Make de-RSE e.V. more functionable and future proof by improving bus factors

[StephanJanosch]

de-RSE e.V. runs some IT infrastructure. Some of it is still coupled to individual persons.

As nobody found time in the past years, let's use this breakout to

• review current situation
  • domain
  • mailing list
  • website
  • pad
  • file synching
  • event planning
• create action items to increase bus factors
• improve collaboration via new tools
  • openslide instance?

The board has already prepared some notes and would like to go forward in a more robust fashion.

[pancetta]

Hi @StephanJanosch, excellent timing, I'd say. Could you provide more input for this proposal? How would you organize such a session, who should attend? Also, please motivate more people (e.g. from the board) to contribute to this. At some point we need a short abstract for this, too.

[StephanJanosch]

I know @knarrff should be there.
@Chilipp might habe opinions.
Anybody involved in NFDI could also join. e.g @florianthiery

• I would start with a SWOT analysis and review existing documents and plans collaboratively.
• Then a desired landscape would be mapped out (plan)
• creation of implementation steps
• if time permits, execution of implementation steps to get going already

[StephanJanosch]

@HeidiSeibold would be a good candidate for contributing to PR related issues. We should not take Twitter for granted. But PR has lower priority. The basics need to be covered first

[Chilipp]

Moin! Yes, as mentioned in rocket chat I can recommend a cloudron hosting as VPS via windcloud.de. you can easily install and maintain multiple Webservices, including email, matrix, mastodon, nextcloud, codimd, rocket chat, Mattermost, jitsi, newsletter, GitHub pages, gitlab and so on. Most of it can be connected via single-signon. Since version 7 multiple cloudron servers can also be connected if one has a more resource hungry application (such as gitlab or jitsi) but I did not try this so far. Mailinglists are unfortunately not straight-forward and would require some coding (that is manageable though).

I am using it privately. In my job I am dealing a lot with server maintenance kubernetes and deployment and here we are of course not using cloudron. But such an infrastructure is hard and expensive to maintain and from my perspective cloudron would work very well for an organization like de-rse

[HeidiSeibold]

Would #13 fall under the same umbrella? What do you think @StephanJanosch?

[HeidiSeibold]

Maybe it might make sense to split this breakout up into several topics?

[StephanJanosch]

Yes #13 would fall there as well.

Splitting up according to primary function could make sense:

• events
• community/networking
• admin

[pancetta]

OK, sounds good. How many slots (90 minutes each) would you think are appropriate here, then?

[sdruskat]

Moin! Yes, as mentioned in rocket chat I can recommend a cloudron hosting as VPS via windcloud.de. you can easily install and maintain multiple Webservices, including email, matrix, mastodon, nextcloud, codimd, rocket chat, Mattermost, jitsi, newsletter, GitHub pages, gitlab and so on. Most of it can be connected via single-signon. Since version 7 multiple cloudron servers can also be connected if one has a more resource hungry application (such as gitlab or jitsi) but I did not try this so far. Mailinglists are unfortunately not straight-forward and would require some coding (that is manageable though).

This is probably scope creep, but perhaps talking about an incentivized extended board structure (e.g. along the lines of the Trustees for the Society of RSE in the UK (detailed at the bottom of this page)) would help administering this infrastructure. Should such an extension of the board structure and the respective incentives be part of this discussion?

If this was the case, I'd change the title of this session to "Make de-RSE more future proof and improve existing bus factors" ;).

[sdruskat]

This is probably scope creep, but perhaps talking about an incentivized extended board structure (e.g. along the lines of the Trustees for the Society of RSE in the UK (detailed at the bottom of this page)) would help administering this infrastructure. Should such an extension of the board structure and the respective incentives be part of this discussion?

If this was the case, I'd change the title of this session to "Make de-RSE more future proof and improve existing bus factors" ;).

@StephanJanosch What do you think re this suggestion? Should we couple these discussions? Or should I create a different issue?

[StephanJanosch]

I like that @sdruskat ! This goes also also in hand with the idea of working groups, which SocRSE kind of shows at the mentioned URL. I just saw, that have working groups and fixed topics (like all time relevant)

[sdruskat]

I like that @sdruskat ! This goes also also in hand with the idea of working groups, which SocRSE kind of shows at the mentioned URL. I just saw, that have working groups and fixed topics (like all time relevant)

Nice one, I'll rename the issue and draft an abstract here.

