Page MenuHomePhabricator

policy for creating teams?
Closed, DeclinedPublic

Description

What is the policy for creating new teams (like workspaces in Slack, currently there is only wikimedia) in chat?
It would be very needed level of organization for grouping channels. Can there be shared channels between teams?

Event Timeline

Puik renamed this task from Additional layer (workspace?) in addition to channels or way of grouping channels to policy for creating teams?.Aug 31 2020, 9:02 PM
Puik updated the task description. (Show Details)

@Puik: Hi, could you please define a problem to solve? Currently this task uses terms like "teams" or "grouping channels" but no idea which problem "teams" solve or which functionality "teams" implies. Thanks!

The problem is in better organizing the conversations – for instance WMEE has a Slack workspace with 32 channels, I'm also running a project that has another Slack workspace with 30 channels.
Creating different teams in addition to current wikimedia adds an additional layer in the organization of chats and teams/groups/chapters and enables better overview of chats in one team (like workspace in Slack). In Slack there's also the option making shared channels between different workspaces.
@tramm and @Ladsgroup have also mentioned the topic in chat.

I personally have no problem creating teams for wikimedia affiliates, I'm slightly worried it might turn into a slippery slope of replacing channels with teams but definitely each affiliate can have their own team IMO.

There's this restriction about teams:

Integrations (e.g., webhooks and slash commands) are only persistent across single team deployments.

Maybe enabling the channel organization features might also help if multiple teams is not suitable because of the need for integrations.

According to the page, it seems the best case would be to have teams the least amount of overlap in matter of people. So after talking to admins, the idea of having one per geographic affiliate (chapter) sounds feasible so everyone would be in wikimedia + their affiliation (like WMDE, WMEE, WMFR, etc.). How does that sound to people?

That could work but I can imagine it also per bigger project or bigger event. Personally would love that WikiSpore gets its own *(so that tech and content discussions can be decoupled), but even more urgent is 2030 Movement strategy events which is now recommending TELEGRAM group as one and only channel of communication *(#veryBadCHOICE) :-/

My arguments against it > towards WM Chat are here
https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/Talk:Strategy/Wikimedia_movement/2018-20/Transition/Global_Conversations

Wikimedia Chat has been retired.