 Hi, everybody. I am Matthew Miller, and this is a Fedora Council video meeting. So the Fedora Council, as you probably know from listening to the interest of these videos before or otherwise, is Fedora's top-level leadership and governance body. As Fedora Project Leader, I am the chair. We have some other Fedora Project Leadership folks here on the Fedora Council and otherwise, and some random awesome contributors, random in the positive way. That sounded negative. I didn't mean it like that. Lots of people here today. Because Akash, who is the lead for Websites and Apps revamp objective and on the Fedora Council, is presenting a result of a community survey that that team did, and it seems like interesting information for the Council and hopefully for everybody. So this is Akash. Take it away. This is the Fedora Websites and Apps team of, you know, the revamp has been going for around one and a half years now. And earlier, the team used to consist of around a handful of people. So it was really difficult to coordinate efforts around maintaining our websites, our web applications, that our community folks as well as the users of Fedora Linux make use of. So we came together as a team. We decided to maintain our websites in the text tag. That is a lot more relevant to these days and have a process around doing these things. So that even when I'm not around, even when the people who have established this initiative, the way we call the objectives these days, community initiatives, even when they are not around, the process should go on. And there should always be someone who would be willing to take this thing up because the things are documented and well in place. We ran a community survey in 2022 to understand how successful we had been in our efforts, both in terms of, you know, developing our websites, maintaining them as well as reaching out to the community and making them feel empowered so that even they can participate. I'm Akash Deepthar. I am the objective lead for this community initiative for the revamp websites and apps team. And I work in that had community platform engineering team as a software engineer. Moving on to the next slide. Right. So the survey that we ran last year had a total of 22 responses out of which nine were complete responses and 13 were incomplete. These responses constitute, go ahead Matthew. Yep, it's the interrupting. Can I ask how is this promoted? That doesn't seem like very many responses. Would you expect it or should there have been more? Should we have promoted it better? Yeah, we could have done a lot of a better job at promoting it better. Maybe had some banners like we do for Nest, for Flock, you know, stuff like that, which we did not quite, you know, at that time we were just getting started with the federal websites three points of initiative. So we were really having a hard time trying to find folks and the best practice, the real thing we would really not want to burden people with more tasks than they already had. So not a lot of responses, but I think it's a good start. And we plan on having more and more responses as we go on in the next year doing this community survey as an annual thing. I think increase in responses is an interesting metric for next year. We'll see. Exactly. Right. So, you know, this set of response consists of both folks who are participating in the federal websites and apps team, as well as those who know that this thing exists, but they are not quite a part of it. But they do know what kind of work we do. Moving on to the next slide. Right. So the folks who contribute to the team around 60% of folks who answered the survey, they believed that participating is easy in the team. And, you know, they have something to do and something tangible to work on, while 40% of the people who answered the survey, they believe that there are things that we can do better in helping them streamline the process of participating. And well, 60% they do not participate as they are, and they are not sure where to start from. That's one of the blockers because they can't quite contribute and they don't know where to start from. And 20% do not participate because there is no big fixes or, you know, something big to be a part of just maintenance. So they are like, nah, we won't participate just yet. And then the 20% they do not participate because there is too many interesting projects, subgroups, takes to be a part of within the community. It's a good problem to have, but not a good problem when we see it from a federal websites and apps perspective. So we asked a more subjective of a question as to what do people think about the team. And here's what we got to know. One of the people that let us know that they have an experience in React, but they, you know, they kind of look forward to our implementation of our applications in view as well as the things that we do for our website 3.0 in Nuxt. They are a user and they think that just because they are aware of a tech stack, they would really want to see the project try and become a part of the contributors team. The next thing is there's a person who really appreciates our communication style as well as our nature being really open. And well, they have some gripes with the packaging team, but I guess that's a compliment of some kind to us. Right. So now a bit more specific to what the engineering team and does and how it was received by the community. We listed down the significant things that the engineering part of the team was a part of. And we asked, you know, we had a scale from zero to 10 with 10 being very, very, really satisfied with what we do and zero being not at all. And for the work that we did on the Meepot Logs application, we have 92.92% approval with 310s, 1.9s, 1.7s. Then