[knarrff]

I know @knarrff should be there.

+1

[sdruskat]

Draft below. Please review, @StephanJanosch, @knarrff, @Chilipp, @HeidiSeibold and others.

de-RSE e.V. - Society for Research Software is the community-run scholarly society for Research Software Engineering and research software engineers in Germany. It has been modeled as a national charitable association and is governed by a board. The structure of the board reflects that of a typical German association, i.e., it has 6 seats: 2 chairs, 2 treasurers, 2 secretaries.

It is in the remit of de-RSE to provide technical infrastructure for the community, including a messageboard, mailing list, community call, website, as well as templates for other groups. It publicizes and communicates topics relevant for the community (job ads, events, relevant research, etc.) and further organizes national RSE events, e.g., an (annual) conference of research software engineering in Germany (deRSE19, rSE22, deRSE23), and the de-RSE unconference 2023. Furthermore, de-RSE develops positions and policies w.r.t. research software engineering in Germany, cooperates with relevant initiatives (Gesellschaft für Informatik, NFDI, German Reproducibility Network, etc.), and lobbies for Research Software Engineering.

For the first years of its existence, much of these activities have been initiated by the board, and have been supported by the community on a per-event or ad-hoc basis. While this modus operandi has proved bootstrappable to get started, and safeguarded the existence of a continuum over the pandemic, it is not future proof: the community is growing, the tasks expanding, and a board of six individuals with day jobs and other responsibilities cannot sustainably stay on top of everything while running the society and its day-to-day business.

In this breakout group, we will discuss an extended model of governance for the society that is compatible with the charter while at the same time distributing tasks over more shoulders, thereby reducing the generally very low bus factors. We will also receive input from the board w.r.t. to existing technical infrastructure and how it shuold be developed to better support the community within the constraints of the society's finances, capabilities, and legal framework. The developed model will be put to the board and the community for discussion, decision and implementation at the earliest possible time. Such a new governance will strengthen de-RSE and the community to become more able to act on the tasks at hand, and the challenges of the future.

As a starting point, we will present a similar model, employed by the Society for Research Software Engineering in the UK.¹
Very briefly, the SocRSE has a board of (potentially 12, currently 11) trustees. All trustees have different tasks, distributed over 8 "committees": 1) Governance; 2) Communications & Publicity; 3) Conference and Events; 4) Equality, Diversity, Inclusion and Accessibility; 5) Finance; 6) Web & Infrastructure; 7) Membership; 8) Code of Conduct. All trustees are expected to work in multiple groups, depending on their preference.
In addition, there are "official" Working Groups for "structural" issues (e.g., for mentoring programme and regional RSE groups) and community-run Special Interest Groups that work on specific topics. SocRSE supports these groups with infrastructure at different levels.

A similar structure could be adopted for de-RSE, thereby multiplying the number of shoulders the society rests upon. In this context, it is key to define incentives for becoming part of this new governance structure, i.e., how the work will be supported, and the personal advantages of doing the work.

Footnotes

1. Note to co-organizers: Should we invite someone from SocRSE? And/or, @ClaireWyatt, will you be present at the unconference and willing to give us a v brief intro to the Soc's governance? ↩

[sdruskat]

In terms of slots, I think we'd need at least 3:

1. Intros, current model & infrastructure presentation, example model presentation (SocRSE), organization in topics and breakout groups
2. Work in breakout groups
3. Reporting back, summarization & harmonization of the model proposal, wrap-up.

[HeidiSeibold]

I added a label to this break-out. Can you check if you feel it is appropriate and change it if not? Let me know if you have any questions.

[sdruskat]

@StephanJanosch @knarrff @Chilipp Any comments on the draft?

[Chilipp]

@StephanJanosch @knarrff @Chilipp Any comments on the draft?

Ah sorry . No, looks good to me! 👍

[HeidiSeibold]

So what I need from you to be able to make a decision on this breakout are the following infos:

Who could be interested in collaborating on this?

@StephanJanosch
@knarrff
@Chilipp
@HeidiSeibold
@sdruskat
@florianthiery

anybody else?

