Skip to content

Instantly share code, notes, and snippets.

@drnikki drnikki/gov1.txt
Last active Oct 2, 2017

What would you like to do?
drnikki [8:55 AM]
Just a reminder that our first governance discussion is going to be right here in 5 minutes.
1 reply Today at 8:55 AM View thread
[9:00 AM]
:zero: Welcome to this meeting to discuss Drupal Community Governance! This is one of a series of meetings we are holding in this channel to connect people who are interested in governance with each other, provide a forum for people to share their thoughts, and empower the community to determine the next steps. Additional background can be found at:
:one: This meeting is text-only. There is no audio or video component.
:two: The entire slack transcript will be recorded and available after this meeting. This means that we’ll be copying and pasting the chat, including usernames, and pasting it into a gist (or other format) to be linked at the bottom of the scheduling google doc -
:three: Please remember that this is a Drupal space, and is also subject to the Drupal Code of Conduct:
:four: If you feel uncomfortable sharing publicly in this space, you can DM me. (edited)
drnikki [9:00 AM]
If you’re participating in this meeting (even if you’re lurking), please respond to this thread with your name, and one thing you’d like to get out of today’s meeting.
9+ 17 replies Last reply today at 9:47 AM View thread
davidhernandez [9:04 AM]
@here ^
dawehner [9:04 AM]
joined #governance.
[9:09 AM]
It sounds like there are a lot of people attending for information. I’d encourage folks to read the post if you haven’t already. @gdemet please fill in the gaps where I’ve left them, but as far as I know, the current state of governance, at a tl;dr level is:
- Whitney’s survey results
- general acknowledgment from Drupal leadership (and community) that current state of community governance is insufficient
- general acknowledgement that documents & processes related to codes of conduct and enforcement need to be revisited
- desire on the part of leadership (aka Dries, DA, DA board) that the process of defining new community governance should be led by the community.
So, that last bullet point is why we’re here today
gdemet [9:11 AM]
To clarify a bit on that last bullet point, that actually comes from the results of the community conversations and the survey.
I would also add that there's an interest in making sure that the contributor community (as differentiated from the business community, etc.) has clear communication channels so they can participate productively and meaningfully in conversations about governance and other topics that impact them.
[9:14 AM]
@gdemet From your last comment it sounds like the business community already has clear communication channels? Or, do neither communities (surely there is overlap there?) have communication channels, but the interest is in keeping them separate?
gdemet [9:15 AM]
One of the things that I think we often forget is that there's not a single unified Drupal "community". Drupal is many communities (contributors, agencies, customers, users, etc.)
[9:16 AM]
Yes, many communities
And geographically separated, too
[9:17 AM]
So George is saying the contributor community needs to be more organized like the business community. What about other parts of the Drupal community that are in neither of those groups?
gdemet [9:17 AM]
So I'm not necessarily saying that the business community has better channels right now, just that the community that seems to be the most frustrated is the contributor community.
[9:18 AM]
Could it be that you’re hearing their frustration more because they at least have some organization/structure?
For example I have a lot of frustrations but there are no channels for me to express them, or leaders to lift up my concerns.
gdemet [9:19 AM]
@rubyji What I'm suggesting is that because the contributor community doesn't have clear channels to provide feedback, they're getting increasingly frustrated and the feedback that does get through is pretty intense (and not always productive).
Because many people don't feel listened to.
davidhernandez [9:20 AM]
Right, I think the point is that is one of the problems we aim to solve.
rubyji [9:20 AM]
Maybe that’s not just contributors, because that feels like my experience as well.
gdemet [9:20 AM]
@rubyji I consider you a contributor
rubyji [9:21 AM]
gdemet [9:21 AM]
I'm using "contributor" in the sense of "anyone who contributes in any way to the project or community", not just "people who write code"
drnikki [9:21 AM]
I wonder if the first thing we can do is settle on some definitions -including for “contributor”
and who would be included in “contributor community”
chandeepkhosa [9:21 AM]
how can we al 'join together' then?
davidhernandez [9:21 AM]
And that underlines another point, which is clarity around roles or what the scope of "the community" even is.
rubyji [9:23 AM]
How do you think the general audience of the whole Drupal community understands the word “contributor” in this context?
davidhernandez [9:24 AM]
I dont think there is any universal agreement, but many people assume the word contributor to mean a developer providing code. I dont agree with that.
rubyji [9:25 AM]
I agree, @davidhernandez. So if you’re out talking in the community about “contributors” that should be defined or maybe a different word used.
When I see most Drupallers talking about contributors, I also assume they mean people who contribute code. So I don’t include myself.
crowdcg [9:26 AM]
@davidhernandez @rubyji I definitely think “contributor” is too conflated of a word to use in this context. Perhaps “engaged user”. I’d use “member” but that is also conflated with membership in the DA.
[9:27 AM]
Moving along… I feel like people keep saying they want to have “community-driven” governance changes, and then I keep reading about changes and decisions being made that I didn’t even know about, not to mention didn’t have any feedback on.
davidhernandez [9:28 AM]
@rubyji Do you have a recent example of that?
[9:28 AM]
The pre-Vienna strategy meeting is a good example - documents coming out of that meeting made it seem like governance decisions were being made.
rubyji [9:29 AM]
Sure, @davidhernandez . Today I read that Dries is stepping down as chair of the board immediately, rather than initiating a process to have the board elect or select a chair.
3 replies Last reply today at 9:32 AM View thread
[9:30 AM]
Yes, the meeting @drnikki mentions is another example, as was the survey about a “governance summit” which made a lot of assumptions, like that anyone wanted a governance summit. (edited)
davidhernandez [9:31 AM]
I was also taken off guard by the governance summit.
[9:31 AM]
What?! Where was that posted?
davidhernandez [9:32 AM]
The board is a different animal. And this is another thing that we need clearly communicated. The board governs the DA and is not in the same scope.
Yeah, his stepping down and recruitment of a replacement was the most hidden bit of news.
chandeepkhosa [9:33 AM] (i believe this may have been during the DA public meeting at DrupalCon)
Tiffany Farriss @farriss
Bylaw changes forthcoming to make way @Dries to step down as @drupalassoc Chair and @nugoodman to become interim chair. #Drupal #DrupalCon
TwitterSep 27th at 3:13 AM
[9:33 AM]
I know there are separate entities @davidhernandez,but how can you talk about the Drupal community without and DrupalCons, for example?
gdemet [9:33 AM]
Out of the community summit in Vienna on Monday (not to be confused with the DA strategy session the weekend prior), it seemed to me that one of the biggest issues is that most folks don't actually know what the status quo of governance within Drupal.
I made up a chart with my understanding, but it still took the better part of an hour, and I think I'm someone who knows this pretty well!
George DeMet @gdemet
@shyam_raj Here’s a more complete version of the chart:
TwitterSep 25th at 7:00 AM (148kB)
[9:35 AM]
Clear as mud.
drnikki [9:35 AM]
I would argue that chart is actually not really about “community” and more about “watering holes” and “legal/event touchpoints”
4 replies Last reply today at 9:46 AM View thread
davidhernandez [9:35 AM]
I've literally been involved in org/gov meetings around this and still found it confusing.
mdrummond [9:36 AM]
I guess one thing I wonder about with DrupalCon Europe going away at least for now, and Drupal Europe being organized by the community next year, what that means for whether diversity and inclusion gets prioritized in that conference organizing going forward for Europe.
[9:37 AM]
So how can the community have clear input into governance if we struggle to even have a clear understanding of what is currently being done?
drnikki [9:37 AM]
^ I have concerns about D&I given some of the leadership referenced in the blog posts about it
mdrummond [9:37 AM]
@drnikki Yup, same.
rubyji [9:38 AM]
Good question, @mdrummond. I would really like to see the community try to articulate shared vision about diversity and inclusion so that we can have some values to operate with.
Too many people make assumptions and they’re not all the same. I think if we value d & i, it would lead to very different decisions.
mdrummond [9:40 AM]
I thought I had heard that DrupalCon Vienna had made some progress in having a more diverse set of speakers at least (I thought I heard 30%?), but I don’t know that I saw a breakdown of attendees for Vienna. And that doesn’t happen by accident: it takes work to recruit and prioritize. Will that still be the case when historically Europe events have had a number of issues with inclusivity? (edited)
2 replies Last reply today at 9:49 AM View thread
[9:40 AM]
joined #governance.
davidhernandez [9:41 AM]
Do you think there needs to be a separate d&i values statement or have those principials incorporated into a universal one?
[9:43 AM]
Why would it be separate?
mdrummond [9:43 AM]
Looking at the closing slides of Vienna right now. Speaker diversity. First time speakers: 24%. % identified as diverse: 29%. Male: 69%, Female: 21%. Other/decline to share: 10%.
[9:43 AM]
I think incorporating DI values into universal values normalizes them as not special interest and a core part of what makes a healthy community.
But it may also be helpful to call it out specifically since it isn't actually normalized yet.
[9:45 AM]
Yeah, we can have it a part of the “main” statement, and also explicitly highlighted
mdrummond [9:47 AM]
I’m surprised to hear that Dries stepped down as Chair of the DA, along with three other members of the board, and it’s five days later with no public announcement of a pretty giant governance change like that. Only learning of it because a board member happened to mention it in a personal blog post.
2 replies Last reply today at 9:50 AM View thread
gdemet [9:47 AM]
It was discussed in the public board meeting at Vienna
The three other board members left because of term limits
[9:48 AM]
^ the notes of which are pretty hard to find, and not really publicized on twitter or other places that people could stumble upon it.
mdrummond [9:48 AM]
I know DrupalCon Vienna was going on, and so the DA was otherwise occupied. Obviously that’s a factor.
gdemet [9:48 AM]
Dries will still be on the board, but he's not going to be acting as chair anymore.
dasjo [9:49 AM]
The closing note showed the data.
