Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

Sign up for GitHub

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Jump to bottom

DjangoCon Europe Support: Provide description of responsibilities #21

Open
wants to merge 6 commits into
base: main
Choose a base branch
from
Open

DjangoCon Europe Support: Provide description of responsibilities #21

Changes from all commits
Commits
Show all changes
6 commits
Select commit Hold shift + click to select a range
1938a3b
DjangoCon Europe Support: Provide description of responsibilities
raphaelm Jun 7, 2024
0d66b25
Update active/dceu.md
raphaelm Jun 13, 2024
1ec12d6
Update active/dceu.md
raphaelm Jun 13, 2024
cb55a34
Update active/dceu.md
raphaelm Jun 14, 2024
84729d0
Merge branch 'main' into patch-2
raphaelm Sep 16, 2024
91d9fca
Update dceu.md
raphaelm Sep 16, 2024
File filter

Filter by extension

Filter by extension
Conversations
Failed to load comments.
Loading
Jump to
Jump to file
Failed to load files.
Loading
Diff view
Diff view
24 changes: 17 additions & 7 deletions active/dceu.md
View file
Open in desktop
Original file line number Diff line number Diff line change
Expand Up @@ -2,11 +2,19 @@

## Scope of responsibilities
thibaudcolas marked this conversation as resolved.
Show resolved Hide resolved

Supports organizers of DjangoCon Europe.
The DjangoCon Europe Support working group supports prospective and current organizers in the following ways:

Delegated responsibilities TBD.
- Provide a point of contact for people interested in organizing the conference to ask questions
- Provide advice to selected DjangoCon Europe organizers and assist them in staying on track by proactively keeping in touch with them during the process of organizing
- Debrief with organizers after the event
- Collect resources resources (documentation, budget, contacts, ...) and lessons learned that make continuity between conferences easier and provide these to future and current organizers

## Initial membership
The DjangoCon Europe Support working group supports the DSF board in the following ways:

- Provide advice and assitance on creating and executing the Call for Proposal process for future conferences
- Assist the board in vetting incoming proposals and make recommendations for how to approach the decision (the final decision is always made by a board vote)

## Membership

- Chair: Tobias Kunze
- Co-Chair: Raphael Michel
Expand All @@ -20,20 +28,22 @@ Delegated responsibilities TBD.

## Future membership

Membership is open to former organizers of DjangoCon Europe conferences. Questions about membership can be directed to [email protected]. [Contact the board](https://www.djangoproject.com/contact/foundation/) to express interest.
Membership is open to former organizers of DjangoCon Europe. Questions about membership can be directed to [email protected]. [Contact the board](https://www.djangoproject.com/contact/foundation/) to express interest.

Membership is self-managed: new members may self-nominate; the WG will vote (50%+1) to approve/deny new members; the WG will directly vote on new Chair/Co-Chairs.

## Budget

TBD
No budget needed at this time.

## Comms

The team will operate via a Google Group, reachable via [email protected]. There might be additional more synchronous communication (e.g. Slack or Discord) if needed.
The team internally operates via a Google Group. This is also the primary external point of contact to reach the working group: [email protected]

The working group uses the #europe channel on DSF's Slack to coordinate internally, with the DSF board and with other DSF working groups.

The team will also set up a collection of data and information, in something like a Google Drive folder. A static informational website might follow at a later date.

## Reporting

TBD
As DjangoCon Europe has a native yearly cycle, the working group will formally report to the board once per year. However, since the working group is not making any decisions and does most of its work by advising the board, the board is expected to be updated on important DjangoCon Europe matters in real-time througout the year.
Copy link
Member

@thibaudcolas thibaudcolas Jun 12, 2024 •
edited
Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

To me as a board member yearly isn’t frequent enough. Though happy to be told otherwise depending on what the contents of the report would be, compared to the more real-time update?

My expectation would be monthly or quarterly. I’d rather receive short but frequent reports, as otherwise I could be out of the loop on what the group is up to for a while. A yearly cycle sounds great to me to make a public report of the group’s activities, but for the board I’d like to know about progress on:

  1. Our selection process. Both the methodology, and practically where we’re at with different proposals / EoIs.
  2. How the group works with this year’s organizers.
  3. Our organizational knowledge improvements.

We also use reporting as a way to keep track of group health (see Shutting down WGs).

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Looking at the months the WG has existed now, there was not a single piece of "action" within the WG (like when vetting the 2025 proposals or giving feedback on the form) where no board member (you, Cagil, Chaim) was deeply involved. I assume that is going to stay that way since

  • the board formally receives the proposals
  • the board makes the decisions in the selection process

So at least for item 1 of your list, if I would now send a report for this quarter that says "Becky worked with Thibauld to vet the proposals for 2025", that did not appear incredible useful to me.

But if you prefer, we can just change it to a monthly cycle, especially for the "How the group works with this year’s organizers" part it makes sense. Although I assume that, since the 2025 team has prior experience, they will not need the support from us very much, but I'm okay with sending a sometimes-almost-empty email once a month.

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Let’s see what others think. From my perspective, if you think there’s not much to report on, a report of "there isn’t much to report on" is completely fine. We can always ask for more info.

there was not a single piece of "action" within the WG […] where no board member was deeply involved

Board members don’t always report on their activities with the rest of the board so I don’t think that’s relevant?

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Just noting without further feedback, I’m happy to move forward with the existing wording :)