Runa Bhattacharjee さんは書きました:
Igor Pires Soares wrote:
>> Additionally, in case of disputes or dormant teams, some guidelines
>> have to be in place to over-ride the language team coordinator's
>> authority (if we are assuming that only a coordinator or authorized
>> member of a language team can sponsor new entrants to that team).
> The idea would be that only teams with no coordinators could have
> members sponsored by coordinators from other languages. The scalability
> of this model is really something to think about. Maybe we could have
> language groups. The challenge is to find a coherent logic to separate
> the languages. Separate them by regions or continents might not be a
> good idea.
Language groups sounds a viable option, however I am afraid that it
might lead to unrelated segregation amongst groups as a long-term side
effect. Perhaps the FLSCo members can be considered as a neutral level
of sponsors, who can take decisions about sponsoring members for:
1. new teams without coordinators
Good one, I don't see any problem to sponsor those applications by any
other languages' sponsors as there is no team formed yet thus he/she can
possibly form new team. But I might miss out some important issue?!
2. old teams without designated coordinators (i just spotted a few on
A question just come up in my mind... Are those teams still active on
3. teams with disputed/MIA leadership
It would be best to solve the problem within the team members.
>> Secondly, it does not eradicate the current problem of:
>> 1. Determining the identity/affiliations of the new entrant (unless
>> the entrant chooses to disclose).
>> Reason being: The "Self:Introduction" mail is listed in the TQSG, but
>> is not a hindrance to reach the queue. Unless the new entrant is
>> "forcibly" made to mention the language team she/he would like to
>> join, they can be waiting in the queue for eternity (or sponsored by
>> someone clearing the queue).
> We should also define an aging policy. If the person doesn't show up
> after a while it will be necessary to remove he/she from the queue.
Also, I already saw a mail about the sequence of to-do's listed in
the TQSG listed as:
1. Approval into cvsl10n
2. Self-introduction mail to the list.
We might need to change that.
The bug has been filed for this. Any input is welcomed.
Secondly, I am not sure if we have any automated method currently for:
1. notifying people waiting in the cvsl10n queue to send
+1, where to request this, any idea?
If this can be done, then aging policy issue can also be improved.
2. notifying the team coordinators (who are not yet listed as
about people from their language waiting to be sponsored
It might be easier that those who are current team coordinators raise
their hands to become 'sponsor' so that they can be notified automatically.
>> Reiterating from an earlier suggestion about this, imho the
>> introduction of an automatic additional step - "approval from the
>> language coordinator" somewhere on the sponsorship page would help
>> map the new entrant to a language and ensure that the coordinator can
>> approve/disapprove of her/his membership either directly or indirectly.
> Wouldn't be necessary to change FAS in order to achieve this?
As far as my understanding, yes. However, imho it might not be a bad
idea to explore the option of a possible patch to the system that might
help us plug this bit, which is a nagging worry for FLP.