Chapters meeting 2010/Documentation/Working Groups/Toolserver
Toolserver working group Edit
This is not about tools and technical things, but about governance of the Toolserver
Question on mailing list of chapters about who and how we can as chapters get together to see how we can run the toolserver
Present Mark Bergsma, WMF, WM NL, WM IT, Daniel, River, WM CH, WM RU, Pavel, WM DE, WM UK, WM SV, WM PL, WM UK, WM FR
Alessio, Daniel Kinzler, River, Ilario, Vladimir, Pavel, Sebastian, Mike, Lars, Marek, Delphine
Previous Discussion on the mailing list Edit Call from pavel to think about a governance structure for the toolserver (legal body that is running the toolserver).
Purpose of such a body
Do we need a different legal body
Sebastian: legal problems, liability reasons, there is WP content on there, so that it might be a problem.
Reason why this discussion started is more: money, practical, find news ways for participation of other chapters.
95000 € in costs
Goals of this meeting Edit Timetable (and an aggressive one) - 3 months
Working group of representative from some chapters, and mandate of working group
Make sure that we list our non-options/parameters
Mandate of the working group Edit Make sure that whatever solution is chosen is an efficient, practical and sustainable technical solution (see parameters)
Make sure that basic legal requirements are taken care of. The working group will have to explore legal options for a toolserver association (or any other legal option that allows a joint governance and financing of the toolserver)
The toolserver association (working title) Chapters are governing the toolserver, not the Foundation, not any other external organisation
Single ownership of hardware
toolserver association) will own that hardware (no outsourcing, no rental, no lease) Keep the existing rules of the toolserver: Work on the toolserver has to be beneficial to a Wikimedia or an Open Street Map projects (potential partner projects)
The resulting outcome should provide a strong incentive for chapters to integrate their locally run toolservers in the Toolserver
Solution has to be agreeable at least to Wikimedia Germany
Timetable Edit One month to decide on what chapters are part of the working group
End of September there has to be a proposal.
Who is in the working group Edit Participating chapters in the working group should commit to invest a minimum of 5000 € into the toolserver in the next 18 months.
Participating chapters agree to participate in the costs of the working group coming up with a solution. Total=5000 €. Further notes Edit
DK- Think, in the long run, about integration of existing local toolservers (bot management etc)
Should all toolservers be integrated in one thing?
Pending questions Edit If we have an external organisation, does it need to be able to accept donations?
Does the chosen solution have the power to redefine usage policy and scope of the projet: focus (chapters wikis? sandboxes for medawiki extensions?)
In the governance structure, should the influence of each financial partner decide who gets to make the decisions?
Can this happen within an existing organisation? ex. Wikimedia Deutschland
SM - It's difficult because the risk is born just by one chapter. Whereas if you have another structure, it is born by that structure.
DM - Not sure it's so difficult to get the chapters to commit to a X per year.
Factors that influence the decision Edit Assumption agreed upon: only participating chapters influence the governance.
Size of community
Number of people (affiliation to a chapter?) who have an account on the server Proposals:
share into the organisation. The number of shares determines your influence in this organisation (you get to decide who is on the board etc.). (Stock company) - ex. German Top Level Domain Association. Model to look at. Membership fee to stay in by every participating chapter. Commitment over several years
Proportional scheme contribution=influence but there needs to be some kind of commitment in the long term (which probably the share model actually solves) Main Remarks Edit
Toolserver is run by the chapters? Yes, no? WMDE, WMFR are ok with that especially as a cash outlet
Good for advertising what the chapters does for the community, nice tool for researchers
Technical decisions on a day to day can't be done by the board.
However a strategical technical decision should be taken by the board