Re: [WG: Badging] Tooling, reclaiming thread

Thanks for the additional context Rich. I might have derailed a bit since I was looking to improve the onboarding of new contributors (without ASF ID) into the apache ecosystem, which IMO has some intersection with the badging system, but it's definitely not the same thing. I'll sleep on this, do

Re: [WG: Badging] Tooling, reclaiming thread

> On Mar 20, 2024, at 11:59 AM, Paulo Motta wrote: > > Rich: > > I need some time to better elaborate this. I will prepare sometime in the > next week or so a short doc explaining what am I proposing, what problem it > solves and how it intersects with the badging tool object of this working >

Re: [WG: Badging] Tooling, reclaiming thread

Rich: I need some time to better elaborate this. I will prepare sometime in the next week or so a short doc explaining what am I proposing, what problem it solves and how it intersects with the badging tool object of this working group. I suspect we might be thinking about similar things but in d

Re: [WG: Badging] Tooling, reclaiming thread

On Tue, Mar 19, 2024, 16:55 Paulo Motta wrote: > > it looks like there’s no way to run this on the hosted service and have > it integrated with ASF LDAP, as each individual badge recipient would have > to create an account through their tooling. > > Backing off a bit, do we really need logins for

Re: [WG: Badging] Tooling, reclaiming thread

> And what if someone else later joins as an ASF committer with the id 'doejohn'? What would their badge page be? That particular badging username would be unavailable and they would have to select another handle for their badging page when registering as committer (if they opt-in to the badging s

Re: [WG: Badging] Tooling, reclaiming thread

On Wed, 20 Mar 2024 at 15:59, Paulo Motta wrote: > > This is fair Sebb. I concede a separate namespace makes sense. This would > also likely simplify the solution so we don't need to worry about clashes. > > Instead of overloading people.apache.org namespace which is associated with > an ASF ID, I

Re: [WG: Badging] Tooling, reclaiming thread

This is fair Sebb. I concede a separate namespace makes sense. This would also likely simplify the solution so we don't need to worry about clashes. Instead of overloading people.apache.org namespace which is associated with an ASF ID, I think it makes more sense to create a separate namespace ins

Re: [WG: Badging] Tooling, reclaiming thread

On Wed, 20 Mar 2024 at 14:02, Paulo Motta wrote: > > The ID reservation for 1 year is an optimistic "vote of confidence" that > the contributor will remain active in the community and eventually become a > committer. There are already issues with 3rd party Wiki and Jira ids. Let's not add another

Re: [WG: Badging] Tooling, reclaiming thread

The ID reservation for 1 year is an optimistic "vote of confidence" that the contributor will remain active in the community and eventually become a committer. Existing committers can enter a "waiting list" for reserved handles. If the reserved handle owner is no longer active after 1 year, the ha

Re: [WG: Badging] Tooling, reclaiming thread

Also we would need to have a way to detect malicious agents doing bogus contributions to reserve handles. This is a separate issue that I would prefer to keep out of this discussion for now. On Wed, 20 Mar 2024 at 10:47 Paulo Motta wrote: > One question that could come up is: > > * what if someo

Re: [WG: Badging] Tooling, reclaiming thread

One question that could come up is: * what if someone does a single commit, and the ID is reserved and blocked for posterity We could add a 1 year TTL where the contributor would need to do another commit within the next year to continue reserving the ID. This would incentivize people with reserv

Re: [WG: Badging] Tooling, reclaiming thread

> Imagine you've been granted committer privileges but you can't pick the ID you want because it has been "reserved" by a non-committer, This can not possibly happen, because the committer that was granted committer privileges has already reserved its own ID when it became a contributor in its fir

Re: [WG: Badging] Tooling, reclaiming thread

I don't think we should allow IDs to be "reserved": Imagine you've been granted committer privileges but you can't pick the ID you want because it has been "reserved" by a non-committer, it seems backward. Gary On Wed, Mar 20, 2024 at 8:37 AM Paulo Motta wrote: > > This is right Claude. Essentia

Re: [WG: Badging] Tooling, reclaiming thread

Elaborating a bit more on this phase of the contributor onboarding pipeline: > 3. John Doe fills a simple form and selects the username "doejohn", which is not an ASF id, but just a handle to a people.apache.org page. If an ASF id exists with the same name, then the request is rejected. This form

