Open k8hertweck opened 6 years ago
Re:Q2 - This overall looks very well done, kudos! Searching for something to pick at, it's very clear that the Carpentries is an organization with all the bells and whistles. What I am less clear is how much the term "organization" applies to the Lesson organizations. I am guessing they are lower on the autonomy scale without any independent fiscal identity or staff. Is that true? If it is, should the term organization be reconsidered?
Independence, autonomy, and redundancy are surely issues you have considered. Are there more details on this? My feeling looking at #7 is that lesson organizations are really "departments" (if committee is too polarizing a word).
It is confusing that both are called 'organizations'. Some re-naming is definitely in order. The main thing is that you're right about the autonomy scale, and the framing as a department is good. Lesson groups/departments/organizations will likely have a committee that oversees them and can also have staff working specifically on that project, but the focus will be on the topic and lesson content and structure and helping people to teach those lessons, rather than overall governance, operations or infrastructure.
Well done, this is succinct but covers all the bases.
Agreed, there needs to be a more clearly named separation between the Organization that is The Carpentries and the lesson orgs. I don't think that's going to be much of a problem, since Git/Github enforces a fairly clear community around each lesson, with maintainers and contributors and their own issues space. It just a name thing, not a process thing.
This looks good. Like @JasonJWilliamsNY I'm picking at the details.
Q1a:
Q1b:
Q2:
I think this is well thought out - my only suggestion is that I think a name like "Research Carpentry" will be much more comprehensible to outsiders than "The Carpentries", but I acknowledge that ship has probably sailed. Thank you for putting this together.
@gvwilson there's still naming conversations! https://github.com/carpentries/2017Merger/issues/10
Thanks - comment added there.
@JasonJWilliamsNY and @npch : picking at details is very much appreciated, and this is absolutely the right point in the process for it. Thank you for your comments and suggestions. As @pitviper6 has noted, the separation between the umbrella organization and the lesson organizations is one of the trickier parts of this process, and where the merger committee really needs feedback to supplement the discussions we have had so far.
View RFC1 here
Q1: Do you agree with above described responsibilities of The Carpentries organisation? Specifically:
Q1a: are there any responsibilities missing?
Q1b: is there anything The Carpentries organisation should not be responsible for?
Q2. Other comments?