How much time do you need for this?

(90 minutes or multiples thereof)

Abstract

See #8 (comment) ?

[sdruskat]

Who could be interested in collaborating on this?

@StephanJanosch @knarrff @Chilipp @HeidiSeibold @sdruskat @florianthiery

anybody else?

I think all participants who are or want to become de-RSE could (perhaps even should?) be interested in this. Should others add their handles here?

How much time do you need for this?

(90 minutes or multiples thereof)

270 mins. I think see (#8 (comment))

Abstract

See #8 (comment) ?

Yes, I think that could be the abstract, unless there are more comments from other proposers?

Thanks @HeidiSeibold!

[led02]

Unfortunately, your abstract is way to long for the current set-up... (>> 120 words)

[Chilipp]

what about this?

de-RSE e.V. is a community-run scholarly society in Germany for Research Software Engineering and research software engineers. Currently, the society is governed by a board consisting of 6 individuals with various roles. However, as the community grows and the tasks expand, the board alone cannot sustainably manage all responsibilities. To address this, a discussion will be held to explore an extended governance model that distributes tasks and reduces reliance on a few individuals. The model employed by the Society for Research Software Engineering in the UK will serve as a starting point. The proposed model includes trustees with different tasks assigned to committees, working groups for structural and infrastructural issues, and community-run special interest groups.

it has 115 words (btw, 120 words is waaayy to low 😉)

[led02]

Yes, 120 is to low. It was also only a note to initiate discussion about what we want to publish on the conference website.Hence: Thank you for your input, but for now don’t bother further until you are explicitly asked for it 😀Von meinem iPhone gesendetAm 15.06.2023 um 13:15 schrieb Philipp S. Sommer ***@***.***>: what about this? de-RSE e.V. is a community-run scholarly society in Germany for Research Software Engineering and research software engineers. Currently, the society is governed by a board consisting of 6 individuals with various roles. However, as the community grows and the tasks expand, the board alone cannot sustainably manage all responsibilities. To address this, a discussion will be held to explore an extended governance model that distributes tasks and reduces reliance on a few individuals. The model employed by the Society for Research Software Engineering in the UK will serve as a starting point. The proposed model includes trustees with different tasks assigned to committees, working groups for structural and infrastructural issues, and community-run special interest groups. it has 115 words (btw, 120 words is waaayy to low 😉) —Reply to this email directly, view it on GitHub, or unsubscribe.You are receiving this because you commented.Message ID: ***@***.***>

[pancetta]

Hi! I just added the "Accepted" label to this BOS. Welcome on board!
https://un-derse23.sciencesconf.org/program

[pancetta]

Hi all, the unconference is only 3 weeks away now! On day 1 there will be a breakout blitz where all session organizers should advertise their sessions. 1 minute, 1 slide, let people know what you intend to do. Please prepare this slide in advance and add it right here (PDF please), by September 20.

[sdruskat]

➡️ de-RSE.pdf
@pancetta

[pancetta]

Here is the main hub for taking notes: https://pad.gwdg.de/FkFJTslFQhq-UF3Es6q4rw#

[sdruskat]

I now won't be able to attend the unconference, hence this session would have to be initiated by someone else.
@StephanJanosch, @knarrff?
I can share what I had prepared (which wasn't much, seeing that this is an unconference).

[StephanJanosch]

I assumed, that I am the one, who gets the session started. sorry you can't be here @sdruskat

[StephanJanosch]

And somehow I did not saw that very long intro by @sdruskat . Don't know why. Very well done! #8 (comment)

[StephanJanosch]

I also want to apologise for a typo in #8 (comment), where I miswrote, that I am glad that @sdruskat cannot be in Jena. The opposite is true. Because Github sends out mails, this comment is about communicating change. The typo has fixed

[pancetta]

Have fun with the session(s)! Please add the pad you're using also here for people to see what you did.

If possible, please prepare a 1 minute wrap up of your session for the farewell session on Thursday afternoon! What did you do in the session, how would you like to continue, how can people contribute after the unconference etc. We'll go through the blitz slides again one by one as in the blitz session.

[pancetta]

Pad is here: https://pad.gwdg.de/gSiVY0M2S16GQxWg34wzfA?both