Re: [WG: Badging] Tooling, reclaiming thread

This is right Claude. Essentially, the people.apache.org handle can be seen as a “handle reservation” to a future ASF ID handle, that will be granted when the contributor becomes a committee. So it’s basically a pre-ASF ID handle granted to contributors without any privileges or login (except the

Re: [WG: Badging] Tooling, reclaiming thread

On Wed, Mar 20, 2024 at 12:55 AM Paulo Motta wrote: > > 3. John Doe fills a simple form and selects the username "doejohn", which > is not an ASF id, but just a handle to a people.apache.org page. If an ASF > id exists with the same name, then the request is rejected. > 6. After some years of con

Re: [WG: Badging] Tooling, reclaiming thread

> it looks like there’s no way to run this on the hosted service and have it integrated with ASF LDAP, as each individual badge recipient would have to create an account through their tooling. Backing off a bit, do we really need logins for a badging page? In my view this would add unnecessary fri

[WG: Badging] Tooling, reclaiming thread

Ok, since the existing “Tooling” thread has been hopelessly derailed into … whatever that is, I’m going to try to reboot this thread. So far, we have a proposed solution from Paulo: > I've played around with badgr.com a bit and was able to > create the > following organizat

Re: [WG: Badging] Tooling

Apologies Paulo if that was. I have indeed missed that this is a public list. But - for my excuse - I should have taken Airflow as an example because we discussed it in public lists (and I had not realized it should have been secret) So let me re-cast my considerations here: * Astronomer runs htt

Re: [WG: Badging] Tooling

As a member of the Cassandra community I did not appreciate internal project matters being brought to a public mailing list without prior consent. This does not help re-establishing trust of the project with ASF leadership to work on common projects. Please start a new thread with priv...@cassandra

Re: [WG: Badging] Tooling

Hi Jarek, You raised interesting discussion points but I would prefer not to discuss specific examples in a public mailing list, since they may spark unnecessary controversy and derail from the focus of the working group. Do you mind summarizing your key considerations without mentioning specific

Re: [WG: Badging] Tooling

I like the idea of having "A" badging system that is seen as "ASF accepted" that any PMC (at PMC level) or any person (at ASF level) might opt-in to use I think such badging system - providing that it's "ASF generally accepted" concept that is defined well - possibly adopted from others like Fedor

Re: [WG: Badging] Tooling

Can I have the 'not badging' badge? On Sat, Mar 9, 2024 at 9:16 AM Gary Gregory wrote: > Here is a hopefully entertaining story about gaming a system: > > A long time ago (not in a galaxy far away), I worked for a company that > created an internal $ bug bounty as a major release of our flagship

Re: [WG: Badging] Tooling

Here is a hopefully entertaining story about gaming a system: A long time ago (not in a galaxy far away), I worked for a company that created an internal $ bug bounty as a major release of our flagship product neared. Someone in QA found a bug that caused the language runtime to incorrectly print

Re: [WG: Badging] Tooling

> Badges may well cause some people to feel valued, but I think they can be divisive. What about people who don't 'earn' enough points to merit a badge? Might that not cause them to feel undervalued? I think merit frameworks are inherently divisive, but the benefit of badges is that it gives flexi

Re: [WG: Badging] Tooling

> If number of PRs is to be used as a credit towards getting a badge, maybe there should be a way to flag some PRs as undeserving. Agreed and perhaps the same for commits and Jira tickets but that's the last thing I want to spend time adjucating :-( Gary On Sat, Mar 9, 2024, 7:34 AM sebb wrote:

Re: [WG: Badging] Tooling

Badges may well cause some people to feel valued, but I think they can be divisive. What about people who don't 'earn' enough points to merit a badge? Might that not cause them to feel undervalued? The value of a person to an ASF project cannot be purely measured in terms of the number of contribu

Re: [WG: Badging] Tooling

Apologies if the previous message sounded snarky - it was late and I impulsively cherry-picked some excerpts to comment without much second thought. :-) A more constructive attempt: 1. I like the principles of the Fedora badging program presented by Rich, and I think we should adopt them verbatim

Re: [WG: Badging] Tooling

Nice discussion! A few comments: > I do not think that we need projects to opt in to this. Badges are not aimed at projects. They are aimed at *people*. Disagree. Projects should have the autonomy to decide if they want to adopt the ASF badging system for their contributions. I do not see why a p

