Definition of the problem
According to https://etherpad.wikimedia.org/p/ArchCom , the purpose of the ArchCom is
- Act as advisors: Answer questions / react to RFCs related to the software and system architecture of MediaWiki.
- Act as gate keepers: Veto bad code / other architecture decisions (in code review as well as higher level planning)
- Act as inspectors: identify and document architectural problems
- Act as leaders: define guidelines, goals and activities to improve MediaWiki architecture
Although there has been a lot of progress since the creation of the ArchCom, we still need to ensure that this aim becomes a consolidated reality.
- Set this group with the best chances of success.
- The first three are process issues
- About the fourth, current c'tee tends to be reactive, not setting priorities or driving RfCs to implementation.
- Document the process describing how these happen
- (This needs to be synced with https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Architecture_committee )
- We need to define the actions that need doing.
- We need real owners of actions.
Docs that need revision
There is a bunch of pages, and we need to assure that we have a setup that makes sense. The following docs might be good, or they might need updating, cleaning, purge...
- https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Architects (Architecture_process redirects here) vs https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Architecture_committee
- https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/RFC_meetings (redirect to Architecture meetings)
- https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Architecture_guidelines ?
See also http://www.gossamer-threads.com/lists/wiki/wikitech/550043 (is there something to be extracted?)
In an ideal situation...
- Team Practices Group would help with the process. But they are currently swamped.
- Engineering Community Team would help with documentation, and also in the definition of community processes in the short term.
- Improving private architecture meeting might help the public IRC meetings as a side effect
- New members will change committee behavior, strong people on the inside.
Here and now
- The ownership of this task should be @brion's
- @Spage will propose the switch for tomorrow's meeting
- SPage will bring up this task and its subtasks at next Architecture Committee meeting, encourage discussion, and record the agreed approach on the ^wiki pages above.
Success: what is says, "Fix the architecture RfC process"
How ECT can help during April-June 2015:
- @Spage to help with documentation and a bit of scrummaster-ish support.
- @Qgil to help Brion and c'tee agree on governance model by Lyon
ECT can try to help cleaning the current situation, but we need a definition of done for this quarter, Then, it should be more Team Practices Group's job.
@RobLa notes that currently there is no budget ask for this. Should we get one by Monday, 30 March? Kevin feels like this is 1/4 TPG...