eth-protocol-fellows/protocol-studies

Wiki contributors meeting #1

Closed this issue · 7 comments

taxmeifyoucan commented

Meeting Info

First call dedicated to coordination of EPF wiki contributors. If you contributed or plan to worn on content in the wiki, don't hesitate to join. We will discuss current state of the wiki, outstanding issues and gather feedback. Feel free to comment below if there are any areas you would like to discuss.

Agenda

  • Current state of the wiki, issues, PRs
  • Feedback from contributors, share your perspective
  • Discuss and come up with tasks to accomplish, filling content gaps
  • Future of the wiki
  • More? Propose!

Feel free to propose an agenda topic by commenting under this issue. Let's also continue the discussion in EPS discord channel for wiki contributors.

thogiti commented
  • Content Gaps and Prioritization: Begin by systematically identifying and documenting the areas where content is missing or incomplete. Create a prioritized list based on the importance and demand for certain topics.
  • Lowering Entry Barriers:: Create some beginner friendly onboarding materials, mentorship sessions, and simplifying the technical steps needed to contribute.
  • Maintain a Leaderboard: (I am not 100% sure about this as I need to think through tradeoffs) Maintain a top 10 contributors list and bring in some magical bragging points where contributors can show their work. May be rank based on number of new articles published, not number of commits or edits. Do this only temporarily for few weeks or so until the wiki is almost full of content. Then take it off.
  • 👍2
taxmeifyoucan commented

Thanks for suggestions @thogiti!

  • Content gaps is exactly what I would like to discuss. Set priorities to work on before we can consider the wiki 'production ready'
  • We can discuss more onboarding materials but they are generally well covered by eth.org docs and epf wiki should be more technical. Let's see whether there are some areas we could cover as well
  • I agree wiki contributors deserve the recognition but I don't think a custom leaderboard is the way to go. There is contributors overview in the github serving kind of like this. We also made the Discord role for people who contribute actively. The call itself should also serve as a way to improve the contributor experience and we can discuss it further there
  • 👍5
gorondan commented

+1 for Content gaps
to the points above, I would add:

  • improving the collab skills of wiki-writers. I think we should see this program (the sg. and moving on to the cohort5) as an opportunity to work together as fellows, with the aim to obtain (better) deliverables, i.e. to find ways to elevate our collective agency and keep personal competition solely for boosting the quality of the deliverables.
  • ❤️4
SiddharthV1 commented

Even though I don't have a contribution in yet, I wanted to join to discuss and get suggestions on the pending Execution Architecture wiki page, the content gaps, suggestions on potential ideas for document structure, and also the fastest way to have a minimum document ready that can be considered ready for other existing or potential wiki writers to contribute.

  • 🎉2
arredr2 commented

I wonder if it makes sense to create "teams" or "breakout rooms" that people can contribute to pages together on based on people's interests? Perhaps a poll is created in Discord to identify who is interested in what area and if any current wiki-contributors here has interest or already contributed in some way to a page, they can take the lead to coordinate?

I think this offers a lot of similarities to current core dev processes so it could be a good exercise to help really flesh out the wiki.

  • 👍2
raxhvl commented

@arredr2 you have correctly highlighted issues with content gaps and collaboration.

I wonder if it makes sense to create "teams" or "breakout rooms" that people can contribute to pages together on based on people's interests? Perhaps a poll is created in Discord to identify who is interested in what area and if any current wiki-contributors here has interest or already contributed in some way to a page, they can take the lead to coordinate?

I think issues with missing content should drive content gaps. Anyone should be able to open issues based on their interest, like you said, and discord (or twitter) could be used to raise awareness or gather interest (polls!).

Ideally, most of discussion around collaboration should be documented on the issue itself. So that the context remains easily accessible.

  • 👍2