we have 85% approval for the live preview generation. We implemented a CI in the tech year space in the previous websites to make sure that people whenever they make a pull request, they get a live preview of how it would look like once it gets deployed on the staging. So that was met with an 85% approval by the folks who took the survey. And the next thing was the one script approach to build every websites that was met with an 81.67% of approval. Do we know what people didn't like? We would get to know about how much they liked stuff because we actually served them on a platter. We asked them that, you know, we did this. Do you like it or not? So the person teaches here actually mentioned how much they liked it. So you would see that there are actually things that are less liked as compared to there are things that are like more as compared to, you know, see this thing. The collaboration with the Fedora Design and Infry is something that they liked a lot as compared to our approaches towards making our things visible on Fedora discussions. So we didn't have questions about what people didn't like, but yeah, it actually makes us want to have those things, right? A lot more objective, subjective question that, yeah, is there something that you don't like us to do or would want us to do better? Something of that kind. Right. So I hope that answers your question, Matthew. Yeah, I guess I would like to know a little bit more about the details, like who doesn't want there to be one script to build it, but that's okay. We can Yeah, you know, just because the survey was a bit anonymous in nature, we really tried to make sure that they expressed their opinions and not who they are or where that opinion is coming from. But yeah, I mean, it would really help as to why they don't like it or why they have scored it less, something of that kind. It would really help us to improve rather than just knowing that, yeah, they just did not like it without any reason behind why they did not like it. Right. So coming back to the approvals for the Websites 3.0 initiative, it has had a 90% approval within the community folks who have taken the survey. And like I mentioned, the collaboration between the Fedora, with the Fedora Design Team as well as the Fedora Infra team, with the Fedora Websites and Apps team, because you know, it's a multi-disciplinary team. We have folks from the design, the folks who assist admins and the folks who are web developers, everyone in one bunch. So 9 to 0.86, it's one of the most positive approvals that we have had, which essentially makes us want to collaborate with these teams as well as teams like Fedora Marketing as much as we can in the coming times. Then the conversations and updates on Fedora discussions, 78.34. We're trying to improve upon it. We're trying to post as much progress as we can on Fedora discussions, especially when it comes to mockups. Emma Kidney, who has been one of the designers for the Fedora Websites 3.0 initiative has been going out there, putting the mockups over there, explaining as to what design stories is for made and why. So we're trying to improve on that as we go forward and not just the design mockups, but also the processes that we take apart of to make sure that this team runs smoothly. We would also want to make sure that people get involved in those things too. So talking about the field, yeah, the slide changed now, perfect. The field of contribution that the folks are most interested in. A big majority of the survey takers are interested in frontend, 40% of them, translation 20%, testing 20%, design 10, and others is 10. We'll get to what others means in the next slide, but this is an all-inclusive thing. So people who are interested in frontend, they are also given a choice if they want to be a part of translation as well or not. It seems that frontend has really taken off. People really like to, this Fedora Websites and Apps team is really becoming a place for web developers to actually put their skills into use to make sure that they build and maintain the community facing websites and applications. Documentation, unfortunately, is a field that got 0%. It just so seems like that no one is interested in maintaining documentation, which is unfortunate, but it's kind of one of the important things that we take into account when we are maintaining this community of ours, trying to make sure that we have all the processes in place so that people who come after us or newcomers, well, they can actually go and read up from documentation and get started instead of waiting for someone else in a different time zone for their son to rise before they can actually do something. So we could really use some more help in documentation because the lack of interest is very visible, but it's one of the prime focuses. So I think this is something that we would work towards in the coming times. And the 10% which happens to be the others, they mentioned that they are willing to help with the fields of infrastructure and fixing of bugs, typos on the websites, something of that kind. So we appreciate all help, all kind of contributions over here. And this total doughnuts chart is 10 responses and out of 22 people, only 10 responded this in completion while 12 people, they decided not to respond. Just a quick clarifying question on that last slide, just to help put that into perspective. What is the active number of contributors on the team look like today? Or what would you gauge the team size in comparison to the responses that came in on this survey? Well, the responses that we have had in the survey, if I were to count a total number of them not to complete or incomplete ones is 22. That team size is definitely around 30. There are a number of people who