:
>>> I wonder if we can rename the recruitment list to something else. My theory is that a lot of people do not understand OpenSource in general, and recruitment is commonly strongly linked with Job offers. So have the theory people write us with the hope on a job.
>>> Maybe a better name would support a better understanding, on how we work or what to expect.
>>> Maybe something like [hidden email]?
>>> Or simply [hidden email] or [hidden email]
>>> what do you think? I am interested in all opinions, even if you are just a passive reader or from other projects.
>>
>> I've also the impression that the expectation of this mail address is different to the one we have.
>>
>> The best is when the name itself says all.
>>
>> So, what about renaming to "volunteering@" or "IwantToVolunteer@"?
>
> I like volunteer@ - it is a call to action. It is the proper verb.
>
> Regards,
> Dave
>
+1 for volunteer@

Keith

>>
>> My 2 ct
>>
>> Marcus
>>
>>
>> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
>> For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]
>>


signature.asc (499 bytes) Download Attachment
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [discussion] rename the recruitment list

Peter Kovacs-3
In reply to this post by Arrigo Marchiori
Hi Arrigo


I like the Idea to post Tasks onto Recruitment. I will try this.

However, I try tried to give people tasks that were signing on, and it
never worked out.

Maybe I am a bad recruiter. I leave that to other peoples decision. You
can read my posts on recruitment and what I tried.

I have mostly wrote stuff like this here:

https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/0a16093227325324ea57fb07cf8e08a7902c0f365792c14065de88ac%40%3Crecruitment.openoffice.apache.org%3E

As an answer when someone posted interest.

I have asked people to talk to me, and figure what they can do and tried
to give them a choice of Issues. Even look for more if they are not
interested.

But in the end, I could recruit no one. So I would like to change
tactics. And one thought I have is that a lot of people think that ASF
is a Company, or they do not differ between ASF and a Company.
OpenOffice is also only a product to them, and not a project.


We have mostly Issues. Crashes, out dated stuff. Boring maintenance.
There are only 2 topics for features. That is OOXML and ODF 1.3.

I try to get a concept for base together. I will make my next step on
FOSDEM, but as you see I take my time. And it will be a long time until

I suggest actual work. And Base is the simplest of all the applications
we have, because it is the "least used".


I hope you understand now more where I come from.

I am a bit astonished that no one screams on the hierarchy suggestions.
I think we do not need them and we can continue with our rather anarchic
approach with similar success.

But I think this is a completely different discussion.


All the best

Peter

On 13.01.21 11:24, Arrigo Marchiori wrote:

> Hello Peter,
>
> thank you for having raised this issue. I have some ``deeper''
> questions about the philosophy of the project itself, and about its
> organization. Please see below.
>
> On Wed, Jan 13, 2021 at 09:25:14AM +0100, Peter Kovacs wrote:
>
>> Hello all,
>>
>> I wonder if we can rename the recruitment list to something else. My theory
>> is that a lot of people do not understand OpenSource in general, and
>> recruitment is commonly strongly linked with Job offers. So have the theory
>> people write us with the hope on a job.
>>
>> Maybe a better name would support a better understanding, on how we work or
>> what to expect.
>>
>> Maybe something like [hidden email]?
>>
>> Or simply [hidden email] or [hidden email]
> My quick reply to your answer: IMHO (as a non-native English speaker)
> the term "recruitment" is already good enough to describe "enlisting
> as volunteering". It's very clear that everyone here is a
> volunteer. Moreover, you don't have to be a recruiter to write to
> recruitment@, as you do not have to be a developer to write to dev@
> (as it is happening for applications to test release candidate 4.1.9)
>
> --- Longer pilosophycal reply starts here ---
>
> This part is about "how we work and what to expect", as you wrote.
>
>  From my very short and limited experience, I have seen quite some
> enlistings: people who wrote "hello, here I am, I am good at this and
> that".
>
> But I have hardly seen anyone working as a _recruiter_, in terms of:
> "we have to do X and Y. Who is available to help?"
>
> So my question is: can we use that list for actual recruitment, in
> terms of gathering people around a sub-proect? Such as "let's refactor
> module X", or "let's document module Y", or whatever we think:
>
>   - would be a Good Thing for the project and
>  
>   - needs a coordinated effort because it's too much for a single
>   volunteer.
>
> Such coordinated efforts would need a... coordinator, with the ability
> to tell volunteers "let's do X, let's not do Y". In other words, a
> simple hierarchy.
>
> I am asking this because I am not sure, from what I understood of "The
> Apache Way", how much hierarchies or sub-groups are
> tolerated. Moreover, the only "structured" process I have encountered
> in my short experience is the preparation of a release, that involves
> the full developers' community.
>
> But from what I have seen so far, Open Office is a _huge_ project,
> that carries the work of _many_ hands. It is IMHO unrealistic to
> expect a real evolution of this software if we do not start working in
> task-oriented groups.
>
> If the answer is yes, that the Apache Way and the project's philosophy
> have nothing against simple hierarchical working groups, then
> "recruitment" is (still IMHO) a _very_ good name for the list, and we
> should take full advantage of such name: _let's use it_ for hiring!
> :-)
>
> Trying to better explain my point, here is a fictional example
> sub-project: translate all source code inline documentation into HTML
> format. All names are fictional.
>
>   1- J. Doe sends a [PROPOSAL]; we discuss it on the dev@ list and
>   agree that it is a Good Thing.
>
>   2- J. Doe and F. Bar take the responsibility of coordinating it,
>
>   3- J. Doe sends a "recruitment" message to _both_ dev@ and
>   recruitment@ telling "let's do this; contributors welcome; we start
>   on Octember 36th, reply to dev@ if interested". He may also dig in
>   the recruitment@ archives and directly contact people who introduced
>   themselves in the past, may be fit for the job and may not be
>   subscribed to the list.
>
>   4- J. Doe, F. Bar and the other volunteers carry out the task, using
>   the dev@ list when necessary. If recruited volunteer B. Etor says "I
>   would like to do it bi-lingual: English and Klingon" then F. Bar has
>   the authority to say "no thanks, please let us stick to English".
>
> I hope I could explain myself clearly. Please do not see this as
> hijacking your discussion thread, as I am just trying to fully
> understand the term "recruitment" and therefore the role of the
> corresponding mailing list.
>
> If this topic has already been discussed in the past (and honestly, I
> would be suprised if it had not :-) please send me the pointers.
>
> Best regards,
--
This is the Way! http://www.apache.org/theapacheway/index.html

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [discussion] rename the recruitment list

Carl Marcum
In reply to this post by Dave Fisher-2


On 1/13/21 1:05 PM, Dave Fisher wrote:

>
> Sent from my iPhone
>
>> On Jan 13, 2021, at 9:55 AM, Marcus <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>
>> Am 13.01.21 um 09:25 schrieb Peter Kovacs:
>>> I wonder if we can rename the recruitment list to something else. My theory is that a lot of people do not understand OpenSource in general, and recruitment is commonly strongly linked with Job offers. So have the theory people write us with the hope on a job.
>>> Maybe a better name would support a better understanding, on how we work or what to expect.
>>> Maybe something like [hidden email]?
>>> Or simply [hidden email] or [hidden email]
>>> what do you think? I am interested in all opinions, even if you are just a passive reader or from other projects.
>> I've also the impression that the expectation of this mail address is different to the one we have.
>>
>> The best is when the name itself says all.
>>
>> So, what about renaming to "volunteering@" or "IwantToVolunteer@"?
> I like volunteer@ - it is a call to action. It is the proper verb.
>
> Regards,
> Dave
>
>
I also like volunteer@
and add the unsubscribe footer ;)

Best regards,
Carl


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [discussion] rename the recruitment list

Marcus (OOo)
Am 15.01.21 um 21:13 schrieb Carl Marcum:

> On 1/13/21 1:05 PM, Dave Fisher wrote:
>>> On Jan 13, 2021, at 9:55 AM, Marcus <[hidden email]> wrote:
>>>
>>> Am 13.01.21 um 09:25 schrieb Peter Kovacs:
>>>> I wonder if we can rename the recruitment list to something else. My
>>>> theory is that a lot of people do not understand OpenSource in
>>>> general, and recruitment is commonly strongly linked with Job
>>>> offers. So have the theory people write us with the hope on a job.
>>>> Maybe a better name would support a better understanding, on how we
>>>> work or what to expect.
>>>> Maybe something like [hidden email]?
>>>> Or simply [hidden email] or
>>>> [hidden email]
>>>> what do you think? I am interested in all opinions, even if you are
>>>> just a passive reader or from other projects.
>>> I've also the impression that the expectation of this mail address is
>>> different to the one we have.
>>>
>>> The best is when the name itself says all.
>>>
>>> So, what about renaming to "volunteering@" or "IwantToVolunteer@"?
>> I like volunteer@ - it is a call to action. It is the proper verb.
>>
> I also like volunteer@
> and add the unsubscribe footer ;)

so, then let us do it this way.
Short discussion and clear decision, I like. :-)

Marcus


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [discussion] rename the recruitment list

Arrigo Marchiori
In reply to this post by Peter Kovacs-3
Hello Peter, All,

because everyone (else) seems to agree on volunteer@ please note it's
fine for me. Please do _not_ consider my vote for recruitment@ as a
veto (in case you were in doubt :-).

Now to Peter's reply.

On Wed, Jan 13, 2021 at 10:29:28PM +0100, Peter Kovacs wrote:

> Hi Arrigo
>
> I like the Idea to post Tasks onto Recruitment. I will try this.
>
> However, I try tried to give people tasks that were signing on, and it never
> worked out.
>
> Maybe I am a bad recruiter. I leave that to other peoples decision. You can
> read my posts on recruitment and what I tried.
>
> I have mostly wrote stuff like this here:
>
> https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/0a16093227325324ea57fb07cf8e08a7902c0f365792c14065de88ac%40%3Crecruitment.openoffice.apache.org%3E
>
> As an answer when someone posted interest.
>
> I have asked people to talk to me, and figure what they can do and tried to
> give them a choice of Issues. Even look for more if they are not interested.
>
> But in the end, I could recruit no one. So I would like to change tactics.
> And one thought I have is that a lot of people think that ASF is a Company,
> or they do not differ between ASF and a Company. OpenOffice is also only a
> product to them, and not a project.

Thank you for sharing this information.

First of all, I am happy to see that you tried. I cannot say wether
you are a good or a bad recruiter, because I have no experience of
recruiting free software contributors. But I really appreciate your
effort.

> We have mostly Issues. Crashes, out dated stuff. Boring maintenance. There
> are only 2 topics for features. That is OOXML and ODF 1.3.

Well... maintenance has kept me busy so far, and I personally enjoy
fixing bugs. I think it's a good starting point for newcomers to get
accustomed to the huge code base, one piece at a time. I am still
learning, of course.

On the other hand, before someone could help with the two features you
pointed out, they should have:

 A- good knowledge of the AOO code base;

 B- good knowledge of the OOXML and/or ODF file formats;

 C- possibly experience with other programs and/or file formats, in
 order to be able to use patterns, best practices etc. from the field.

I personally find utopistic to find _one_ of the three condition above
in a newcomer, let alone all of them together ;-)

As a ``non-rockstar'' C++ programmer, I could instead be helpful with
blatant bugs crashing AOO. Any C programmer understands a null-pointer
dereference! I just had to read the "debugging" wiki page carefully,
to make my (small) experience with gdb useful.

What we need, maybe, is an expert developer who is able to break the
bigger problems into smaller ones, that could be assigned to newcomers,
with lower barriers to entry.

