Add Website working group

[ronnzw]

Based on the conversation on issue #2. I have created the initial proposal for the website working group.

• I have proposal for the duties that the group is willing to take and Liaison can add any other responsibilities l might have missed.
• I have added members that have accepted from the list of maintainers and those that showed interest, i will reach-out to the current maintainers of djangoproject.com for their confirmation.
• All aspects of the proposal can still be discuss
• @thibaudcolas agreed to take this to the board for approval as per the conversation
• Chair and Co-Chair to be selected by members.
• I didn't have visibility of the Ops-Team and their responsibilities but we might need to add the team as members, @thibaudcolas perhaps you can help

[thibaudcolas]

Thank you for giving this a go @ronnzw! I can’t review this fully now but:

• It’s really cool to see this happen 😎
• You’ve marked this as a draft PR, are you already looking for reviews or not?
• Please see Initial proposal for social media working group. #6 for an example of the process in action

@thibaudcolas agreed to take this to the board for approval as per the conversation

I’ll only be able to take this to the board once the proposal is completed and there’s a sense it’s "approved enough" here in the pull request. The next opportunity for a vote is the February 8th board meeting, in about 3 weeks – I think it’d be useful for you to decide whether you want to try to make that date or not. If so, please get your proposal completed and informally approved by the group’s proposed members at least 3-5 days ahead of that date so I can raise this with the board and they can review ahead of the meeting.

Could you:

• Fill in all TBA sections, even if just with draft information
• Think of how you want to coordinate with members to pick a chair and co-chair

I didn't have visibility of the Ops-Team and their responsibilities but we might need to add the team as members, @thibaudcolas perhaps you can help

I’ve raised the idea of this group (shared #2) with the Ops team on January 4th. I see we have two Ops team members in discussions on #2. So I think this will be something they can advise on, and I wouldn’t presume their involvement with the WG otherwise. We can ask them for review perhaps, once the proposal has more details.

[jacobian]

This all looks super good, thanks for getting it started!

[jacobian]

One general note for everyone to be aware of: 20tab has been working on some research towards a potential refresh/refactor/redesign/re-something of the website, so they should, in some way, be included/consulted here -- let's avoid duplicating work. @cgl has been leading that work, she might be able to say more.

[sabderemane]

Thank you @ronnzw for your work on the proposal, I add some comments, happy to have any feedback

[thibaudcolas]

Hi @ronnzw, just wanted to follow up on my initial message:

I’ll only be able to take this to the board once the proposal is completed and there’s a sense it’s "approved enough" here in the pull request. The next opportunity for a vote is the February 8th board meeting, in about 3 weeks – I think it’d be useful for you to decide whether you want to try to make that date or not. If so, please get your proposal completed and informally approved by the group’s proposed members at least 3-5 days ahead of that date so I can raise this with the board and they can review ahead of the meeting.

The board meeting is now in 2 weeks, so if you want this to be added to the agenda for that meeting, I’d recommend getting this proposal finished and informally approved by group participants by the end of January.

It’s also completely fine if this proposal needs more time – after February 8th, the next board meeting is on the 14th of March. Let us know what you think.

[ronnzw]

Hi @ronnzw, just wanted to follow up on my initial message:

I’ll only be able to take this to the board once the proposal is completed and there’s a sense it’s "approved enough" here in the pull request. The next opportunity for a vote is the February 8th board meeting, in about 3 weeks – I think it’d be useful for you to decide whether you want to try to make that date or not. If so, please get your proposal completed and informally approved by the group’s proposed members at least 3-5 days ahead of that date so I can raise this with the board and they can review ahead of the meeting.

The board meeting is now in 2 weeks, so if you want this to be added to the agenda for that meeting, I’d recommend getting this proposal finished and informally approved by group participants by the end of January.

It’s also completely fine if this proposal needs more time – after February 8th, the next board meeting is on the 14th of March. Let us know what you think.

Thanks for the reminder @thibaudcolas. l would prefer to get this done ASAP(meaning February 8th). Any ideas of how l can get this approved by group participants? Is it just getting their feedback on the issue: #2 ?

[thibaudcolas]

@ronnzw yes. I would recommend getting at least "looks good to me" feedback from everyone who you added to the list of members, and you’ll also need to identify a Chair and Co-Chair by coordinating with those participants.

[thibaudcolas]

@ronnzw from private discussions, @cgl has volunteered to be the group’s board liaison. You can add @sabderemane and I as regular members.

Please liaise with @cgl as far as when this is ready for the board to review per the proposal process. The board meeting is in 7 days, so my personal recommendation would be to have the proposal completed at least by next Monday.

