[Members] Resurrecting the comms team

Kevin Smith kevin.smith at isode.com
Wed Feb 21 12:39:22 UTC 2018

On 21 Feb 2018, at 12:15, jc at opkode.com wrote:
> Am 21. Februar 2018 12:02:49 MEZ schrieb Kevin Smith <kevin.smith at isode.com>:
>> On 16 Feb 2018, at 11:11, JC Brand <jc at opkode.com> wrote:
>>> Based on the summit discussions we had around promoting XMPP and the
>> informal
>>> comms team that was assembled there, I'd like to propose resurrecting
>> the
>>> official comms team.
>> As I mentioned at the Summit, I’m not convinced that going through
>> setting up the comms team formally again is a good idea.
> One reason why an official team seems necessary to me is so that we can give team members access to the xmpp.orggithub repo so that they can add newsletter entries (and potentially add other material such as blog posts).

Just to be devil’s advocate here, but people can do all those things without needing write access to the repo. As always, with my iteam hat on I remain cautious about handing out write access to things particularly widely.

I think that until the team’s active and producing stuff informally, going through the effort of having an official work team etc. seems premature (we’ve been here before). Others may disagree.

>>> At the summit we came up with the idea of sending out a regular
>> newsletter,
>>> which would be a curated list of articles, tutorials and news
>> relating to XMPP.
>> These are good ideas.
>>>> The team's mission is to inform the XMPP community and interested
>>>> parties on news and recent developments within XMPP ecosystem.
>>>> The team consists of XSF members who have indicated their desire
>> and
>>>> willingness to join the team and execute its mission.
>> I think that an open team like this sounds good in theory, but would be
>> counter-productive. We usually have explicit membership, generally
>> approved by Board or Council, and if we *do* restart the comms team, I
>> think that’d be appropriate here too.
> So we add "and has been approved by the board/council.” 

Board, probably, yeah.

>> (Incidentally, a chair is also needed)
> We can elect a chair. 

I think, from memory, that the charter needs to say how the team’s leader is selected, although I could be wrong. I’d suggest just ‘chosen by Board’ or somesuch.


More information about the Members mailing list