Attendees: 74 male, 14 female, 12 other/decline to share
Speakers: 69 male, 21 female, 10 other/decline to share. 21 first time, 29 diverse at 1:40
YouTube Drupal Association
DrupalCon Vienna 2017: Closing Session
[9:50 AM]
As we approach the end of the hour, I’ve been trying to see if there are any actionable suggestions to have emerged. If folks could offer one _specific_ thing they want to see based on this discussion, that would be great
rubyji [9:50 AM]
This is the kind of thing that leaves people feeling unheard and disinvested in the community.
It seems like maybe the DA needs to think more proactively about communication strategy both for PR management and for community relations.
chandeepkhosa [9:51 AM]
they might just be tired from DrupalCon and taking a rest, I know I am. We might hear more tomorrow (edited)
davidhernandez [9:51 AM]
This is part of the push/pull of communications in Drupal. Yes, you can be informed if you know all the right places to hunt for info, but a lot of it is not pushed out to people with time/less energy to go hunting.
[9:51 AM]
Personally I’m concerned about the investment of time and money into the community summit idea when the community hasn’t really called for that. If we do something like that, it needs to be at the right time or else things could just end up worse than they started.
crowdcg [9:52 AM]
Transparency was a key thing that came out of the community discussion and survey, if i recall correctly. Just seems business as usual that decisions are not being publicized widely.
gdemet [9:52 AM]
I think it's actually clarity more than transparency.
rubyji [9:52 AM]
As I mentioned above, I’d like to see more strategic communication from the DA, the CWG, and the board as right now the information I’m getting doesn’t align with what people claim their goals are.
chandeepkhosa [9:52 AM]
and some things that are transparent (eg on the DA blog) aren't being read by that many people
rubyji [9:53 AM]
I think we need both more clarity *and* transparency.
dasjo [9:53 AM]
My understanding of him announcing it in the public board meeting was that dries wanted to inform first and prepare further communication afterwards as more clarity will be gained through discussions
drnikki [9:53 AM]
So, we have one specific action from Ruby. Any other _specific, actionable_ things that folks would like to see
1 reply Today at 9:57 AM View thread
mdrummond [9:54 AM]
What I really want to see as these governance changes are being made, is that we put creating a safe, inclusive environment for people from marginalized communities at the heart of the work that’s done. If we want Drupal to be a more diverse community that reflects the wider world, and sets an example for others in open source, then that work needs to be intentional and prioritized.
1 reply Today at 9:56 AM View thread
crowdcg [9:54 AM]
@dasjo understandable but they should have had that in their pocket to publicize immediately following the announcement.
I doubt that was decision made in total isolation
davidhernandez [9:54 AM]
I want some consolidated/coordinated communications. People shouldn't have to scan every verse to stay informed. (edited)
[9:55 AM]
I think the community needs a real, welcoming, inclusive, and accessible place to come together to talk about governance as well as other stuff.
chandeepkhosa [9:55 AM]
i think a video summarising all recent changes/decisions would be great
gdemet [9:55 AM]
I'd like us to come to a shared understanding of what "community" means to us.
(is that specific/actionable enough?)
[9:56 AM]
@gdemet was talking about how people feel frustrated and a big part of that is that we don’t know what’s happening across the community, we don’t know if we’re alone, or part of a wave of people that want changes, etc. There needs to be a central place to connect.
davidhernandez [9:56 AM]
The Dries thing is a good example. Quietly dropping something like that just leads to speculation before he can get any detailed info out.
2 replies Last reply today at 9:59 AM View thread
mdrummond [9:56 AM]
Text > Video. Much easier for people to access.
dasjo [9:56 AM]
I fail to understand why everything needs to happen now now. I think it is a big change and i am curious to find more about it but i don't know why at one hand people ask for more discussion and at the other hand ask for set in stone communications. My understanding is this is a process that takes time and communication should be constantly flowing
1 reply Today at 9:59 AM View thread
chandeepkhosa [9:57 AM]
perhaps our next call could be a hangout video/call? fine if not (i get its harder to compile minutes) (edited)
2 replies Last reply today at 10:01 AM View thread
drnikki [9:57 AM]
Okay, A few things I’ve inferred from the text above, that I want to surface for voting. You can add a :heavy_plus_sign: or :heavy_minus_sign: to agree or disagree.
:question: We need to define what “contributor” means when we talk about “contributor community”
:question: We need to figure out where the community is/what it’s boundaries are.
:question: We need a values statement
:question: That values statement should include D&I as part of it, not as an addendum (edited)
I think that’s everything that you all brought up. Just wanted to tack it on to the bottom for easy parsing by people coming later, and for folks reviewing chat logs later.
We’re out of “official” time, and this is the last line of text that I’ll include in the “meeting minutes,“.
rubyji [10:08 AM]
replied to a thread:
2 replies from rubyji
If threads are not being included I just want to make sure these suggestions make it into the minutes:
1. No community summit until the community is ready.
2. Communicate more strategically.
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
You can’t perform that action at this time.