---

To pick the group’s Chair and Co-Chair, you could organise an online form where people who are interested in joining the group submit some information / preferences about how the group runs. This is what happened for #6. So for example you could have the following questions:

• Your name
• Why you want to join the group
• Are you currently a DSF individual member
• What would you prefer for the group to collaborate? (Slack, mailing list, Discord, forum, other)
• Would you be up for being co-chair?
• Would you be up for being chair?
• Please provide a statement on why you would make a good chair/co-chair

---

Once you’ve collected everyone’s answers, you could organise a vote to determine who would be chair/co-chair.

[cgl]

I 'd like to see some details on turnover too. What is the desired team size and how people drop from the team?

[ronnzw]

@ronnzw from private discussions, @cgl has volunteered to be the group’s board liaison. You can add @sabderemane and I as regular members.

Please liaise with @cgl as far as when this is ready for the board to review per the proposal process. The board meeting is in 7 days, so my personal recommendation would be to have the proposal completed at least by next Monday.

To pick the group’s Chair and Co-Chair, you could organise an online form where people who are interested in joining the group submit some information / preferences about how the group runs. This is what happened for #6. So for example you could have the following questions:

• Your name
• Why you want to join the group
• Are you currently a DSF individual member
• What would you prefer for the group to collaborate? (Slack, mailing list, Discord, forum, other)
• Would you be up for being co-chair?
• Would you be up for being chair?
• Please provide a statement on why you would make a good chair/co-chair

Once you’ve collected everyone’s answers, you could organise a vote to determine who would be chair/co-chair.

@thibaudcolas we will only be able to create the form once the wg is setup because we will need to attach the form to a specific wg email. For #6 my understanding is that the form is not there as yet, i think for the same reason. Also the guide clearly mention that the information can be updated at a later stage.

[ronnzw]

I 'd like to see some details on turnover too. What is the desired team size and how people drop from the team?

From conservations on slack it seems like between 7 - 9 members is the proposed size. Do you have problems with this number @cgl @jacobian @thibaudcolas @CuriousLearner @sabderemane

[thibaudcolas]

@ronnzw we had enough people interested in this at DjangoCon Europe 2024 to have a good discussion about the website. Based on those discussions, we have the following people interested in stepping up to run this group:

• @sabderemane as Chair
• @SaptakS as Co-Chair. Saptak is a member of the Django accessibility team.
• @sabderemane as board liaison

Could you update the proposal accordingly? Or otherwise I can take over your draft and address remaining feedback so we can move forward.

cc also @bmispelon who was around during those discussions, and who we tasked with producing documentation on the site’s infrastructure ahead of the working group getting started.

[ronnzw]

@ronnzw we had enough people interested in this at DjangoCon Europe 2024 to have a good discussion about the website. Based on those discussions, we have the following people interested in stepping up to run this group:

• @sabderemane as Chair
• @SaptakS as Co-Chair. Saptak is a member of the Django accessibility team.
• @sabderemane as board liaison

Could you update the proposal accordingly? Or otherwise I can take over your draft and address remaining feedback so we can move forward.

cc also @bmispelon who was around during those discussions, and who we tasked with producing documentation on the site’s infrastructure ahead of the working group getting started.

Sorry folks for the delay. I missed this reply. I have updated accordingly. @sabderemane @thibaudcolas

[sabderemane]

One general note for everyone to be aware of: 20tab has been working on some research towards a potential refresh/refactor/redesign/re-something of the website, so they should, in some way, be included/consulted here -- let's avoid duplicating work. @cgl has been leading that work, she might be able to say more.

@jacobian I'm answering late but @pauloxnet has followed the research (internally) and he is part of the members of the working group. I have also been involved on the results of the research. I believe I would be still able to ask any relevant details if necessary to @cgl even if she is not part of the working group 😄

[thibaudcolas]

Permissions / access to resources:

• Website deployment: ping via @django/ops-team on the pull request for deployment.
• Merging: initial onboarding phase where only Chair and Co-Chair have permissions to merge. After onboarding of 3-6 months, other group members who have proven their expertise will be granted merge permissions.

Ops team will retain access, and in case there are site infrastructure issues, would be able to restrict permissions.

---

Other resources that are relevant but could be done ad-hoc:

• Stripe
• Sentry
• reCAPTCHA
• (Trac)
• Transifex

[jcjudkins]

I am happy with what I see so far!

[Stormheg]

If more volunteers are needed to help review PRs, issues, or maintenance in general; I'm happy to help out.

[pauloxnet]

I reviewed everything, and I added suggestions to speed up this process. Can we give us a deadline for this process of revision (e.g the end of November 2024)?

[sabderemane]

Can we give us a deadline for this process of revision (e.g the end of November 2024)?

I have reviewed some comments but having the deadline by the end of november is good, if it can be earlier it's even better. I'm planning to review it this week during a conference. I would like to bring it to december board meeting for approval if november (19th) is not possible.

[jacobian]

Some suggestions but nothing that should be considered a blocker - looks great!

[thibaudcolas]

👏👏👏👏👏👏👏👏

[knyghty]

This was approved yesterday 🎉