[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: selecting Debian mentors for the mentor summit

I think it would be good for us to send one mentor and one admin. Jaminy
(who has been a great admin) expressed interest. Are there any objections?

Unless anyone else has strong feelings, I'm inclined to literally roll
the dice and randomly pick someone.


On 08/09/2018 03:47 PM, Daniel Pocock wrote:
> On 09/08/18 16:47, Lucas Kanashiro wrote:
>> On 08/09/2018 06:16 AM, Daniel Pocock wrote:
>>> On 09/08/18 00:57, Lucas Kanashiro wrote:
>>>> I do not know if you understood what I was saying... I am not arguing
>>>> that people that do not maintain packages do not worthwhile (I know the
>>>> Debian constitution). I was claiming that even mentors can be newcomers
>>>> in our project, and if want to keep them tighten to our community, a
>>>> conference such as Debconf is the right place.
>>> Yes, I fully agree we need to make it easy for people to attend Debian
>>> events and events where Debian has a stronger presence (reminder: the
>>> DPL offers[1] USD 100 to anyone for travel to a BSP, contact[2] him for
>>> details)
>>> For the summit, however, we still need to decide whether to use some or
>>> all of the criteria that have come up or just to fall back on the
>>> previous algorithm: randomly pick from those people who never attended
>>> the summit before.
>>> >From what I can see, there are now 6 candidates (Dashamir, Lucas,
>>> Jaminy, Urvika, Chirayu, Milena) and none of them attended before, is
>>> that correct?
>>> To tweak the previous algorithm to ensure diversity, we could start by
>>> randomly selecting one of the 3 women and then make a random selection
>>> from the remaining 5 candidates.  As Molly is the only remaining person
>>> named in the last delegation, perhaps we can ask her to roll the dice?
>> You can ensure diversity for sure (1 slot for women). But again, pick
>> randomly people that may not understand what Debian is to represent the
>> project might not be a good idea. I think that I already made my point,
>> I'll leave this decision up to admins.
> I'm not saying this is the best approach, only that if we don't get a
> lot of feedback from people it may be easier to simply fall back on the
> default (or something very close to it) from previous years.
> If somebody wants to volunteer to take the possible criteria and work
> them into a new selection procedure now is the time.
> For example, this could be a nice little script in the outreach-admin
> repo on Salsa:
> 1. putting all the candidates in a table, with boolean values for each
> of the criteria
> 2. making a set of all candidate pairs that satisfy the selection goals
> (every mentor should appear in at least one pair)
> 3. randomly choosing one of the pairs from the set
> Step (2) is the part of the process that may need some thinking about.
> Regards,
> Daniel

Reply to: