Create new pattern: Group Support #527

rrrutledge · 2023-02-27T22:46:07Z

View the document.

rrrutledge · 2023-02-27T22:46:25Z

@jeffabailey interested to review.

jeffabailey · 2023-02-28T16:29:34Z

@jeffabailey interested to review.

Added some. I will add more this evening.

rrrutledge · 2023-02-28T17:46:23Z

Added some

Like you have a review in progress with comments queued up? Nice!

lenucksi · 2023-03-02T18:10:11Z

Nice document, only addition I would have is that communication and expectation setting should be made absolutely clear that this is "best-effort inner source" and so demands and expectations by others are out of place and "pull request welcome" is the standard answer. Failing to do so and accepting your average corporate "yesterday" deadline will lead to fast burnout of the new maintainer group.

rrrutledge · 2023-03-02T19:45:03Z

Thanks for this feedback, @lenucksi. Let me look at incorporating that.

rrrutledge · 2023-03-06T21:54:07Z

@jeffabailey let us know if you have some comments/feedback?

spier

Super interesting @rrrutledge!

The pattern write-up looks great already, in terms of following the pattern template and all.

I left specific comment inline in the pattern.

One general thought that kept coming up when reading the pattern:

Can this model of InnerSource support only work as an absolute exception in a company?

As if this were to become the norm, rather than the exception, I would be worried that it would paint the wrong picture of InnerSource. As in some people might reason "we don't need to find/staff a team for this component. Some InnerSource folks will just pick it up because they like the project". So in that sense that might even lead to an anti-pattern of sort?

Looking forward to the conversation, and again thanks a lot for sharing this!

spier · 2023-03-06T21:52:16Z

patterns/2-structured/support-as-a-group.md

+
+## Status
+
+Structured


Would you be ok to share this pattern as "Initial" to get started?
That way it won't be published in our online book immediately, and gives us a bit more time to harden the content.

I admit that this is likely a flaw in our maturity process but somehow it makes me nervous to publish a pattern straight from zero into our book.

Would be honestly great to get your thoughts on this topic, as I feel like I am stuck in my own head here.

Adding on to this:
We can decide at the very end whether we want to publish this as Initial or Structured.
So don't worry about this too much for now.

OK we'll see at the end. Reading the definition of Maturity Levels it does say that we need multiple instances before it can be included as Structured.

Hmm. I am reading this for Structured:

Is validated by at least 1 (one) known instance

For the most part this has meant that patterns with one Known Instance will be moved to Structured. But of course we can make our own choice.

Oh I see. Only one required for structured. I think that this is why I submitted this as Structured initially - it's something that I am using at WellSky.

Yeah. I think we should stick to the definition as outlined in our Maturity Levels.
That means that the pattern is Structured, as it has 1 Known Instance, and also meets all other requirements for that level.

I still think that it might be a flaw in our maturity process, as a single org can publish a pattern straight from zero into our book (with themselves as a known instance).

We (as the patterns working group) should possibly review this in the future but for now let's move on and get this PR merged :)

FYI I will also post something similar as my review comment, so that this does not get lost in this thread.

patterns/2-structured/support-as-a-group.md

spier · 2023-03-06T22:07:57Z

patterns/2-structured/support-as-a-group.md

+## Context
+
+* Popular InnerSource project.
+* No one is actively supporting it.


Suggested change

* No one is actively supporting it.

* No one is actively supporting it.

* The company cannot assign a new maintainer to the project because ...

Suggesting to add the reason for not assigning a new maintainer here, or maybe a list of possible reasons.

This bit got me confused, as it didn't seem logical to me.
The library has a lot of users (50 projects).
The migration cost away from this library is high.
50 x high migration cost = super high cost :)

So why wouldn't the company assign a new maintainer?
Wouldn't it be in their best interest?

It is entirely possible that I am misunderstanding the scenario/context here.
And if yes that's great, so that we can clarify this :)

The company cannot assign a team to support.

What are the reasons? Could be varied. The point is we are not getting a team for it.

I see. Still confused by this, I have to admit :)

The company is probably short-staffed in general.

patterns/2-structured/support-as-a-group.md

jeffabailey · 2023-03-07T01:12:12Z

@jeffabailey let us know if you have some comments/feedback?

Finished submitting a review.

patterns/2-structured/support-as-a-group.md

fioddor · 2023-03-15T10:26:46Z

It might be difficult to find known InnerSource instances. If so we can argue that this pattern is applied in open source, for example in Debian.

fioddor · 2023-03-15T10:26:56Z

I wonder if we should extend this pattern to cover Special Interest Groups (SIG). Perhaps it's better to just create the SIG pattern and link it. SIGs have a broader scope than just sharing maintenance effort, but the underlying concept is pretty much the same: "Alone I can't, with friends yes".

spier · 2023-03-16T19:42:55Z

I wonder if we should extend this pattern to cover Special Interest Groups (SIG). Perhaps it's better to just create the SIG pattern and link it. SIGs have a broader scope than just sharing maintenance effort, but the underlying concept is pretty much the same: "Alone I can't, with friends yes".

