I've added an #mwstake discussion page for the Wikimedia Strategy 2017: https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/MediaWiki_Stakeholders%27_Group/Wikimedia_Strategy_2017_Discussion. The idea is to allow folks with an interest in MediaWiki to have a place to discuss and have input into the Strategy. The next step would be to advertise the page. Ultimately, discussion from the page would be summarized on meta. I won't be able to attend the meeting tomorrow, but please discuss advertising the page. Thanks!
The Wikimedia Foundation Technology and Product Q&A Session #2 by Victoria Coleman (CTO) and Toby Negrin (Interim VP of Product) is Tuesday May 9, 2017, at 17:00 UTC via YouTube live.
Link to live YouTube stream: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q4kfgU9SZcg
IRC channel for questions/discussion: #wikimedia-office
We agreed, that extensive logo discussions wouldn't help us. We should decide in the near future, which one fits more, so that we can go ahead, with more important issues.
But I have first two questions for @Qgil: Can you help us to find out, if this logo has to be approved by someone in the foundation? And if there are any restrictions, the stakeholders have to consider using such a logo?
Yes, it is. We must refresh two or three portals in the next tthree weeks with a new template, that fits to MediaWiki.org. For that we need an icon for MediaWiki Stakeholders stuff.
But: we're only talking about a few styleguides. And we're not redesigning MediaWiki! But of course those templates can and should be customized and by any other Mediawiki.org user. :-)
Of course aligning our icon with beef products may offend vegetarians. We could use an icon of a stake (as opposed to a steak), but this may offend witches and vampires. Perhaps if we took two stakes in an X over a steak it would indicate that we are neither supporting beef products nor threatening witches or vampires, and by using both steaks and stakes it would symbolize our support for all (steak|stake)holders. </sarcasm-but-also-sort-of-serious> :-)
The intern here is in favor of the steak. (I told her to leave her own comment, but she said that it was too much work, so here I am...)
I'm afraid that if we made this a stake-holding logo (hand included, natch) that possible vampire members would *really* not want to participate.
Now that I've thought some more, and given we have to abide by the friendly space policy, I think we should dump the steaks and stakes and go back to @Tgr's original sunflower logo.
As requested, yesterday Cindy, Mark and I came to a decision on the logo: We will use the simple sunflower with blue and orange circle: https://phab.wmfusercontent.org/file/data/bowwqjy3eqia6kaxky4i/PHID-FILE-qbvv2atzrjskbzolzi5r/MediaWiki-usergroups-logo01.png.
This is why:
• Soundness: Any logo suggestions involving a steak are definitely funny, but probably will not help us to be taken serious
• Simplicity: The sunflower is already very detail rich, adding hands or globes would make the logo more complicated and twitchy (<- not sure this is the correct word)
• Association: Using the WMF circle and general layout of user group logos associates us with the WMF
• Differentiation: Using the orange instead of red is more pleasing in combination with the sunflower; it is used on mw.o; we indicate we are a bit different from the WMF (red)
Several questions about the upcoming SMWCon in Rotterdam. With my #mwstake hat on: which #mwstake folks will be attending? Shall we try to have an in person meeting? How about a mini hackathon (suggestions? LDAP extensions?) either on the first day or the Saturday after the conference (although location could be a challenge for the latter). Due to the oddities of airline tickets, it was significantly less expensive for me to return home Sunday, so I will be around Saturday.
Hi Cindy. All about the MediaWiki Platform Group would be very interesting. Actually I know only, that it exists and read about some important tasks. But how does it work together with TechCom and other groups? What are current projects etc.? What are your experiences after 100 days of MediaWiki product management? :-)
Note especially that one of the three strategic goals is:
The infrastructure for open: We will empower individuals and institutions to participate and share, through open standards, platforms, and datasets. (...) We will be a leading advocate and partner for increasing the creation, curation, and dissemination in free and open knowledge.
which seems highly relevant for 3rd-party MediaWiki support.
As @Tgr said above, the Wikimedia movement strategic direction is very relevant to 3rd party MediaWiki developers and users. Right now, the strategic direction is being drafted. From Nicole Ebber, "Informed by all the valuable feedback from Wikimania, the Meta talk page and the source pages, the drafting group is currently working on a new iteration of the draft strategic direction and is aiming for publication in early-mid September. Everyone will then have 2 weeks time to comment on this new version. If all goes according to plan, the final direction will be published by the end of September. Please continue reviewing the draft and tell us what you like or dislike about it!  The endorsement will happen in October, and I would like to encourage you all to already think about how your organization or group can come to an agreement on endorsing it."
All, please consider submitting a position statement for the Developer Summit, which will be in San Francisco January 22 and 23. The deadline to submit a position statement, which is required to be considered to attend the summit, is September 29. Position statements are 100-500 words. We are actively seeking a diverse set of voices, and I encourage your participation!