will go and attend to their daily lives or not be a part of the community for some time, but they always come back after around a couple of quarters. So I would still consider them in this count. And yeah, around 30 and around 50% or in the first slide I actually mentioned how many of these survey takers are from within the team. And let me actually go back to the first slide too. Yeah, I say, I guess it's somewhere around 60% who are a part of the team. So the 40% are those who are participating as survey takers or as someone who are part of the community, the wider federal project community who are aware of federal websites and apps team, but they are not participating actively. Helpful. I just wanted to help put that number. Thanks. Perfect. Thanks. Right. Say, again, a more subjective question to better understand what else are people satisfied with the thing that the team is doing, apart from the ones that we mentioned before. And we gazed them with numbers this time around. We are being really specific as to what people would want to mention explicitly. And here we get to know that, you know, the engagement that we have had with the additions, working groups and expecting handling expectations for the complexities that are necessary for an excellent PR. That is something that the people are really satisfied with. And it's just one survey taker out of a total of 22 who decided to answer this question. I guess it's a subjective question. The subjective questions do not have a lot of takers. But then again, if we become a lot more visible with what we do, maybe we will. Right. So now that we are done with the engineering side of things, as well as the more explicitly asked, what are you happy with with the engineering side of things? Let's move on to the council objectives progress. How are people happy with it or not satisfied with it? And what would they like us to change? So, the overall communication that we have had with the community so far has gotten an approval of 84%. The reworked documentation that we are trying to put into place to make sure that people find it easy to contribute to the team has made an approval of 80%. And the active participation with the mentor projects program, be it an outreach or GSOC with our websites, as well as our applications, both in terms of the design, as well as just having web developers to participate with us has been met with 96% of approval. And the efforts that we have put to make sure that we set up the banners for community promotions, be it for community surveys or for Fedora Nest or release parties, whenever those happen was met with 90% approval. The frequent workshops that we do during, well, Fedora Nest or release parties around front end design, around the technologies that we make use of and how to contribute to them was met by 85% approval. And the objective updates that we really try to make sure that every single community, even that happens, we try to make sure that we express them, we let community know what we have been up to, has been met with a 96% approval. I have a question for you on this slide. I'm just trying to figure out how those percentages map to the responses. Like for the last one, I understand five people answered it and 17 didn't. With three 10s and two 9s, that sounds like 100% approval to me, or is there some sort of weighting that you did on these? I'm trying to make math work out. Well, let's just say that the total would be 50, because if everyone would have approved us with 100%, with 10s, that would be 50. And if we have two 9s, then that is, well, two less. So that would amount to 96%. Okay, I see what you're doing. It's a bit hit or miss, but we are trying to make the best happen with the responses that we've gotten so far. And we have also made it really clear around what number of responses are complete, and the number of responses that are totally unattempted. Moving on to the next slide. I also have a question as well on the last one. I know you mentioned it briefly, but on that part around effort to set up community banners, could you describe that one a little bit more to me? Like what that effort looked like? Right, so during the time whenever we used to run Fedora community surveys, and what we do it now as well, what do I mean when we use it? Whenever we run community surveys, whenever we have Fedora Nest or any event of that kind that requires promotion within the community. What we do is we interact with the folks in the infrastructure team to make sure that we set up those banners up with the discourse folks, I mean, as well as with the wiki as well. And with every website that we have, we set these things up to let people know and to direct them to the right place. This really helps to point people to the right place and get us to having as much survey results for the actual annual community survey as much as we can. It's a contrary thing that we did not use this for ourselves when we could, but like I mentioned we were busy at that point in time. So the team was really instrumental in making sure that these community surveys and these community events were met by a large audience in an organic manner of course. Right, so moving on to the next slide. How familiar is the creative community with the team and what it does? So in the total of 10 responses that we've gotten so far out of 12, 22, 12 did not respond, 30% are fully aware, 0% mostly aware, 50% moderately, little aware is 10% and not aware is 10% person. So 10% of the people who attempted the survey don't know what the team has been doing, we'd really like to change that and 50% of the survey takers are moderately aware of the projects that we undertake, which essentially means that they are aware of this team called websites and