Have you seen a SIG-like concept in the context of InnerSource? Would be great to hear more about it :)

And yes, I would keep this separate from the pattern in this PR as well.
This PR seems to be about the maintenance of an individual project.

spier · 2023-03-21T18:50:09Z

@rrrutledge wanted to check if you had any questions about the feedback I left in the review, or if there is anything else that you need to push this forward?

Also while reading other patterns, I found that this one here as some overlap with your "Support as a Group":
https://github.com/InnerSourceCommons/InnerSourcePatterns/blob/main/patterns/1-initial/explicit-shared-ownership.md

rrrutledge · 2023-03-22T12:39:27Z

if you had any questions about the feedback I left in the review, or if there is anything else that you need to push this forward?

Just need to spend time going through the feedback and updating. I will take a look.

Co-authored-by: Jeff Bailey <776901+jeffabailey@users.noreply.github.com>

rrrutledge

Thanks for the feedback! Have a look!

patterns/2-structured/support-as-a-group.md

rrrutledge · 2023-03-28T18:48:47Z

patterns/2-structured/support-as-a-group.md

+
+## Status
+
+Structured


OK we'll see at the end. Reading the definition of Maturity Levels it does say that we need multiple instances before it can be included as Structured.

patterns/2-structured/support-as-a-group.md

rrrutledge · 2023-03-28T18:51:57Z

patterns/2-structured/support-as-a-group.md

+## Context
+
+* Popular InnerSource project.
+* No one is actively supporting it.


The company cannot assign a team to support.

What are the reasons? Could be varied. The point is we are not getting a team for it.

patterns/2-structured/group-support.md

pattern-categorization/innersource-program-mind-map.md

spier · 2023-03-30T18:24:11Z

@rrrutledge I am curious to hear your thoughts and experience on this angle:

Can this model of InnerSource support only work as an absolute exception in a company?

As if this were to become the norm, rather than the exception, I would be worried that it would paint the wrong picture of InnerSource. As in some people might reason "we don't need to find/staff a team for this component. Some InnerSource folks will just pick it up because they like the project". So in that sense that might even lead to an anti-pattern of sort?

Looking forward to the conversation, and again thanks a lot for sharing this!

Also want to second the possible risk of maintainer burnout, that was raised here.

If you haven't seen any these risk materialize, or don't share these concerns, then of course we should not add it to the pattern though. This pattern should reflect the reality of how you have experienced it "in action".

rrrutledge · 2023-03-31T17:16:52Z

curious to hear your thoughts

I think it's good to note that actually staffing the project is a preferable avenue (e.g. Core Team) for the reasons that folks have brought up. Is there a Caveats or Disclaimers section where we can put things like that?

spier · 2023-04-01T20:13:09Z

I think it's good to note that actually staffing the project is a preferable avenue (e.g. Core Team) for the reasons that folks have brought up. Is there a Caveats or Disclaimers section where we can put things like that?

@rrrutledge you can create a Caveat or Disclaimers section in this pattern, if you like. It isn't part of our standard pattern template though.

Personally I would integrate this extra info into the Resulting Context, as using this pattern creates new risks in your org. i.e. those risks are a result of using this pattern. One could say sth along the lines of:

While this pattern can provide a solution for the short to medium term, in the long term it has the following risks <A, B, ... D>. Therefore it should always be the preferable avenue to actually staff the project e.g. by means of a Core Team, or a regular host team that maintains the project.

rrrutledge · 2023-04-04T18:55:27Z

integrate this extra info into the Resulting Context

Done.

patterns/2-structured/group-support.md

…ledgments section.

spier

Thank you for sharing this pattern with us @rrrutledge!
Also a great win for the ISPO Working Group 👍

The content of this pattern looks great and I am happy to merge this.

The last point we discussed was whether the pattern should be marked as Initial or Structured.

The consideration was whether a single org should be able to publish a pattern straight from zero into our book (with themselves as a known instance). Being able to do that may negatively impact the quality of the pattern, as the pattern has little time to get confirmed and improved by the experience of other orgs applying a similar approach.

However as this is how we have currently defined the Maturity Levels for our pattern, we should go ahead and merge this PR.

We (as the patterns working group) should possibly review this in the future but for now let's move on and get this PR merged :)

Please note that this discussion isn't saying anything about this particular pattern, it is mostly a contemplation about the process in which we publish patterns to our online book in general.

spier · 2023-04-04T21:43:18Z

This pattern is live in our book now!
https://patterns.innersourcecommons.org/p/group-support

rrrutledge · 2023-04-04T23:17:11Z

Woah! Nice! Thank you!

rrrutledge added 2 commits February 27, 2023 16:43

Create support-as-a-group.md

bd3295d

Update innersource-program-mind-map.md

248451e

rrrutledge requested review from lenucksi, NewMexicoKid, cewilliams, spier and robtuley as code owners February 27, 2023 22:46

Re-creating markmap and screenshot

844d86c

rrrutledge mentioned this pull request Feb 27, 2023

How to Support an InnerSource Project as an Ad-Hoc Group InnerSourceCommons/ispo-working-group#2

