wiki:org/meetings/2015WinterDevMeeting/Notes/VolunteersAndCommunity
Are the new people spending time on mentoring? Are they as good
at it as Nick?

Newer people don't feel that they're as good at mentoring as Nick.

GSoC used to have Nick as mentor, now we tried to expand
Prioritize helping new people vs helping current people?

Accept that we aren't all going to be Nick

Harder for volunteers to find the topics that they want to work on
(Volunteer page should be updated)
Tor is now 40 projects; so a volunteer probably won't reach the right
developer on the first try.

* For first contact, go through the decision tree with the user to help
them figure out which project needs them. This is a pretty lean step.
But then what? Does the leader of that team pick it up?

In practice, we point potential volunteers away from projects where they
won't get picked up.

Does the documentation#UpToSpeed actually help prospective volunteers?

* Allocating weekly times for irc meetings to do bug review.

One potential volunteer wants to help but doesn't want to bug devs
"because he knows they're busy".

Not only code is contribution. Many other useful contributions.
But: fixing typo in website is like cleaning toilets.
Tor stackexchange exists! And that's much more interesting.
What about these Reddit people? Community outreach to other
places where the effort is magnified.

Silicon valley is increasingly spending money on privacy-preserving
stuff.

* Nick has talked of a set of "practice problems" you could do to get
better at being a little-t-tor developer.

Give people a quiz when they show up as potential volunteer. And make sure
that Nick doesn't write the quiz, but instead current community members
who will then have to get even more familiar with Tor by designing a
new quiz problem.

Posting a popular bug on the blog, and discussing it a bit to draw
in new devs.

Proactive: universities are great places for reaching volunteers.
Guest lectures in classes. Career fairs.

* Developers choosing to put their dev discussion on mailing lists, to
make a record and to draw more people in. Doing discussions just on
irc or just in person will keep outsiders out.

We've seen lots of bugs on trac where people put a patch and then
don't get a quick response. Should we add a trac plugin to remind
users about tickets in state needs-review?

* Realization: we have very few reviewers. And even fewer people who
are confident enough in their reviewing -- Linus doesn't want to
review Tor patches because what if he says ok but misses something?

Dilemma: should we try to recruit more developers, if we can't actually
keep them? Or should we try to recruit reviewers? How to incentive
people to review code without including money? And not just review the
code but provide good feedback to the person who wrote the patch.

Is focusing on getting more *developers* the most important
integration of volunteers we should be focusing on? While relays
are becoming illegal in Germany and Italy?

* tor-teachers list: gather and coordinate people around the world who
do advocacy and outreach for their communities.
Need a person whose sole job is to drive this list.

The tor-teachers list has precedent: funding Moritz to coordinate
relay operators was a good move.

Aaron's list:
* Follow-through
* Talking about Tor; how we promote it

List an easy bug each week in Tor Weekly News: write short user stories
around a trac ticket to make it appealing.

* tor-teachers list: gather and coordinate people around the world who
do advocacy and outreach for their communities.
Need a person whose sole job is to drive this list.
Last modified 3 years ago Last modified on Mar 3, 2015, 12:03:53 AM