17:01:25 <spotz> #startmeeting diversity-wg
17:01:26 <openstack> Meeting started Mon Jan  6 17:01:25 2020 UTC and is due to finish in 60 minutes.  The chair is spotz. Information about MeetBot at http://wiki.debian.org/MeetBot.
17:01:27 <openstack> Useful Commands: #action #agreed #help #info #idea #link #topic #startvote.
17:01:30 <openstack> The meeting name has been set to 'diversity_wg'
17:01:33 <spotz> #topic Roll Call
17:01:45 <SWDevAngel> Hi!
17:01:49 <megheisler> \o hi
17:02:30 <spotz> Hey
17:02:52 <spotz> fungi: Joining?
17:03:03 <fungi> ohai
17:03:17 <spotz> Sweet that's everyone I think:)
17:03:17 <fungi> seems i need to update my calendar for this
17:03:41 <spotz> I had to verify it was the first Monday and then figure out the correct time:)
17:03:51 <SWDevAngel> me too.
17:03:56 <spotz> #link https://etherpad.openstack.org/p/diversity-wg-agenda
17:04:08 <spotz> Agenda for anyone interested
17:04:54 <spotz> I've changed the UC meetings more into an old business and new business format, not sure we want to do that or not
17:05:20 <SWDevAngel> I also updated the year. It's 2020. ;)
17:06:09 <spotz> The only thing I've got on the agenda is discussing our branching out to the other OSF projects as we report to the board and not OpenStack persay. megheisler as you're here if you have anything to report on mentoring we can do that too
17:07:21 <spotz> #topic Diversity for all projects
17:07:35 <megheisler> sure!
17:08:38 <fungi> so in the agenda you ask the question, "would they like help?"
17:08:56 <spotz> I can't remember if we came up with this in an official meeting or just chatting when there wasn't a meeting. But as this group as I just mentioned reeports back to the board the idea waas that after the break we should reach out to the other projects and see if they're interested and how we can help
17:09:00 <spotz> was typing:)
17:09:18 <fungi> maybe we'd be better first figuring out what sort of help we're talking about, or what sorts of things we currently do that are openstack-specific
17:09:49 <fungi> it seems like a lot of the focus is already on general osf involvement
17:10:04 <fungi> events, surveys
17:10:09 <spotz> The speed mentoring is kinda more OpenStack but doesn't need to be and the survey definitely was
17:10:47 <spotz> And well regular mentoring is ttoo
17:10:57 <fungi> yeah, that's mostly content in both cases
17:11:07 <spotz> So mentoring is easy to change we just need vollunteers from the other projects
17:11:28 <spotz> At summit and as ongoing meentors
17:11:31 <fungi> i'll posit they're already getting help from the osf diversity wg in a number of ways
17:12:06 <spotz> Survey I don't thtink we would do an OPenStack onee again for at lelast a year but we could do one for the othter projects
17:12:58 <fungi> i'd suggest it just be a general osf community survey. we can always add a question asking the respondent to list the projects in which they're involved
17:13:15 <fungi> keeping in mind there's going to be a fair degree of overlap
17:13:20 <spotz> And I agree we probably are already giving them help, but it might be nice to reach out and see if there's anything specific they need
17:13:26 <SWDevAngel> For me I already feel very x-project in the community work I do. Actually even beyond the OpenStack Foundation. My focus has been all things Cloud Native, and especially open source. So from a community or Ambassador standpoint, I'm happy to help out where applicable.
17:13:53 <fungi> but at least if the survey asks them to indicate the projects they're participating in, we can slice results along that axis to get project-specific demographics too
17:14:22 <fungi> and it cuts down on survey fatigue for people participating in multiple projects
17:14:33 <spotz> fungi yeah my only concern with a big joint survey is being ablle to determine what project answers came from and maintain anonymity
17:15:06 <fungi> i definitely agree, outreach (asking projkects if they have specific diversity challenges they're struggling with) is a great idea
17:15:14 <spotz> Even now we don't know what OpenStack projeect
17:15:47 <fungi> i see, concern that a specific project or list of projects could out th eanonymity of a respondent?
17:17:05 <spotz> Possibly or even when responses say there was an issue within a project we don't know which one they had that issue with
17:17:15 <fungi> (by project i'm talking about osf level projects, so currently airship, kata, opensatck and zuul... maybe soon starlingx too)
17:19:01 <spotz> Yeah:) But say someone fills out the survey and we get a comment that says they couldn't get code mergeed because of X or Y. We might not be able to narrow it down to say a Zuul issue vs a Kaata or OpenStack issue, similiar to how wee don't currently know if it was Kollla or OSA
17:19:22 <spotz> That concern make sense?
