Uncool

<rant>

I really can’t express how frustrated I am right now.

As someone pointed out years ago in the loco mailing list… does rt@ubuntu.com actually work, or is it just routed to dev/null?

How is it possible that it takes several months, or even years, to give a LoCo team an answer on a request ticket? Do we LoCos suck that bad?

</rant>

Can YOU help me with any of these?

  • The Central American community needs their forums merged. This was approved by the Forum Council six months ago.
  • The Classroom-es project (official project of the Spanish LoCos – already organized three Open Weeks, two User Days, etc) needs a mailing list @ubuntu.com.
  • The Ubuntu-pa community has been without a website for over a month. They just need ubuntu-pa.org redirected to their new servers.
  • The Ubuntu-l10n-miq mailing list admins needs their passwords reseted.
  • The Ubuntu-mx-df team needs a mailing list. (via @magia154)

Feel free to add your own requests in the comments.

15 pensamientos en “Uncool

  1. Jef Spaleta dice:

    Please correct me if I’m wrong, but I have the impression that this process is blocking entirely on the availability of Canonical staffed manpower?

    Perhaps this model doesn’t scale out well.

    Perhaps its time to have a discussion about creating community managed infrastructure with a system administration team that pulls administration staffing resources from LoCos so LoCos as a larger subcommunity inside Ubuntu can take on the increasing burden of managing more of the infrastructure they need to be more effective?

    -jef

  2. leogg dice:

    I’m not sure if transferring the administration of this infrastructure to the community will help… but, what the heck… at least it can be worse of what it is now.

  3. Jono Bacon dice:

    Sorry to hear about your problems. Have you raised these issues with the LoCo Council (http://loco.ubuntu.com/loco-council/) ?

    Jono

  4. leogg dice:

    @Jono:
    I’m part of the LC🙂
    https://wiki.ubuntu.com/LoCoCouncil

    IMHO, it’s not about processes and procedures… it’s about getting your hands dirty and do something about it!

  5. Diego Turcios dice:

    Ubuntu Honduras also has been waiting for an answer
    Like 3 months ago, I talk with the comunnity council about that topic and they haven’t give me an answer

  6. Jef Spaleta dice:

    @leogg,
    I say the following with no intention of assigning blame or attempting to suggest any malice or incompetence…

    In any community effort, where best effort is the norm, both redundancy and accountability are important when dealing with breakdowns in workflow.

    The infrastructure LoCos are relying on has a human element. Naively it appears that the human element isn’t scaling out for whatever reason. When an email address starts acting as a blackhole that’s a very good indication the particular human beings on the other end of that are being over-used as a resource in terms of their total responsibility load. For whatever reason, doesn’t really matter. When people are stretched thin, lower prioritized are dropped.

    With that in mind, there may neither be enough redundancy nor enough accountability in the LoCo specific elements of the infrastructure workload. Having LoCos contributing staffing resources into the infrastructure management resource pools helps add both redundancy to the LoCo facing process as well as makes some of the available human resources more directly accountable to LoCos for the particular LoCo needs. As such those people will more likely prioritize LoCo needs ahead of other things offsetting the need for the existing staffing to prioritize differently when push comes to shove.

    -jef

  7. leogg dice:

    @Jef:
    Yes, I understand your POV, and I support it totally. I wish I could be part of the solution, and not part of the problem.

    The question is; would a LoCo-driven infrastructure be more effective? Sure, LoCos would prioritize their own needs, but to what extent? The community driven forums seems to be a blackhole as well.

    The main problem is that we have grown to fast, and to much?

  8. Jef Spaleta dice:

    @leogg,

    I’m required by the mandate self-consistency by statements I have made elsewhere to obligatory question the very concept that Ubuntu as a community is actually growing.

    With that out of the way, overall growth rate is not the issue. It’s an imbalance available skillsets versus demand for those skills. To draw an analogy to urban planning terms its the difference between smart growth and suburban sprawl. Sprawl can happen slowly or it can happen quickly. The rate of growth is not the issue..its the lack of planning for the growth is. Obviously fast growth can take you by surprise unexpectedly so its not a completely decoupled problem space. But I think Ubuntu has been around long enough now for the rate of growth to no longer be a shock to anyone.

    So how do you have smart growth inside a community?
    Sustainable communities can look inward and do a skills assessment and plan to cultivate skills where it appears they are needed. Businesses (as a type of community) do this exceedingly well via the hiring process, but volunteer orgs can do it to via investments in training and recruitment.

    Volunteer firefighters continue to be the best family of possible volunteer models I can describe to people when it comes to understanding how you can get volunteers to provide essential human capital to help do a critical public service that largely benefits other people while working side-by-side with paid fire fighters in many cases. These models can be adapted for other orgs.

    -jef

  9. leogg dice:

    @Jef:
    Yes, but that imbalance between users and contributors is real. While the user base grows very fast, the amount of new contributors don’t. And it doesn’t matter how much you plan for it, it always gonna hit you hard.😉

  10. jussi dice:

    I wonder if perhaps parts of this could be authorised to different parts of canonical – ie. ML lists could also be created by the community team etc (jono et al.)

    I guess there would need to be a front end for it then, but if the process was made simpler for canonical employees, then it would go faster, no?

    Just my 2c (in the morning)🙂

  11. Jef Spaleta dice:

    jussi,

    Overloading other Canonical employees who arlready have additional tasking may not be in better. It may be worse becasue now you could be making it more difficult for those other employees to get their existing task set done.

    Does it make sense for a community as large as Ubuntu’s to expect Canonical to be able to staff all the needed manpower to keep the community facing infrastructure and processes running efficiently? I’m not sure that will ever scale.

    -jef

  12. leogg dice:

    @jussi:
    yup, it could be a solution… btw, comment #1,000… thanks!!!

    @Jef:
    “Does it make sense for a community as large as Ubuntu’s to expect Canonical to be able to staff all the needed manpower to keep the community facing infrastructure and processes running efficiently?”

    No.

    1. Canonical is not a big company, such as Red Hat or Novell.
    2. We, the LoCos, shouldn’t expect Canonical do everything for us.
    3. Unfortunately, people that can help out don’t have access to manage these resources, so there’s not much that can be done in order to eliminate the bottlenecks.

  13. Jef Spaleta dice:

    @leogg,

    3) which goes right back to my first point. Maybe its time to have the discussion about how to inject externals into the infrastructure management that appears to be bottlenecked on available Canonical staffing.

  14. leogg dice:

    @Jef:
    …or completely move away from Canonical services. Host and manage our own forums, wikis, mailing lists and websites.

  15. Jef Spaleta dice:

    @leoog

    I wouldn’t advocate taking on the burden of establishing duplicated infrastructure like that unless it becomes clear as the result of a discussion with the current administraiont team overseeing the resources that shared maintenance of existing resources isn’t possible. The best outcome and benefit of common interests for Canonical and the larger LoCo community ecosystem is to make more efficient use of the existing resources if possible.

    -jef

Responder

Introduce tus datos o haz clic en un icono para iniciar sesión:

Logo de WordPress.com

Estás comentando usando tu cuenta de WordPress.com. Cerrar sesión / Cambiar )

Imagen de Twitter

Estás comentando usando tu cuenta de Twitter. Cerrar sesión / Cambiar )

Foto de Facebook

Estás comentando usando tu cuenta de Facebook. Cerrar sesión / Cambiar )

Google+ photo

Estás comentando usando tu cuenta de Google+. Cerrar sesión / Cambiar )

Conectando a %s

A %d blogueros les gusta esto: