CWG meeting 2016-02-10

From OpenStreetMap Foundation

Communication Working Group meeting on Wednesday 10th February 2016

Attendees

Topics

  • github CWG repo move to 'osmfoundation' organisation
  • "OSM communicators" vague idea
  • Workplan to be supplied to the board

IRC log:

20:58 hbogner: hi harry-wood
20:58 harry-wood: hello!
21:04 harry-wood: Just the three of us?
21:05 harry-wood: Sorry I missed it last time Zverik
21:05 hbogner: i was out of the country last week, but i guess there was no meeting then, and just few hours ago i returned
21:05 harry-wood: http://wiki.osmfoundation.org/wiki/Working_Group_Minutes#Communication_Working_Group
21:06 hbogner: aha, that wast the last one then
21:06 harry-wood: oh yeah. Sorry I missed it the one two weeks ago :-)
21:07 harry-wood: Since then I've been tweeting and facebooking image of the week a bit more
21:08 harry-wood: facebook is lagging behind. I'm gradually catching up. Twitter is now in sync
21:08 hbogner: i was totaly out of the country and everything
21:08 harry-wood: by which I mean I can just tweet each week as at the same time as setting the image on the wiki each week
21:09 harry-wood: I was hoping since I started tweeting it was make an immense number of people start proposing new featured images http://wiki.openstreetmap.org/wiki/Featured_image_proposals
21:10 harry-wood: possible seen a slight increase, which is good.
21:11 harry-wood: And I was late home today because I was busy posting this https://blog.openstreetmap.org/2016/02/10/gsoc-2015/
21:12 harry-wood: even when someone else writes a thing, there can be a lot of work proof-reading, HTML formatting, and quality checking/adjusting/uploading images
21:12 harry-wood: quicker than doing the writing of course :-)
21:13 hbogner: :D
21:13 hbogner: yes, a bit quicker :D
21:18 hbogner: so what is on todays schedule?
21:18 harry-wood: I was started trying to use grouptweetk for @OSMUK and @OSMLondon recently, but the free tariff is more limited than I thought
21:18 harry-wood: It's cut off access completely after the trial period
21:18 harry-wood: with a choice to either upgrade to a paid plan, or "Opt in to the Free Ad-Sponsored GroupTweet Plan"
21:19 harry-wood: "allow us to send occasional promoted GroupTweets from your account"
21:19 harry-wood: sounds crap
21:19 harry-wood: but I guess that's what you get for free
21:19 harry-wood: (@OpenStreetMap is on the paid plan)
21:21 hbogner: i added Ilya Zverev to http://wiki.osmfoundation.org/wiki/Communication_Working_Group#Who_we_are
21:21 Zverik: hi everyone, sorry for being late
21:22 harry-wood: hi Zverik
21:22 harry-wood: hboger: ah yeah thanks. forgot to do that
21:23 Zverik: harry-wood: thanks for publishing that gsoc article, I've read it yesterday and didn't come up with any comments
21:24 hbogner: so whats with the plan to migrate osm-cwg git to osm-foundation?
21:24 Zverik: last time we were discussing grouptweet alternatives
21:24 Zverik: as for migration, I don't know (yet)
21:24 Zverik: if everyone is okay with that, I'll ping mvexel
21:24 Zverik: oh wait
21:24 Zverik: mvexel: ^^^
21:25 Zverik: it seems he is afk. Well, I'll write a mail
21:26 harry-wood: oh we had a github issue about it :-) https://github.com/osm-cwg/tasks/issues/30
21:27 Zverik: As for grouptweet, I've logged in, but hasn't posted anything yet
21:27 harry-wood: Does https://github.com/osmfoundation have zero repos, or just zero public repos?
21:27 Zverik: zero public repos. THere is a repo for the board
21:28 harry-wood: Oh right. So osmfoundation is paying github for private repos
21:28 harry-wood: that could be useful for CWG too then
21:28 Zverik: yes. That's why I propose to migrate, so there can be more private repos
21:28 harry-wood: a private repo would allow us to talk about embargo'd new items
21:28 Zverik: I guess OWG pays too
21:29 hbogner: yes, private repos would help talk more relaxed
21:30 harry-wood: oh yeah. you mean the 'openstreetmap' organisation
21:30 harry-wood: that has private repos too hey?
21:30 harry-wood: maybe we've wasted money there by paying for 'openstreetmap' and 'osmfoundation' separately
21:31 Zverik: no wait. I was sure there is an owg organization, but that must've been Andy's account
21:32 Zverik: I've seen owg tickets somewhere, but failed to google these now
21:32 harry-wood: I only know about https://github.com/openstreetmap/operations 'operations' repo
21:32 harry-wood: is that one you're thinking of?
21:32 Zverik: yes, thanks
21:32 harry-wood: but that's public
21:33 harry-wood: maybe there's no private repos under 'openstreetmap' organisation
21:33 harry-wood: quite a lot of different code repos https://github.com/openstreetmap
