Notes from module owner discussions at Mtn View retreat
Mark Surman
There was a small session on module ownership during the recent
Mozilla retreat in Mtn View. Notes from this session are pasted below.
This wasn't a decision making or planning meeting. However, we had a
bunch of people together so it seemed like a good time for some
brainstorming.
As you'll see in the notes, Gerv has offered to put some time into
moving discussions module ownership and other governance issues once
school ends for him later this month.
Hopefully, he and others can use these notes as raw material for
future discussions.
Cheers ... MS
*** Notes from Modules and Module Ownership session
*** at April 2009 Mozilla Off Site, Mountain View
** Purpose:
Identify issues and possible solutions relating to the module
ownership system.
** Notes
The discussion started with the question: is it an issue that most
module owners and many peers are full time employees of Mozilla
organizations?
People underlined the fact that module ownership and employment must
always remain separate. Module ownership is merit based.
However, that doesn't necessarily mean that having large numbers of
module owners as employees is a problem. Two specific items were
discussed here:
1. MoCo and MoMo are very much mission aligned with the whole of the
Mozilla project, which wasn't necessarily the case with Netscape.
2. Many critical modules require owners who can put in full time
effort. There are few orgs other than MoCo and MoMo willing to pay
developers to work full time on Mozilla core technologies.
The conversation pointed to a broader set of community health and
renewal questions as being more important than the employee / non-
employee split. Questions were?
1. How do we encourage good, responsive module ownership? How do we
make sure things are well owned?
-> There were a number of suggestions related to breaking up larger
modules into smaller chunks so that all module owners and peers had
more reasonable load.
-> One comment was that the size of module should be about what one
person can handle on own review-wise.
- How do we always ensure that there is a diversity of opinion within
the core of the project?
- Similarly, how do we develop new expertise and authority in general,
and generally bring in new contributors?
-> There was general support for the idea that while Mozilla is good
at bringing in new contributors, it can always get better.
--> Existing contributors should continue to watch out for new people,
help them find good starter bugs and provide help where they can.
--> However, it may also be useful to learn from the triage method
that Dave Humphrey uses at Seneca -- making sure new contributors well
prepared and find the right people and projects in Mozilla. This
approach could be used more broadly than just in education.
-> It was suggested that we could in some cases look more actively for
'outside peers' that we may be missing, possibly from other projects
building on Mozilla technology (e.g. Songbird).
-> Also, we need a continual flow of new areas *inside* core mozilla
technology where new contributors can do more than maintain old code;
can create something new.
There was no discussion of non-code module ownership, although it was
noted that this is important.
** Follow-up
Notes to be written up and this discussion to continue online.
Gerv Markham will be re-joining Mozilla Foundation full time in June.
Part of his time will be dedicated to supporting discussions on module
ownership. As a starting point, he will identify open threads in
mozilla.governance and try to move them along.
Mitchell and Mark Surman will spend time trying to clarify and move
ahead the concept of non-code module ownership. Gerv will also support
this.
<there were other follow up items implied, but I don't recall any
other explicit ones>
Nelson Bolyard
> There was a small session on module ownership during the recent
> Mozilla retreat in Mtn View. Notes from this session are pasted below.
>
> This wasn't a decision making or planning meeting. However, we had a
> bunch of people together so it seemed like a good time for some
> brainstorming.
Were any people who are not employed by Mozilla invited?
Did any attend?
Mark Surman
Good question. I probably should have been more clear about the
context.
The notes I posted are from a session at Mozilla Corporation staff
retreat. As flagged when I posted, the idea was to take advantage of
the fact that people were together anyways by holding a brainstorm /
discussion. I happened to be attending as well, so I took notes.
One of the points that came up in the meeting was that we need to have
broader, more sustained (and mostly online) discussions on these
issues with all parts of the community.
Based on this, I asked Gerv if he would be willing to put a good
amount of his time into supporting module ownership and governance
discussions when he starts back full time later this month. He's
happily agreed and is keen to do this.
Gerv and I are just thinking now about how he will take this on. If
you have ideas on this -- especially on reaching out to include the
broadest possible group -- feel free to ping us directly by mail.
Thoughts always welcome.
Cheers ... MS