> I try to get a concept for base together. I will make my next step on
> FOSDEM, but as you see I take my time. And it will be a long time until
> I suggest actual work. And Base is the simplest of all the applications we
> have, because it is the "least used".
>
> I hope you understand now more where I come from.

I understand and, again, for what my humble opinion is worth, I
appreciate your efforts.

> I am a bit astonished that no one screams on the hierarchy suggestions. I
> think we do not need them and we can continue with our rather anarchic
> approach with similar success.
>
> But I think this is a completely different discussion.

Maybe no one read through my whole message ;-)

In fact, we could discuss about ``organization'' rather than
hierarchy; I could have used a better wording. I do not want to ``give
powers'' to anyone, but rather individuate a ``leader'' as someone who
``leads'' in terms of ``goes ahead and shows the way''. That is what
experienced developers and contributors here IMHO would be _very_ fit
for. And without this kind of leading, I believe, bigger improvements
will be very, very difficult.

I hope I could explain myself clearly, and most of all, I hope that it
is clear that all I am writing is aimed at achieving higher goals as a
project. And that the purpose of my messages on this thread is to
understand: can we recruit and organize small groups of people (inside
the existing doc, dev, QA groups) or is it against the policies here?

If we agree on this, then we can pass to a second level of this
discussion: what ``big'' projects are worth organizing our efforts
on. This should happen on a new thread, but just because we are
here... you mentioned ODF and OOXML, but we could also add:
 - squash bugs blocking the next 4.2.0-Dev,
 - update obsolete modules (Boost, Python, NSS etc)
 - support newer Java releases,
 - your upcoming proposal for Base,
 - ... whatever :-)

I could start myself trying to ``recruit'' volunteers on my pet peeves:
 - documenting the source code,
 - enhancing error reporting and logging,

but I would rather work for some time on a project driven by someone
with more experience than me, before starting up my own.

Thank you and best regards.

> On 13.01.21 11:24, Arrigo Marchiori wrote:
> > Hello Peter,
> >
> > thank you for having raised this issue. I have some ``deeper''
> > questions about the philosophy of the project itself, and about its
> > organization. Please see below.
> >
> > On Wed, Jan 13, 2021 at 09:25:14AM +0100, Peter Kovacs wrote:
> >
> > > Hello all,
> > >
> > > I wonder if we can rename the recruitment list to something else. My theory
> > > is that a lot of people do not understand OpenSource in general, and
> > > recruitment is commonly strongly linked with Job offers. So have the theory
> > > people write us with the hope on a job.
> > >
> > > Maybe a better name would support a better understanding, on how we work or
> > > what to expect.
> > >
> > > Maybe something like [hidden email]?
> > >
> > > Or simply [hidden email] or [hidden email]
> > My quick reply to your answer: IMHO (as a non-native English speaker)
> > the term "recruitment" is already good enough to describe "enlisting
> > as volunteering". It's very clear that everyone here is a
> > volunteer. Moreover, you don't have to be a recruiter to write to
> > recruitment@, as you do not have to be a developer to write to dev@
> > (as it is happening for applications to test release candidate 4.1.9)
> >
> > --- Longer pilosophycal reply starts here ---
> >
> > This part is about "how we work and what to expect", as you wrote.
> >
> >  From my very short and limited experience, I have seen quite some
> > enlistings: people who wrote "hello, here I am, I am good at this and
> > that".
> >
> > But I have hardly seen anyone working as a _recruiter_, in terms of:
> > "we have to do X and Y. Who is available to help?"
> >
> > So my question is: can we use that list for actual recruitment, in
> > terms of gathering people around a sub-proect? Such as "let's refactor
> > module X", or "let's document module Y", or whatever we think:
> >
> >   - would be a Good Thing for the project and
> >   - needs a coordinated effort because it's too much for a single
> >   volunteer.
> >
> > Such coordinated efforts would need a... coordinator, with the ability
> > to tell volunteers "let's do X, let's not do Y". In other words, a
> > simple hierarchy.
> >
> > I am asking this because I am not sure, from what I understood of "The
> > Apache Way", how much hierarchies or sub-groups are
> > tolerated. Moreover, the only "structured" process I have encountered
> > in my short experience is the preparation of a release, that involves
> > the full developers' community.
> >
> > But from what I have seen so far, Open Office is a _huge_ project,
> > that carries the work of _many_ hands. It is IMHO unrealistic to
> > expect a real evolution of this software if we do not start working in
> > task-oriented groups.
> >
> > If the answer is yes, that the Apache Way and the project's philosophy
> > have nothing against simple hierarchical working groups, then
> > "recruitment" is (still IMHO) a _very_ good name for the list, and we
> > should take full advantage of such name: _let's use it_ for hiring!
> > :-)
> >
> > Trying to better explain my point, here is a fictional example
> > sub-project: translate all source code inline documentation into HTML
> > format. All names are fictional.
> >
> >   1- J. Doe sends a [PROPOSAL]; we discuss it on the dev@ list and
> >   agree that it is a Good Thing.
> >
> >   2- J. Doe and F. Bar take the responsibility of coordinating it,
> >
> >   3- J. Doe sends a "recruitment" message to _both_ dev@ and
> >   recruitment@ telling "let's do this; contributors welcome; we start
> >   on Octember 36th, reply to dev@ if interested". He may also dig in
> >   the recruitment@ archives and directly contact people who introduced
> >   themselves in the past, may be fit for the job and may not be
> >   subscribed to the list.
> >
> >   4- J. Doe, F. Bar and the other volunteers carry out the task, using
> >   the dev@ list when necessary. If recruited volunteer B. Etor says "I
> >   would like to do it bi-lingual: English and Klingon" then F. Bar has
> >   the authority to say "no thanks, please let us stick to English".
> >
> > I hope I could explain myself clearly. Please do not see this as
> > hijacking your discussion thread, as I am just trying to fully
> > understand the term "recruitment" and therefore the role of the
> > corresponding mailing list.
> >
> > If this topic has already been discussed in the past (and honestly, I
> > would be suprised if it had not :-) please send me the pointers.
> >
> > Best regards,
> --
> This is the Way! http://www.apache.org/theapacheway/index.html
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
> For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]
>

--
Arrigo

http://rigo.altervista.org

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]

Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: [discussion] rename the recruitment list

Marcus (OOo)
Am 17.01.21 um 15:41 schrieb Arrigo Marchiori:
> because everyone (else) seems to agree on volunteer@ please note it's
> fine for me. Please do _not_ consider my vote for recruitment@ as a
> veto (in case you were in doubt :-).

I've created a Jira issue for Infra:
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-21344

Marcus



> On Wed, Jan 13, 2021 at 10:29:28PM +0100, Peter Kovacs wrote:
>
>> Hi Arrigo
>>
>> I like the Idea to post Tasks onto Recruitment. I will try this.
>>
>> However, I try tried to give people tasks that were signing on, and it never
>> worked out.
>>
>> Maybe I am a bad recruiter. I leave that to other peoples decision. You can
>> read my posts on recruitment and what I tried.
>>
>> I have mostly wrote stuff like this here:
>>
>> https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/0a16093227325324ea57fb07cf8e08a7902c0f365792c14065de88ac%40%3Crecruitment.openoffice.apache.org%3E
>>
>> As an answer when someone posted interest.
>>
>> I have asked people to talk to me, and figure what they can do and tried to
>> give them a choice of Issues. Even look for more if they are not interested.
>>
>> But in the end, I could recruit no one. So I would like to change tactics.
>> And one thought I have is that a lot of people think that ASF is a Company,
>> or they do not differ between ASF and a Company. OpenOffice is also only a
>> product to them, and not a project.
>
> Thank you for sharing this information.
>
> First of all, I am happy to see that you tried. I cannot say wether
> you are a good or a bad recruiter, because I have no experience of
> recruiting free software contributors. But I really appreciate your
> effort.
>
>> We have mostly Issues. Crashes, out dated stuff. Boring maintenance. There
>> are only 2 topics for features. That is OOXML and ODF 1.3.
>
> Well... maintenance has kept me busy so far, and I personally enjoy
> fixing bugs. I think it's a good starting point for newcomers to get
> accustomed to the huge code base, one piece at a time. I am still
> learning, of course.
>
> On the other hand, before someone could help with the two features you
> pointed out, they should have:
>
>   A- good knowledge of the AOO code base;
>
>   B- good knowledge of the OOXML and/or ODF file formats;
>
>   C- possibly experience with other programs and/or file formats, in
>   order to be able to use patterns, best practices etc. from the field.
>
> I personally find utopistic to find _one_ of the three condition above
> in a newcomer, let alone all of them together ;-)
>
> As a ``non-rockstar'' C++ programmer, I could instead be helpful with
> blatant bugs crashing AOO. Any C programmer understands a null-pointer
> dereference! I just had to read the "debugging" wiki page carefully,
> to make my (small) experience with gdb useful.
>
> What we need, maybe, is an expert developer who is able to break the
> bigger problems into smaller ones, that could be assigned to newcomers,
> with lower barriers to entry.
>
>> I try to get a concept for base together. I will make my next step on
>> FOSDEM, but as you see I take my time. And it will be a long time until
>> I suggest actual work. And Base is the simplest of all the applications we
>> have, because it is the "least used".
>>
>> I hope you understand now more where I come from.
>
> I understand and, again, for what my humble opinion is worth, I
> appreciate your efforts.
>
>> I am a bit astonished that no one screams on the hierarchy suggestions. I
>> think we do not need them and we can continue with our rather anarchic
>> approach with similar success.
>>
>> But I think this is a completely different discussion.
>
> Maybe no one read through my whole message ;-)
>
> In fact, we could discuss about ``organization'' rather than
> hierarchy; I could have used a better wording. I do not want to ``give
> powers'' to anyone, but rather individuate a ``leader'' as someone who
> ``leads'' in terms of ``goes ahead and shows the way''. That is what
> experienced developers and contributors here IMHO would be _very_ fit
> for. And without this kind of leading, I believe, bigger improvements
> will be very, very difficult.
>
> I hope I could explain myself clearly, and most of all, I hope that it
> is clear that all I am writing is aimed at achieving higher goals as a
> project. And that the purpose of my messages on this thread is to
> understand: can we recruit and organize small groups of people (inside
> the existing doc, dev, QA groups) or is it against the policies here?
>
> If we agree on this, then we can pass to a second level of this
> discussion: what ``big'' projects are worth organizing our efforts
> on. This should happen on a new thread, but just because we are
> here... you mentioned ODF and OOXML, but we could also add:
>   - squash bugs blocking the next 4.2.0-Dev,
>   - update obsolete modules (Boost, Python, NSS etc)
>   - support newer Java releases,
>   - your upcoming proposal for Base,
>   - ... whatever :-)
>
> I could start myself trying to ``recruit'' volunteers on my pet peeves:
>   - documenting the source code,
>   - enhancing error reporting and logging,
>
> but I would rather work for some time on a project driven by someone
> with more experience than me, before starting up my own.
>
> Thank you and best regards.
>
>> On 13.01.21 11:24, Arrigo Marchiori wrote:
>>> Hello Peter,
>>>
>>> thank you for having raised this issue. I have some ``deeper''
>>> questions about the philosophy of the project itself, and about its
>>> organization. Please see below.
>>>
>>> On Wed, Jan 13, 2021 at 09:25:14AM +0100, Peter Kovacs wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hello all,
>>>>
>>>> I wonder if we can rename the recruitment list to something else. My theory
>>>> is that a lot of people do not understand OpenSource in general, and
>>>> recruitment is commonly strongly linked with Job offers. So have the theory
>>>> people write us with the hope on a job.
>>>>
>>>> Maybe a better name would support a better understanding, on how we work or
>>>> what to expect.
>>>>
>>>> Maybe something like [hidden email]?
>>>>
>>>> Or simply [hidden email] or [hidden email]
>>> My quick reply to your answer: IMHO (as a non-native English speaker)
>>> the term "recruitment" is already good enough to describe "enlisting
>>> as volunteering". It's very clear that everyone here is a
>>> volunteer. Moreover, you don't have to be a recruiter to write to
>>> recruitment@, as you do not have to be a developer to write to dev@
>>> (as it is happening for applications to test release candidate 4.1.9)
>>>
>>> --- Longer pilosophycal reply starts here ---
>>>
>>> This part is about "how we work and what to expect", as you wrote.
>>>
>>>   From my very short and limited experience, I have seen quite some
>>> enlistings: people who wrote "hello, here I am, I am good at this and
>>> that".
>>>
>>> But I have hardly seen anyone working as a _recruiter_, in terms of:
>>> "we have to do X and Y. Who is available to help?"
>>>
>>> So my question is: can we use that list for actual recruitment, in
>>> terms of gathering people around a sub-proect? Such as "let's refactor
>>> module X", or "let's document module Y", or whatever we think:
>>>
>>>    - would be a Good Thing for the project and
>>>    - needs a coordinated effort because it's too much for a single
>>>    volunteer.
>>>
>>> Such coordinated efforts would need a... coordinator, with the ability
>>> to tell volunteers "let's do X, let's not do Y". In other words, a
>>> simple hierarchy.
>>>
>>> I am asking this because I am not sure, from what I understood of "The
>>> Apache Way", how much hierarchies or sub-groups are
>>> tolerated. Moreover, the only "structured" process I have encountered
>>> in my short experience is the preparation of a release, that involves
>>> the full developers' community.
>>>
>>> But from what I have seen so far, Open Office is a _huge_ project,
>>> that carries the work of _many_ hands. It is IMHO unrealistic to
>>> expect a real evolution of this software if we do not start working in
>>> task-oriented groups.
>>>
>>> If the answer is yes, that the Apache Way and the project's philosophy
>>> have nothing against simple hierarchical working groups, then
>>> "recruitment" is (still IMHO) a _very_ good name for the list, and we
>>> should take full advantage of such name: _let's use it_ for hiring!
>>> :-)
>>>
>>> Trying to better explain my point, here is a fictional example
>>> sub-project: translate all source code inline documentation into HTML
>>> format. All names are fictional.
>>>
>>>    1- J. Doe sends a [PROPOSAL]; we discuss it on the dev@ list and
>>>    agree that it is a Good Thing.
>>>
>>>    2- J. Doe and F. Bar take the responsibility of coordinating it,
>>>
>>>    3- J. Doe sends a "recruitment" message to _both_ dev@ and
>>>    recruitment@ telling "let's do this; contributors welcome; we start
>>>    on Octember 36th, reply to dev@ if interested". He may also dig in
>>>    the recruitment@ archives and directly contact people who introduced
>>>    themselves in the past, may be fit for the job and may not be
>>>    subscribed to the list.
>>>
>>>    4- J. Doe, F. Bar and the other volunteers carry out the task, using
>>>    the dev@ list when necessary. If recruited volunteer B. Etor says "I
>>>    would like to do it bi-lingual: English and Klingon" then F. Bar has
>>>    the authority to say "no thanks, please let us stick to English".
>>>
>>> I hope I could explain myself clearly. Please do not see this as
>>> hijacking your discussion thread, as I am just trying to fully
>>> understand the term "recruitment" and therefore the role of the
>>> corresponding mailing list.
>>>
>>> If this topic has already been discussed in the past (and honestly, I
>>> would be suprised if it had not :-) please send me the pointers.


---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [hidden email]
For additional commands, e-mail: [hidden email]