-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 10
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
Introduction of better community recognition #30
Comments
I'm personally a fan of the KEDA badges as it's an easy way to start recognizing hard work by the community without introducing too much of hierarchy. |
Any thoughts @zroubalik @jeffhollan @ahmelsayed? |
I like a simple "formal" approach, having regular contributors in GitHub Group allows us to assing these users to issues etc. But I am open to badges as well :) |
Created #32 |
Should we push this topic @kedacore/keda-maintainers ? The adoption is growing there are some new people contributing, maybe if we move this topic, they will be more engaged and open to continue contributing 😄 |
Hi! is there any progress on this one? are we still looking for badges or memberships? |
We haven't made any progress on this yet, but I'm happy to hear what you as a contributor would expect /love? |
IMO, badges look really nice, and it's a thing that contributors can share with others (with proud I hope). Maybe create a team inside the org and invite them to the org, could be another good option to improve the feeling of being part of KEDA. But, as you said @tomkerkhove , I'd like to hear the opinion from @Ritikaa96 and maybe we can open a thread in Slack to gather people opinions too |
Let's ask people to share things here to keep things in one place, maybe? |
A t-shirt for a major contribution? 😄 |
I would go with both badges and a group, for example to join a group you need to have at least XYZ commits, or something around this. The same for badges. I think that it is great to recognize contributors. |
I think that using both, we have more flexibility. Maybe we can have 2-3 badges (IDK if it's possible) and also the groups. |
Hi @JorTurFer @tomkerkhove @zroubalik, the badges are what am looking forward to. but with that how about a scoring system or different badges for a number of contributions to the team. It will make the contributing process fun if we allocate scores to their activity and more people would like to engage. The process can look like this:
I have yet to find an open-source project supporting this system or is it even feasible, but it'll be highly encouraging to participate in this process. |
Just dropping a note that I haven't forgotten about this thread and will circle back. I think introducing badges is a simple way to recognize people's contribution, but it would need clear requirements. The simplest example would be "Scaler Contributor" for everyone who contributes a scaler along with docs and has been around to maintain it for x months. This is something simple that I can have a look at as a first step. Thoughts @zroubalik @JorTurFer? |
I agree. Maybe we can create other categories like yours, IDK, something like:
|
I created #58 to introduce our first badge and see how we proceed based on the learnings. |
Another aspect to clarify/doc - Who can trigger e2e tests and how/when do people get access to that. ie. "core contributor" |
@Ritikaa96 Is this what you are looking for in KEDA? https://github.com/dapr/community/blob/master/community-membership.md |
Still working on this though, just behind the scenes. |
Apart from the badge, I think we need a stronger outcome here. Thoughts @zroubalik / @JorTurFer ? |
Agree! |
Honestly, IDK what more we could give the contributors more than badges and adding them to the org if they are recurrent. I mean, we don't have any bounty budget or so |
I think that these new role proposal can be considered too as community recognition #107 |
As KEDA grows, so does its community and we should consider introducing a community ladder to give credit to those who keep on contributing day-in, day-out (regardless of contribution type).
There are a few options we can consider:
This idea was initiated due to #29 which is a valid question.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: