Okay, no

[branchandroot]

So, anyone at all can submit pull requests to the OTW github, now. Supposedly, this way "experienced coders" can help in a drive-by way without having to jump through all the volunteering, form-filling, hoops.

That's nice.

Except for the part where you still need to jump through the hoops to get a development environment, the thing that lets you see the code from the back end. Without a development environment, the only way you can write a drive-by bug fix is by installing a local version of the Archive on your own computer or webspace which effort, the github documentation specifically says, will not receive any help or support. ETA: That's a bit better. A Windows install will not be supported, but there are some docs available for OSX or Linux; the Secretary has also added a link to the new IRC channel, which is entirely laudable.

And why the hell should anyone go to that kind of trouble? In what way is that "casual"? In what way is this actually useful? ETA: In particular, how is this useful given the OTW's history of bad faith and abusing their pool of volunteers, to date? How is a "well, it's better than most" barrier going to convince anyone who's been watching this train wreck for a few years, now, to dip a toe in?

I am seriously out of patience with this run-around, and the misinformation someone is evidently feeding the rest of the org. Whoever first suggested that opening up pull requests alone would open up development in some meaningful way? Lied.

And if there was no active misinformation, then I'm sorry but chalk up another mark for incompetence. I'm honestly not sure which I'd prefer.

Comments

from the eyes of someone with much more enthusiasm than experience

[helens78]

Dreamwidth's process doesn't make you fill out a job application just to get started, though. As a potential babydev, all I had to do was go through a mostly-automated process and then ask a couple of questions in chat.

For AO3, when you go to the Volunteers & Recruiting page, it says AO3 only wants experienced devs who have worked with "developing and deploying web applications, coding within a web development framework (our teams use Ruby on Rails but experience with Python/Django is good), administering MySQL databases, and working with nginx/squid/unicorn."

Then you're asked to describe your skill level and for a time commitment, right off the bat.

Then you're supposed to fill in all the things you're experienced with, "optionally".

As a potential AO3 babydev, honestly, the combination of "we only want experienced coders" and "please promise us a time commitment right off the bat" is frighteningly off-putting. I just kinda feel like, why should I bother? Maybe I only have time to learn to write one patch. Maybe I'll get swamped by RL before I can do anything. They obviously already don't want me since I'm not experienced; there's no place for me there anyway. Why go through the process of trying to knock at the door when the answer is already "sorry, kid, we don't want you"?

IDK. Maybe it's better not to have a dozen potential babydev accounts clogging up your hosted development environments, and it's easier if you tell people "no" at the outset? If that isn't the case, though, a single checkbox in that form for "potential babydev" and eliminating the "how much time will you put in" would both be a lot more welcoming; it would send a signal that people like me could actually be of use and could actually make a contribution, even if we're not looking for a scheduled part-time job. (Part of the reason DW's development "hoops" aren't intimidating is because they're so active and friendly and crystal clear about wanting people who have never in their lives touched code, and that even patching one thing and then never being heard from again is useful and appreciated. And if RL calls, so be it.)

I will say that one thing that's heartening is that there is now an IRC option instead of just Campfire. For disability reasons I am SUPER TERRIBLE at IRC, but at least it's something I'm familiar with and can be made to run in programs that can be customized to be much, much easier for me on an ability level.

Re: from the eyes of someone with much more enthusiasm than experience

[jennyst]

When Volcom finish their revamp, all the welcoming stuff will be there again for our babydevs, too. At the moment we've closed our general recruitment, including for babydevs, to allow us to revamp our processes. We don't want to add new people if they're not going to be properly supported - we'd rather admit that up front than have people be disappointed and burn out later. The only exception is for technical experts, to help with the AO3 performance issues. That's why the form seems so off-putting.

I'll see if we can make that any clearer on the form, though - we used to have a section explaining that it was a temporary form while we sort out the new intake process, and it seems to have disappeared. And thank you for the compliment on IRC - it was a bit of a battle to get it approved and set up, and uptake has been disappointingly low, so it's good to know someone appreciates it.

Basically, we'd love to welcome people in your position again soon, but we're wary of over-promising right now, because we've let too many people down already. We want to take a few more steps to improve our volunteer retention and support structure first, rather than encouraging more babydevs to dive in the deep end at risk of drowing.

Re: from the eyes of someone with much more enthusiasm than experience

[helens78]

♥ That sounds thoughtful! I'm looking forward to seeing where this leads. I really do look at the Archive as a long-term process rather than an endpoint to a goal, you know? Like any ongoing project in development, I'm hoping there will be opportunities in the future. *fingers crossed*