Re: [WG: Badging] Tooling

Hi Rich, I don't have specific realistic concerns, I am trying to look ahead and avoid a "how didn't yiu guys think of THIS!" moment 😀 Gary On Fri, Mar 8, 2024, 12:19 PM Rich Bowen wrote: > > On Mar 8, 2024, at 12:09 PM, Gary D. Gregory > wrote: > > > > Sure, badging can be fun and it sure se

Re: [WG: Badging] Tooling

> On Mar 8, 2024, at 12:09 PM, Gary D. Gregory wrote: > > Sure, badging can be fun and it sure seems popular on GitHub: I do like my > Mars 2020 Helicopter Mission badge (https://github.com/garydgregory/) ! > > I wonder if there are there any privacy issue we should be able to foresee? > > I w

Re: [WG: Badging] Tooling

Sure, badging can be fun and it sure seems popular on GitHub: I do like my Mars 2020 Helicopter Mission badge (https://github.com/garydgregory/) ! I wonder if there are there any privacy issue we should be able to foresee? I would guess that badges would be derived from data that a member from t

Re: [WG: Badging] Tooling

On Mar 8, 2024, at 9:19 AM, Rich Bowen wrote: > > I attended a talk last week at FOSS Backstage by Spot Callaway, who started > the Fedora badges program. He said that the guiding principles are: > > * It should be fun, not legalistic. > * It should celebrate non-code accomplishments at least

Re: [WG: Badging] Tooling

On Fri, 8 Mar 2024 at 15:44, Rich Bowen wrote: > > Let me state this more clearly: > > > > > If someone never logged in, they would never see their badges. That is > > common to all of the badge platforms that I have looked at. > > For every badge system I’ve looked at, nobody receives any badges

Re: [WG: Badging] Tooling

Let me state this more clearly: > > If someone never logged in, they would never see their badges. That is common > to all of the badge platforms that I have looked at. For every badge system I’ve looked at, nobody receives any badges until they log into the system, creating their account. Tha

Re: [WG: Badging] Tooling

> On Mar 8, 2024, at 10:24 AM, sebb wrote: > > Some people may not want badges; they should not be forced to have > them if they happen to meet the criteria. > I agree that opt-in is necessary. > If someone never logged in, they would never see their badges. That is common to all of the badge

Re: [WG: Badging] Tooling

On Fri, 8 Mar 2024 at 15:15, Gary D. Gregory wrote: > > > I do not think that we need projects to opt in to this. Badges are not > > aimed at projects. They are aimed at *people*. > > I'm not sure about this. Opt-in would be fine with me. I am worried about > gamification and a flood of PRs just

Re: [WG: Badging] Tooling

> I do not think that we need projects to opt in to this. Badges are not aimed > at projects. They are aimed at *people*. I'm not sure about this. Opt-in would be fine with me. I am worried about gamification and a flood of PRs just to get badges. I think experimenting with a handful of project

Re: [WG: Badging] Tooling

> On Mar 3, 2024, at 11:47 AM, Paulo Motta wrote: > > I've thought a bit more and rather than starting with multiple badges, it > probably makes more sense to start with a single badge to validate the > idea. More can be proposed later if the first one is shown to be effective. > > I'd propose

Re: [WG: Badging] Tooling

> I note that it’s AGPL. I think this is the same as fedora's tahrir < https://github.com/fedora-infra/tahrir/blob/develop/LICENSE>. I think we just need to publicly fork this repo on ASF, in case the current fork dies or badgr changes model. > Are you suggesting that we use this service? I’m a

Re: [WG: Badging] Tooling

> On Feb 29, 2024, at 9:44 AM, Paulo Motta wrote: > >> The most promising of these was Badgr (https://badgr.com/) which seems to > have become a paid service, and not open any more. > > An active fork of badgr is available on > https://github.com/edubadges/edubadges-server. I note that it’s A

Re: [WG: Badging] Tooling

> The most promising of these was Badgr (https://badgr.com/) which seems to have become a paid service, and not open any more. An active fork of badgr is available on https://github.com/edubadges/edubadges-server. > can someone step up to do the research to find one? I've played around with badg

[WG: Badging] Tooling

So … a few years ago, I looked for badging software, and there were several options. It appears that all of them have been acquired and made non-open. The most promising of these was Badgr (https://badgr.com/) which seems to have become a paid service, and not open any more. Another one - https