Ideally broken down by community/staff to the extent possible (call-ins w/o name can't be easily identified, though we might ask people to add their name to an Etherpad at the beginning of each session).
| Status | Subtype | Assigned | Task | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Resolved | Aklapper | T78684 Have public bug day / triage sessions in February 2015 about VE | |||
| Resolved | • Rdicerb | T89523 Track # of participants in weekly VisualEditor triage meetings |
Results of the first weekly Triage meeting (Feb 11, 2015)
https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/wikitech-l/2015-February/080803.html
Numbers from meeting on 2/11
Unknown due to system limits, will try to quantify in next meeting
Accepted: 8 (out of 26 triaged total) - All 7 rejected bugs were posted by staff.
Dependencies: 4 (out of 21 total)
Zero
On the question of who participated in the call: We have no way of verifying identities in these meetings. People who use telephones are assigned sequential numbers, and one person put in a "name" by mashing the middle of his keyboard.
However, assuming that the unknown people were not current WMF staff, then there were five or six people on the call who were most likely present as volunteers and three or four who were most likely present due to their jobs (excluding anyone currently employed by the Foundation).
Yes, we can't know for sure due to anonymous call-ins. We can do super quick intros on the phone, or use IRC as a reasonable proxy for folks to virtually raise their hands if they're participating. Directional = good enough in this case.
In addition to "number of" types of questions, I think we should check whether a good representation of those who oppose(d) to the deployment of VisualEditor in their wikis are participating in the current process. So far this participation seems to be driven by WMF members and technical contributors interested in VisualEditor for third parties.
It would be useful to go back to the most relevant RfCs (en.wiki, de.wiki, more?) and read through them with the aim to assure that the main objections are being discussed/addressed in Phabricator tasks, and with the aim to invite the people who pushed those arguments.
I've gone through the meetings, and I've made the following headcount of volunteers (people not present for work, regardless of whether that work is for the WMF or for another employer, such as the Wiki Education Foundation). These counts are approximate, because no proof of identity is required.
11 February: 5 (one on IRC only)
18 February: 2
25 February: 3
4 March: 1
11 March: 2
18 March: 0
The last meeting of this quarter will be held tomorrow.
There were zero non-WMF people in attendance at the last meeting.
In terms of conclusions:
These meetings happen every week anyway, and they will probably remain open to the public via the Google Hangout link posted at https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Talk:VisualEditor/Portal for a while. However, since there is so little apparent interest, we are likely to drop all other communication channels, such as IRC notes or minutes sent via e-mail.
Since this is the end of Q3, future discussions will involve https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/tag/editing_department_2014_15_q4_blockers/