Proposal for Django Core Sprints

[Paolo Melchiorre]

Hi everyone,

Following Andrew Godwin's example, I too share with you a proposal
that I made during DjangoCon US 2022 and that I have already shared
with some of you.

Inspired by an article by Will Vincent, I wrote my proposal for Django
Core Sprints, and its genesis, in an article and would also like to
have the opinions of the Django community members interested in the
idea:
https://www.paulox.net/2022/10/26/about-my-proposal-for-the-django-core-sprints/

Ciao,
Paolo
--
Paolo Melchiorre

https://www.paulox.net

[James Bennett]

Organizing sprints is a fine idea, but:

* They should be designed around the assumption of remote-first, not "hybrid" or in-person-first, and there should be no language in the description whatsoever about in-person participation being important. There simply are too many factors involved in trying to get a bunch of people all in one place at the same time, and privileging in-person participation is something I will put up massive resistance to.

* But I also think you're going to find that getting people to make another commitment on top of existing events is going to be difficult, and so it would make more sense to formally attach the sprint to a major event like one of the DjangoCons.

Meanwhile, I think it is absolutely essential to drop the "Core" naming, and to drop the idea that there are special classes of contributors whose presence is especially needed.

Those last points, for me, are non-negotiable. The Django project explicitly has only the roles defined in DEP 10. There are no special statuses or classes of contributors whose input is more important than others, and that is *deliberate*.

I knew when writing DEP 10 that some folks were never going to like the flatter setup, and would probably eventually try to re-introduce something resembling the old core team. I'm not saying that is what you're trying to do here, or that that's what anyone else is trying to do right now, but it feels like the proposals being put out right now are heading in that direction, and I want to make sure we stop that before it gets even the tiniest bit of traction.

--

---
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "DSF Members" group.
To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to dsf-members...@googlegroups.com.
To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/dsf-members/CAKFO%2Bx6FAf-M14fKx5QS1K8rru2L3mOiR1R%3Dn6FzDk%3DrnaUq3A%40mail.gmail.com.

[Andrew Godwin]

Hi Paolo,

I do like the overall idea - a few thoughts below.

My first concern for this, which somewhat echoes James, is that trying to organise an additional in-person event that a large number of contributors are expected to go to is difficult. Funding considerations are one concern - we would need to make sure everyone whose companies did not cover them to go had their trip paid for - but time away from home is also something that we should be considerate of, be it for family or for anything else.

That, too, brings an interesting challenge - who do you invite (and presumably help pay for)? We no longer have a core team, and I don't think it's worth singling the Technical Board out in this regard - the Fellows are an obvious requirement if they can make it, but past that, it's a hard metric to gauge.

I do like your point about disconnecting it from needing to give a talk, though - conferences and sprints are certainly Different Moods for me, and it can be draining to be sociable for three days and then have to go into sprints and be even more so. I don't know if there's a useful resolution to this specific problem.

My second concern is almost the opposite of that, ironically, which is that I do believe there are some things that benefit from synchronous, in-person communication. A single week at the most recent DjangoCon has done wonders for me in that regard, and while I do believe it should be a hybrid event, I also think it should not be a remote-only event. While it is a personal opinion, I find in-person sprinting significantly easier (due to the nature of the work as opposed to purely coding) and would probably find it hard to attend a remote-only sprint.

The final question I would raise is that of location. There are two elements here - where in the world do you hold it, and what the actual venue is like.

There is no single location in the world you will ever find where everyone can attend - even with very patient Australians who are far too willing to sit on planes for ages. It's likely you'd have to geolocate in either the Americas or in Europe, and if you additionally want to host it in a location that is safe for all attendees, that cuts down the number of US states and European countries even more.

And then, the venue. In the modern world, I ideally want an outdoors sprint venue, so that we're not all stuck inside a room hoping the masks work well enough. That places limitations on climate and season and also availability of power - so many that it starts to look like an impossible task to satisfy this along with all the above.

I don't write this as a means of discouragement - I think there's a lot to be said for your idea, and even though I've outlined a lot of potential flaws, I think a flawed event in this fashion would be better than nothing happening at all! I just want to highlight all the talking points we're going to need to really think about and have answers to if we take this forward.

(I didn't even discuss how we might fund this, which is also a conversation to have, but waving our hands in the air and going "sponsorship" is enough for me to start with)

Andrew

-- 

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Django developers  (Contributions to Django itself)" group.

To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to django-develop...@googlegroups.com.

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/django-developers/CAKFO%2Bx6FAf-M14fKx5QS1K8rru2L3mOiR1R%3Dn6FzDk%3DrnaUq3A%40mail.gmail.com.

[Paolo Melchiorre]

Hi James,

First of all, thank you for your feedback.

On Thu, Oct 27, 2022 at 1:10 AM James Bennett <ubern...@gmail.com> wrote:
> * They should be designed around the assumption of remote-first, not "hybrid" or in-person-first, ...

