Re: Reviewed: [[Welcome_Message_To_New_Ambassadors]]

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]


> Sorry to break the threading, I accidentally deleted your original
> email.  Your welcome message made a nice review over lunch today:

Thanks a lot for the review. :)

> I made changes directly because I didn't see anything substantive that
> I changed. That is, I don't think I changed any meaning, just did
> some grammar adjustments and clarifications.

I also wanted that but refrained considering it might not be a polite request.

> Please read my changes
> carefully -- I'm not as familiar with the updated mentoring guidelines
> as I should be. :)

No, it is just fine and clear.

> There is one issue in the instructions -- it directs the new potential
> Ambassador to get aggregated on Fedora Planet.  However, that requires
> being in a FAS group already (plus having signed the CLA.)  If the
> Ambassador-to-be is not already in the 'ambassadors' group, they have
> to belong to another group, too.

No, this was a more of an intentional fallacy. I (we) wanted to check
if the participants are serious enough to explore that much and report
back that it is not doable.

> One concern is that we'll get an influx of people to low-barrier
> groups, such as 'docs', who are just interested in getting their FAS
> group to get aggregated and fulfill Ambassador requirements.  I could
> foresee a chain-reaction of people raising barriers in groups to block
> against that.  Also, it is possible to contribute to various projects
> without joining the group.  One could write wiki documentation or be
> involved in QA test days without belonging to the 'docs' or 'qa'
> groups.

> Would it be possible to have the candidate bring proof of that instead
> of being required to have joined another group?  In other words, if
> they are going to join e.g. 'docs' just to get in to 'ambassadors',
> they are less likely to sustain contributions to the Docs Team.  (It's
> OK if people don't want to remain a Docs contributor, we just need to
> set the expectations all around.)

Yes, your concern seem very reasonable. I never gave it a thought, so
thanks for pointing it out. We are discussing this and would link to
change it to something more productive very soon.

Thanks again for the review and now the draft looks much better. :)


Sent from Calcutta, WB, India

fedora-docs-list mailing list
To unsubscribe:

[Home]     [Fedora Legacy]     [Fedora Desktop]     [Red Hat 9 Bible]     [Fedora Bible]     [Red Hat 9]     [Big List of Linux Books]     [Yosemite News]     [KDE Users]

Powered by Linux