21:34 harry-wood: So I can see some sense it a separate https://github.com/osmfoundation org with private repos
21:35 Zverik: I thought maybe all working groups should work under the same organization
21:36 harry-wood: Yeah let's just have a private CWG repo to start with
21:36 Zverik: also, links to repos should be included in WGs' wiki pages
21:36 Zverik: (I can do that later)
21:37 hbogner: yes, we should start with cwg first and break the ice
21:37 harry-wood: I'll need permissions on the osmfoundation organisation, and then I can move the 'posts' repo into place there (renaming as 'cwg' as it goes)
21:37 harry-wood: I think that's the thing to do
21:37 Zverik: I'll contact Grant
21:37 Zverik: (he's the owner)
21:37 harry-wood: or maybe if I give grant permissions on osm-cwg, he can do the move
21:37 harry-wood: might work better
21:38 Zverik: yes, probably
21:38 Zverik: it's just a couple of lines in a console
21:39 hbogner: grant is in osm-cwg already, but dont know if he has admin rights
21:40 hbogner: as i see there is also teams option in github
21:41 Zverik: okay, just mailed Grant
21:41 harry-wood: So I had this vague plan that we might launch an "OpenStreetMap Communicators" group
21:42 harry-wood: a big group of people. and mailing list. Throw it open widely as a team of roving reporters who feed news and write blog posts to feed into the comms channels. Not a boring old dusty old "working group". Not holding formal meetings as a foundation organisational unit.
21:42 hbogner: launc ith where and how?
21:43 harry-wood: I mention it now because… a public github repo for posts tracking
21:43 harry-wood: might be better placed at openstreetmap/comms or something like that
21:43 hbogner: i invited the most active g+ poster to this meeting today, but maybe i was late for today
21:43 Zverik: github is good for tasks, but not for aggregating information, imo
21:44 Zverik: I wonder if we can gather said big group not only to hang out on a mailing list, but also to meet regularly on IRC
21:45 harry-wood: well maybe, but the point of it would be to try to keep it very informal
21:45 Zverik: Grant has answered: "can do. Created a cwg group. Let me know when to go ahead"
21:46 harry-wood: I imagine people are put off the idea of joing a working group because… it's in the name. "working"… boo
21:47 harry-wood: but also the requirement to have meetings
21:47 Zverik: yes, the question is, how formal it should be to keep meeting.
21:48 hbogner: for osmf blog it should remain formal, but for social media less formal
21:48 Zverik: what kind of mails should they send? Everything that comes up, twitter-like? Mailboxes will overflow then
21:49 harry-wood: I see a role of CWG then becoming less about all the hard work of tweeting and blogging and maintaining channels, and more about the even more hard work of things like setting comms policies, perhaps enforcing guidelines and banning people, and perhaps getting into other big communication related initiatives + managing budget for it
21:50 harry-wood: but this is just a vague idea. One problem is… it might not work. :-)
21:51 harry-wood: We might not get many people interested in it
21:52 harry-wood: There's also overlap with the system blog.de folks have set up. Don't want to tread on the their toes. I guess we just need something equally awesome to happen in english
21:52 Zverik: the thing is, active bloggers/reporters usually already have a blog to maintain, and burdening them with another blog might not work
21:53 harry-wood: So it's a vague idea. We can transition to something like in future perhaps
21:53 hbogner: but we have to do something, and not leave the most work up to you harry
21:53 harry-wood: I think tech challenges around shared access to tweeting, and stepping stone along the way.
21:53 harry-wood: Worth thinking about with regards naming of github repos too
21:54 Zverik: harry-wood: Grant has answered that he's ready to move repos, see 21:45 above
21:54 harry-wood: but I think it's sensible initially to to move our osm-cwg/posts repo over to osmfoundation/cwg
21:54 harry-wood: so happy for him to go ahead with that
21:55 Zverik: and what about other repos? You'll move issues manually?
21:55 harry-wood: yeah
21:55 hbogner: and what with users?
21:55 hbogner: we sould join?
21:55 Zverik: wait, posts has only one issue :)
21:56 harry-wood: we've got a few here to move. https://github.com/osm-cwg/tasks/issues can munge them into the same osmfoundation/cwg repo
21:57 harry-wood: hmm yeah. We've tidied up a bit there hey?
21:57 harry-wood: hmmm maybe we should move osm-cwg/tasks to osmfoundation/cwg instead then
21:57 harry-wood: that would also work fine
21:58 hbogner: i set up some labels for issues, and that can be further improved