17:19:56 <megheisler> Yeah, I could see where needing to know if the issue is project specific would help out in fixing it
17:20:25 <fungi> yep, definitely would be an item in favor of separate surveys
17:21:16 <spotz> But if we ask to many narroowing questions we risk anonymity issues. Now to bee honest without talking to thee other projects we don't know how large their communities might be
17:21:52 <SWDevAngel> Could you put in a box to check that states which project that response was directed toward, on survey questions like that?
17:21:52 <spotz> If it's 100 people a broader survey might have a better chance of being answered if it was combined with another group
17:22:34 <spotz> I don't think we can with how we did the last survey. fungi what about that system you had set up?
17:23:20 <fungi> so in favor of a single survey, we've got the deduplication of results (allowing us to have overall osf demographic numbers) and avoiding survey fatigue among cross-project participants. in favor of separate surveys is that it could be hard to map a project-specific complaint to a corresponding project/community and also combining project participation could make it harder to maintain anonymity
17:23:22 <fungi> of respondents
17:24:28 <fungi> #link https://docs.openstack.org/infra/system-config/survey.html#admin-survey-user
17:24:31 <spotz> Yeah and of course those might be non-issues if the other projects don't want to be included ot utilize this group
17:25:23 <fungi> survey.openstack.org hasn't gotten heavy use yet, i think a few folks have beta tested it for small stuff but i've not really gotten any feedback
17:25:58 <spotz> I just remembered reviewing documentation for it
17:26:15 <spotz> I think we wee a google form last time which greeatly limits what we can do
17:27:16 <SWDevAngel> I can't imagine that a project wouldn't want to utilize this group. We're only here to help. :)
17:27:25 <spotz> So my first suggestion is we get a list of contacts for the other projects from OSF and compile an email and reach out
17:28:05 <spotz> Well when UC reached out they didn't want assistance, but they all have their own governance and most didn't even have users at the time
17:28:22 <fungi> well, it's the osf diversity wg's mission to report on and assist with member diversity concerns within the osf. that doesn't necessarily mean project-specific diversity concerns, but it has been leveraged that way so far
17:28:45 <spotz> Welll there hadn't been any ooother projects:)
17:29:03 <fungi> the uc is openstack-specific in the same way that the tc is opensack-specific. they're delegated similarly in the bylaws
17:30:02 <fungi> so i think keeping the uc focused on openstack is reasonable in the same way that not imposing a common tc over all osf projects was reasonable
17:30:14 <spotz> Another benefit of reaching out and getting buy in is hopefully new members to this group:)
17:30:44 <fungi> yep!
17:31:48 <fungi> as i said, i like the idea of asking project communities what they need help with, but i also think the osf diversity wg shouldn't try to make its general osf activities specific to particular projects
17:33:00 <fungi> enlisting help from additional projects in general osf activities would be good. making additional silos maybe not
17:33:43 <spotz> I don't think it was ever intentional I think it just wasn't planned appropriately for when the other projects joined
17:34:57 <spotz> So we get some contacts from Allison and Jimmy and reach out to them welcoming to the OSF and lletting them know we exiist to help all project aas part of OSF and not OPenStack and trry to get follkls to join the efforts
17:35:23 <fungi> yep, i didn't mean to suggest anything is being done wrong, just that new project-specific tasks may not be within the scope of the wg
17:35:37 <spotz> I so can't type;( I think I need a new keyboard again
17:35:50 <fungi> your keyboard is incompatible with 2020
17:35:53 <spotz> We won't know until we aask what they need
17:36:28 <spotz> Anything on this or are we in agreement for the next steps?
17:36:44 <fungi> i'm cool
17:37:07 <spotz> SWDevAngel and megheisler?
17:37:24 <megheisler> yep, I think that is all good
17:37:24 <spotz> Just want to make sure I'm keeping us on track with time:)
17:37:47 <SWDevAngel> Yes, I'm fine. Like I said above, from a community standpoint, I'm already cross-project. I've done meetups on Zuul, Kata, etc. Happy to always help wherever. :)
17:38:11 <spotz> Ok cool:)
17:38:22 <spotz> #topic Mentoring Update
17:38:28 <spotz> You're on megheisler:)
17:38:33 <megheisler> Great!
17:39:01 <megheisler> So like I dropped in and said once I was out of commision for a while because of health stuff
17:39:17 <megheisler> unfortunately the mentoring effort seems to have gotten dropped a bit
17:39:48 <megheisler> but with the new year I am contacting a few people who expressed interest in mentoring/being mentored
17:40:03 <megheisler> just to see if they are still interested
17:41:32 <megheisler> but that's the current status of thing, if anyone has any thoughts or suggestions please let me know!
17:41:37 <spotz> Great thanks, and hopefully with the outreach we were just tallking about we'lll be ablle to either start or maybe merge in other efforts
17:42:28 <megheisler> yeah, I'd be interested to find out what sort of mentoring individual projects have done if any
17:43:32 <fungi> that'll be great
17:44:31 <megheisler> In terms of a mentoring plan I am going to wait to see how many people respond back
17:44:53 <spotz> Yeah I'm not sure if anyone is doing something besides possibly Oatreachy?
17:45:30 <spotz> Yeah and we might need to do a more formal push to get things going again
17:45:46 <megheisler> yeah, that makes sense
17:46:44 <spotz> Sometimes just seeing it 'fresh' gets new interest
17:47:04 <spotz> We have just under 15 minutes. Anything on this?
17:47:12 <megheisler> OK, thanks, I'll work on that.
17:47:18 <megheisler> Thats all from me
17:47:45 <spotz> #topic Open Discussioon
17:49:51 <spotz> Anyone have anything else or we get 10 minutes back
17:49:59 <SWDevAngel> Just a quick note (again, from a community standpoint).
17:50:16 <fungi> i brought up with osf event peeps that more specifically incorporating community diversity topics in the agenda/planning for the vancouver ptg/opendev in may thing would be appreciated, and will try to make sure i keep on top of that as organization around content begins to crystalize
17:50:44 <spotz> Great thanks fungi
17:51:08 <SWDevAngel> I've been noticing more mainstream publications actually taking an interest in how these big communities are built and sustained. I've been interviewed in different circles than usual lately. Did you see the piece that ran in Forbes last month?
17:51:16 <SWDevAngel> https://www.forbes.com/sites/oracle/2019/12/10/kubernetes-hungry-businesses-recruit-to-fill-their-skill-gaps-at-kubecon/#3a4950117d41
17:51:59 <SWDevAngel> My point is that YES, people are understanding better the relationship of community to open source (and other) projects. AND it's a great place to point out the importance of diversity in building these communities.
17:52:58 <fungi> that's awesome
17:53:03 <spotz> Cool
17:53:23 <fungi> (and no, i hadn't noticed that article)
17:53:35 <fungi> thanks for pointing it out!
17:53:54 <SWDevAngel> Yeah, totally. I did this Marketing Influencer thing, and also theCUBE last fall. I've been doing this community thing for God knows how long but it seems now that it's finally sinking in mainstream, how it all ties in.
17:53:59 <megheisler> I hadn't seen the article, great piece
17:54:55 <spotz> Yeah I think communities as a whole are getting the idea of diversity matters and trying to do the right thing fromo the start or early at least
17:55:04 <SWDevAngel> I think it was pushed to Forbes by a blogger at Oracle. So that's another thought. Not sure who runs that kind of stuff for the OpenStack Foundation but it'd be good to let them know that mainstream business pubs are interested in stories like this, and they can help place them.
17:55:44 <spotz> That's a good point
17:55:56 <SWDevAngel> Actually, maybe that's a point for Robert Cathey. I think he still does the PR outreach for the Foundation. I can ping him.
17:56:14 <fungi> yep, he's sho i'd suggest
17:56:21 <fungi> er, he's who i'd suggest
17:56:38 <SWDevAngel> Got it. Will do.
17:56:43 <fungi> thanks again!
17:57:03 <fungi> he's really the one with all the contacts
17:57:22 <spotz> Thanks SWDevAngel
17:57:32 <spotz> Ok anything else?
17:57:43 <SWDevAngel> Yes. I know he saw the article cuz he tweeted it out, but I'll talk with him to make sure he made the connection that he could help place an article like this for the OpenStack Foundation projects and communities.
17:57:58 <SWDevAngel> That interview was done at KubeCon. Something similar could be done at the next Summit.
17:58:09 <SWDevAngel> Nope, I'm good. Happy New Year everyone!!!!
17:58:16 <fungi> nothing else from me
17:59:02 <spotz> #endmeeting