<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=windows-1252"
http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
<div class="moz-text-flowed" style="font-family: -moz-fixed;
font-size: 12px;" lang="x-western">(I accidentally hit reply and
not reply-list, so Kent will have received this already) <br>
<br>
On 7/11/2014 9:59 AM, Mike Conley wrote:
<br>
<blockquote type="cite" style="color: #000000;">So how do we feel
about refreshing the (module) list, and finding some new owners
<br>
and peers for various things?
<br>
<br>
</blockquote>
I think it's probably a good idea, but finding people might prove
challenging.
<br>
<blockquote type="cite" style="color: #000000;">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.
<br>
</blockquote>
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.
<br>
<br>
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...
<br>
<br>
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.
<br>
<br>
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).
<br>
<br>
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.
<br>
<br>
Josiah Bruner [:JosiahOne]
<br>
<blockquote type="cite" style="color: #000000;">
<br>
_______________________________________________
<br>
tb-planning mailing list
<br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated"
href="mailto:tb-planning@mozilla.org">tb-planning@mozilla.org</a>
<br>
<a class="moz-txt-link-freetext"
href="https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/tb-planning">https://mail.mozilla.org/listinfo/tb-planning</a>
<br>
</blockquote>
<br>
</div>
</body>
</html>