Remote participation #8
Replies: 4 comments 1 reply
-
|
I might be interested in participating for a few hours here and there remotely from UTC-8 - there are several proposed enhancements I'd be happy to pitch in on for design/impl (proper ExceptionGroup support, fixture control sans-name-magic, argparse usage slicing) and I've recently hit a few things in adjacent areas where I've had to roll my own something that could be useful to others in-box. No worries if there isn't a critical mass for "proper" remote setup too, though- it's tough to get the same collaborative experience with only 1-2 folks remote... |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
Remote topics and availabilityAfter thinking about how to best do this and discussing this with the venue, we got to the conclusion that it'll be a bit tricky to also get remote participants in - given we have about an 1:1 to 1:2 ratio of core maintainers and new(-ish) contributors on-site, it will probably be tricky to have remote participants integrated nicely as well. We also decided we don't want the video conference system to be running for the whole sprint, because it's a bit of a weird feeling to be live-streamed all day 🙃 Thus, my proposal would be that everyone who is interested in remote participation leaves a post in this discussion, with:
I'll then try to summarize and announce those topics on-site when the sprint starts on Monday. If someone on-site is interested in working on one of those topics, they will reach out to you, and then we can always use the meeting room system thingy for a (hopefully) rather convenient video call into the room. We have a If you want to work on your own thing, you're also most welcome to do that! I'll try to keep an eye on Discord, IRC, and incoming PRs during the week. Outside of that, I'm afraid I'll most likely not have the capacity to e.g. do longer 1:1 sessions with remote people, as I'll be quite busy with what's happening on-site. Admittedly this is all a bit experimental! I really don't know how well this will work, and as @nitzmahone said above, it's tricky to get hybrid settings right (even more so since we'll probably be 2-3 groups on-site). I suppose we'll need to try and see how it goes. @nitzmahone could you edit your post to add availability details there too? @WarrenTheRabbit @Niloth-p @jaraco can you perhaps add such a post in this discussion too? |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
Thank you for the update!
|
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
Thanks for reaching out.
|
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
|
The coherent system needs some more explanation, at first glance it triggers a gut wrench It may fit the import roots system I envision, but my initial idea on it's edge cases is giving me hives |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
-
Some people can't make it to the sprint, but might possibly be interested in remote participation. From the top of my head: @WarrenTheRabbit @jaraco and perhaps @okken @Zac-HD @nicoddemus @asottile (no pressure if this doesn't change anything for you, I just thought I'd let people know who can't make it to the sprint but might have wanted to participate).
This hasn't really been a priority for me to organize thus far, as my resources are somewhat scarce currently, and getting on-site participants finalized is the more time-critical aspect. However, Omicron (where we'll host the sprint) has WebEx meeting systems in all their meeting rooms, so it should be possible for us to get a couple of people in remotely as well.
Obviously it gets more difficult to coordinate things and also especially to mentor people in a hybrid format, but I think it'd be great as an opportunity for people to join who already know their way around pytest (at least on a basic level). I'll post more about the topic in this thread as soon as the on-site stuff is taken care of.
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
All reactions