21:58 Zverik: told Grant what you've typed above :)
21:58 harry-wood: yeah we might need label for 'posts' and 'tasks' though :-)
21:59 harry-wood: I'm sure we'll work it out
21:59 harry-wood: ….
22:00 Zverik: great. I'll see this through
22:00 harry-wood: another thing to talk about. The board would like a "Work plan" (email from paul norman)
22:00 Zverik: harry-wood: about replacing the grouptweet, how do you feel about mediawiki tweeting plugin? :)
22:00 harry-wood: is there a mediawiki tweeting plugin?
22:00 hbogner: labled all the tasks
22:00 Zverik: yup, https://github.com/osm-cwg/tasks/issues/31 :)
22:01 Zverik: harry-wood: I don't see any work plan email. Did Paul sent it more than a month ago?
22:01 harry-wood: he did yes
22:02 harry-wood: I will resend it to you
22:02 hbogner: Zverik, harry-wood how do we, members of osm-cwg join osmfoundation ?
22:02 hbogner: on github
22:02 harry-wood: we'll be added by grant
22:02 hbogner: aha, ok
22:02 harry-wood: well actually he needs to add us to the repo I think
22:03 harry-wood: (if it's private access)
22:03 harry-wood: we don't need to be added to the organisation since that allows us to create new repos etc
22:03 harry-wood: think that's how it works
22:04 hbogner: i think he'll create a team for us
22:04 hbogner: like there is a owners team in osm-cwg
22:04 harry-wood: aye that sounds right
22:05 Zverik: actually it looks like I can do all that, but better leave it to Grant :)
22:05 Zverik: harry-wood: so, what about work plan? Are we even able to come up with anything realistic now?
22:06 harry-wood: Nothing too concrete just now
22:06 harry-wood: I could do an updated report on the state of CWG
22:07 hbogner: i gave myself a plan to try to list and sort out all the social networks OSM gropus, pages, users
22:08 harry-wood: cool
22:09 harry-wood: hmmm interesting Zverik https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Extension:Community_Twitter I missed your link to that before. I must look into it more
22:11 Zverik: I'll try to write as many osm bloggers as I can with the idea of making a group harry-wood talked about. I'd like to know which way of communication would be better
22:12 Zverik: (definitely not github or forum, irc would be great, but time zone issues; mailing lists are odd for some)
22:12 harry-wood: OK. but the manner in which the idea is "launched" could influence its success
22:12 harry-wood: but if you're just canvassing opinions, I guess there's no harm in that
22:12 Zverik: yes, just some questions in private
22:12 harry-wood: Like I say, I think the key element is making it informal
22:13 Zverik: the key element is growing attendance :)
22:13 harry-wood: no point making another intense "working gorup"
22:14 Zverik: but still, do you want the group to produce articles/tweets/posts for official osm channels, in english and semi-formal?
22:14 harry-wood: suppose so yeah
22:14 harry-wood: we need OSM roving reportors. …"OSM Communicators"
22:15 Zverik: why osmers from e.g. indonesia would need to join it?
22:16 harry-wood: Yeah I'm never really sure what to do about foriegn-language stuff. I mostly think there's no need for me or CWG to be interfering with it. Local communities are pretty good at organising their own comms
22:17 harry-wood: but we actually already have a wider group of translators with access to blog.openstreetmap.org
22:17 harry-wood: honorary members of CWG you might say :-)
22:18 hbogner: oh, i didn't get the time to translate posts in last few months
22:20 Zverik: I'd like members from local communities to connect with other local communities on cwg platform. Or maybe another, but that could be a task for cwg to establish it
22:21 Zverik: so, it's 1am here, so I have to go. harry-wood, please take a look at that mediawiki plugin in the coming week. I'd really like an open-source, or at least free solution
22:21 harry-wood: yeah will do
22:21 hbogner: i have to go to, busy day tomorrow
22:22 hbogner: bye
22:22 Zverik: I'll see that Grant moves our repo to osmfoundation
22:22 harry-wood: Good stuff
22:22 Zverik: thanks everyone, next meeting is next Wednesday, good night :)
22:22 hbogner: night
22:22 harry-wood: I dont know if there's any hurry about the workplan thing
22:22 : hbogner left the room (quit: Quit: Pozdrav).
22:22 harry-wood: I've forwarded the email
22:22 Zverik: harry-wood: it's more of a suggestion, nobody has sent theirs, except for LWG
22:23 harry-wood: Certainly we'll get away with leaving till next week :-)
22:23 Zverik: I've received the mail, thanks
22:23 harry-wood: OK
22:23 harry-wood: Thanks then Zverik. See you around

Retrieved from "https://osmfoundation.org/w/index.php?title=CWG_meeting_2016-02-10&oldid=3626"