My proposal is that of hybrid sprints for the reasons I have listed in
my article, remote-first or remote-only sprints are totally another
proposal that maybe someone will do.

> * ... it would make more sense to formally attach the sprint to a major event like one of the DjangoCons.

There are already sprints at the end of the various DjangoCon, I am
trying to propose something in addition to them.

> Meanwhile, I think it is absolutely essential to drop the "Core" naming ...

The word "core" refers to the fact that the sprints I propose are
exclusively dedicated to the Django code, unlike what happens now in
the sprints at the end of DjangoCon where people sprint on different
things.

To avoid further misunderstandings, I reiterate that the sprints I
propose are in some way similar to what already happens in other
communities, for example CPython [1] and HPy [2].

Grazie,
Paolo

[1] https://discuss.python.org/t/rsvp-2022-core-dev-sprint-oct-3-7-sunnyvale-ca-usa/18420
[2] https://hpyproject.org/blog/posts/2022/07/dusseldorf-sprint-2022/

> On Wed, Oct 26, 2022 at 3:01 PM Paolo Melchiorre <pa...@melchiorre.org> wrote:
>> Following Andrew Godwin's example, I too share with you a proposal
>> that I made during DjangoCon US 2022 and that I have already shared
>> with some of you.
>> Inspired by an article by Will Vincent, I wrote my proposal for Django
>> Core Sprints, and its genesis, in an article and would also like to
>> have the opinions of the Django community members interested in the
>> idea:
>> https://www.paulox.net/2022/10/26/about-my-proposal-for-the-django-core-sprints/

[Paolo Melchiorre]

Hi Andrew,

Thanks also to you for your very detailed answer.

On Thu, Oct 27, 2022 at 1:54 AM Andrew Godwin <and...@aeracode.org> wrote:

> ... trying to organise an additional in-person event that a large number of contributors are expected to go to is difficult....

I am aware that this proposal of mine to the DSF board is not easy,
but I think it could have positive effects as I have seen it happen in
the past and as it still happens today in other communities.

> ... who do you invite (and presumably help pay for)? We no longer have a core team ...

I understand that the term "core" has triggered some old discussion
that I am not aware of, but in my proposal it refers to the scope of
the code to work on.

> ...it's a hard metric to gauge.

This is something that we could decide together.

> ... while I do believe it should be a hybrid event, I also think it should not be a remote-only event.

On this point you seem to agree with my proposal

> The final question I would raise is that of location ...

I tried to give general indications on the location in my proposal so
that I could then decide a place based on the actual participants of a
given sprint, without imposing a predefined location or nation.

> I didn't even discuss how we might fund this...

Surely here too I left generic indications, because it seemed to me
more than once to understand that the DSF board would not have too
many problems in receiving new funds as long as they were destined for
a specific objective.

For example, imagine a sprint working on only one of the proposals you
listed in your last talk, it could be a point that many may have an
interest in financing directly.

Grazie,
Paolo

> On Wed, Oct 26, 2022, at 4:01 PM, Paolo Melchiorre wrote:
> Hi everyone,
> Following Andrew Godwin's example, I too share with you a proposal
> that I made during DjangoCon US 2022 and that I have already shared
> with some of you.
> Inspired by an article by Will Vincent, I wrote my proposal for Django
> Core Sprints, and its genesis, in an article and would also like to
> have the opinions of the Django community members interested in the
> idea:
> https://www.paulox.net/2022/10/26/about-my-proposal-for-the-django-core-sprints/

[st...@jigsawtech.co.uk]

Hybrid sound the best way, with remote first as otherwise you are excluding people who would need air travel that's not covered by someone else and can be very expensive how and are thus increasing a carbon footprint for something that really doesn't need it

[Paolo Melchiorre]

Hi 'st...@jigsawtech.co.uk',
I'm sorry but I can't find your name in the email.

In my proposal I explicitly propose that the few people invited should
be financed in various ways, precisely to avoid excluding someone.

Grazie,
Paolo

On Thu, Oct 27, 2022 at 8:02 AM 'st...@jigsawtech.co.uk' via Django

developers (Contributions to Django itself)

> --
> You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Django developers (Contributions to Django itself)" group.
> To unsubscribe from this group and stop receiving emails from it, send an email to django-develop...@googlegroups.com.

> To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msgid/django-developers/994f5282-05b0-465b-8d13-851109f985c2n%40googlegroups.com.

[Ed Rivas]

I think this could open up another way in which companies could get involved in the development of Django by acting as a Sprint Sponsor. This could include providing a venue and/or funding for travel and lodging costs. Having a list of features that need to be sprinted on could attract companies that are looking for specific advancements in Django. In case of the CPython sprint linked above, Google provided the venue, and I'm sure medium/large companies would be happy to pay for their employees to attend.

Overall, I'm +1 on this. I agree we should be clear this is not an elite group of contributors but rather a time to sprint on Django proper or related projects deemed critical open to anyone who wants to help. We don't need to commit to an actual multi-year program from the get-go, we can start by running one sprint and iterating on the learnings from that.