Module owner and peerage refresh?

Josiah Bruner josiah at
Fri Jul 11 18:17:41 UTC 2014

(I accidentally hit reply and not reply-list, so Kent will have received 
this already)

On 7/11/2014 9:59 AM, Mike Conley wrote:
> So how do we feel about refreshing the (module) list, and finding some 
> new owners
> and peers for various things?
I think it's probably a good idea, but finding people might prove 
> Some people are "Mozilla Rep". We also have Mozilla people who are 
> "Early Feedback Community Release Manager" "Community Champion" 
> "Engineering Community Manager" "student ambassador"  There is no 
> meaningful term that we can confidently use for people who are working 
> aspects of the Thunderbird project. Naming ourselves in a way that is 
> confirmed by the community would be helpful when discussing things 
> with people who do not know us.
I've been thinking a similar thing as well. Mozilla currently seems to 
have two main "groups" to help organize events and focus their 
attention: "Employees" and "Volunteers". Employes breaks down into the 
different areas: Engineering, UX, Design, Marketing, and each of those 
breaks down. So every employee knows exactly what their position is and 
what they are responsible for and they can explain it to others.

Volunteers though really only break down to what you (Kent) mentioned; 
"Mozilla Rep", "Community Champion", etc. Privately, among the 
"Engineering" people, we give ourselves more useful titles ("Mailnews 
peer", "Compose Window Peer", "Theme Peer", etc), but that only helps 
other developers, not everyone else, and even for developers it gives a  
very limited understanding...

Part of this is certainly because the majority of the volunteers aren't 
really exceptionally helpful or active (compared to the employees), so 
there really isn't a reason to. However, for us (and some Fx and SM 
volunteers) this is really annoying. When applying to events or other 
activities, the company can't really know how influential and necessary 
we are.

I'm not sure what would change exactly though. Do you think these titles 
should be more product specific or just more inclusive of volunteer 
developers? Should we all just be called "Community 
Developers/Engineers" or something more specific? If we leave the title 
that broad, I think it still might be confusing and hurt the more active 
developers. (For example, people like Markus Stange are almost so 
essential I'm surprised he doesn't have some title already).

All this being said, I personally am more a fan of titles than many 
people (who may find it irrelevant), so perhaps this isn't that 
necessary. We should get more voices if others agree.

Josiah Bruner [:JosiahOne]
> _______________________________________________
> tb-planning mailing list
> tb-planning at

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <>

More information about the tb-planning mailing list