Closed

spier added 2-structured Patterns with existing instances (Please see our contribution handbook for details) 📖 Type - Content Work Working on contents is the main focus of this issue / PR labels Feb 27, 2023

spier changed the title ~~Create support-as-a-group.md~~ Create new pattern: Support as a Group Feb 27, 2023

Emphasize that support is "best-effort" only

fe232ac

spier reviewed Mar 6, 2023

View reviewed changes

jeffabailey requested changes Mar 7, 2023

View reviewed changes

spier reviewed Mar 7, 2023

View reviewed changes

patterns/2-structured/support-as-a-group.md Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

rrrutledge and others added 2 commits March 28, 2023 13:37

Update patterns/2-structured/support-as-a-group.md

0eb96e4

Co-authored-by: Jeff Bailey <776901+jeffabailey@users.noreply.github.com>

Update support-as-a-group.md

1c62a4e

rrrutledge and others added 2 commits March 28, 2023 13:52

Apply suggestions from code review

5869f5c

Co-authored-by: Jeff Bailey <776901+jeffabailey@users.noreply.github.com>

Update and rename support-as-a-group.md to group-support.md

c748d50

rrrutledge commented Mar 28, 2023

View reviewed changes

spier reviewed Mar 30, 2023

View reviewed changes

patterns/2-structured/group-support.md Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

Using relative links + Add link to TC Pattern

09c41cc

spier reviewed Mar 30, 2023

View reviewed changes

pattern-categorization/innersource-program-mind-map.md Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

spier and others added 2 commits March 30, 2023 20:10

Fix title and link in mindmap

01b063a

Re-creating markmap and screenshot

390b50f

Update group-support.md

a298f0d

Update group-support.md

109d6e5

spier reviewed Apr 4, 2023

View reviewed changes

patterns/2-structured/group-support.md Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

Add 'to'

505de49

spier reviewed Apr 4, 2023

View reviewed changes

patterns/2-structured/group-support.md Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

spier added 2 commits April 4, 2023 23:18

Merge lines in list, to make things work for gitbook

d0160a7

Change formatting of links (to get highlighting). Remove empty Acknow…

aa3d0ee

…ledgments section.

spier approved these changes Apr 4, 2023

View reviewed changes

spier merged commit b3bb4f7 into main Apr 4, 2023
1 check passed

spier deleted the rrrutledge-patch-1 branch April 4, 2023 21:41

spier changed the title ~~Create new pattern: Support as a Group~~ Create new pattern: Group Support May 23, 2023

Provide feedback

Saved searches

Use saved searches to filter your results more quickly

Create new pattern: Group Support #527

Create new pattern: Group Support #527

rrrutledge commented Feb 27, 2023

rrrutledge commented Feb 27, 2023

jeffabailey commented Feb 28, 2023

rrrutledge commented Feb 28, 2023

lenucksi commented Mar 2, 2023

rrrutledge commented Mar 2, 2023

rrrutledge commented Mar 6, 2023

spier left a comment

spier Mar 6, 2023

spier Mar 6, 2023

rrrutledge Mar 28, 2023

spier Mar 30, 2023

rrrutledge Mar 31, 2023

spier Apr 4, 2023

spier Apr 4, 2023

spier Mar 6, 2023

rrrutledge Mar 28, 2023

spier Mar 30, 2023

rrrutledge Mar 31, 2023

jeffabailey commented Mar 7, 2023

fioddor commented Mar 15, 2023

fioddor commented Mar 15, 2023

spier commented Mar 16, 2023 •

edited

spier commented Mar 21, 2023

rrrutledge commented Mar 22, 2023

rrrutledge left a comment

rrrutledge Mar 28, 2023

rrrutledge Mar 28, 2023

spier commented Mar 30, 2023

rrrutledge commented Mar 31, 2023

spier commented Apr 1, 2023

rrrutledge commented Apr 4, 2023

spier left a comment

spier commented Apr 4, 2023

rrrutledge commented Apr 4, 2023

	* No one is actively supporting it.
	* No one is actively supporting it.
	* The company cannot assign a new maintainer to the project because ...


		## Status

		Structured


		## Status

		Structured

Create new pattern: Group Support #527

Create new pattern: Group Support #527

Conversation

rrrutledge commented Feb 27, 2023

rrrutledge commented Feb 27, 2023

jeffabailey commented Feb 28, 2023

rrrutledge commented Feb 28, 2023

lenucksi commented Mar 2, 2023

rrrutledge commented Mar 2, 2023

rrrutledge commented Mar 6, 2023

spier left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

jeffabailey commented Mar 7, 2023

fioddor commented Mar 15, 2023

fioddor commented Mar 15, 2023

spier commented Mar 16, 2023 • edited

spier commented Mar 21, 2023

rrrutledge commented Mar 22, 2023

rrrutledge left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

spier commented Mar 30, 2023

rrrutledge commented Mar 31, 2023

spier commented Apr 1, 2023

rrrutledge commented Apr 4, 2023

spier left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

spier commented Apr 4, 2023

rrrutledge commented Apr 4, 2023

spier commented Mar 16, 2023 •

edited