apps. So we would really like to make sure that these 15% people, they are changed into contributors potentially speaking in coming times now that they know the kind of work that we do and they are aware of the process that we undertake. Also a question, was there, I know there was there were some steps taken to make sure that identities were preserved and people who the survey takers were wouldn't be revealed, but did you do any connection or mapping to the people who were on the team who answered this question versus the people in that earlier question who weren't involved with the team and how that group of people knew about the work? Does that question make sense? It does, right. So it kind of ties down to how we publicized our survey. So we've made a blog post in the com blog around updates that we have been doing as a community. It included the stuff that we have done with the Federal Websites 3.0 as well as the things that we do in our applications, maintaining them in the state that they are in, as well as designing them and rewriting them as we see fit. In that com blog, we added it as a link that this is what we did, but now we kind of want you to tell us how we can do it better. So this is how it was publicized to the folks. So it was publicized in the com blog, people irrespective of them being in the part of the team, they got to know about it. And there's literally no way that I can actually tell how many of these sponsors have come within the team, because, well, asking for a name was one of the fields that we did not have. Yeah, let me clarify. It was that response that you had in the very beginning where people answered whether they were a part of the team or whether they were just like an observer or a contributor somewhere else. I was just wondering if you looked at that subset of people in the survey results, so the people who say they weren't involved with the team, how did that group of people answer this question? Right, so that would require us to have a conditional question of some kind, maybe caching that, yeah, they are not a part of the team. So let's ask them as to what made it difficult for them to actually make them not be a part of the team. So if I were to go back to the first slide, 40% who actually answered this question, we went ahead with the conditional statement and asked them as to why or how is it difficult for them to participate? Why is it not easy for them? And these are the responses that we have gotten from these 40%. And it's a round off, but I would like to assume that these 40% are the people who do not partake in the team. Then again, I would take that with a grain of salt because I'm not sure. There might be people who are in the team, but they are finding a better way to contribute. That is why they think it's difficult. But from the answers that I've gotten so far in the bottom, I would like to assume that these 40% are not a part of the team. Okay. Maybe for next time too, because I assume this was on Lyme Survey. Is that correct? Yeah. Yeah. So I was just playing around with Lyme Survey in the last week too, and I was doing some stuff with the keycap giveaway, and I was exploring how you can look at the responses and group them based on like, say the people who answered this question in some way, how could you look at just this group of this subsets responses? So maybe that's something you and I could work on together next time, as I'm also trying to learn Lyme Survey a little bit better and trying to wrangle that side of things. Maybe that would be a helpful way to build on this and try to do some deeper analysis on some of this data too for both this survey, but also maybe with the wider community surveys that we do. I'd be really interested to do some like the conditional analysis, I guess. But yeah, I was just curious. I wanted that was in scope for this. Right. I mean, it would totally help us to, you know, when we'll actually end up having more responses in the coming time, it would become really crucial to vet those responses and to understand as to why someone responded in a way they did. Like Matthew mentioned, that if someone responded with a lesser rating for a certain thing that we worked on, why did that happen? So that would really be helpful not just for this team, but for the wider community survey. Going back to, yeah, there it is. Well, let's ask ourselves some subjective questions around what the community feels like around the frequency of us sharing updates with them. So the responses that we have gotten so far, these are the ones that we gave them an option for and the ones down below are, well, others, you know, so they could actually take it to them to write down what kind of frequency they're looking for. So the third, you know, two survey takers, so 33% 33.34% people actually thought that, you know, having it during the federal release parties is enough. And zero percent approval for the ones who mentioned that the Nest with Fedora, you know, having updates presented at that point in time is enough. And a majority of people, 66.67, telling that we need it at both point in time during Fedora-Linus release parties, as well as in Nest with Fedora, something that we have been doing so far, not with just the updates, but with, you know, the community workshops as well. So in both these events, we have been really trying to push for not the updates, but both updates as well as the workshops, so that people will not only get a taste of what we do, but we'll also have a way to be a part of it. And zero percent approval around more frequent sharing of updates on ComBlog. And the subjective responses constitute of just publish updates, so pull can be done. We'll need to subscribe to appropriate discourse topic, which gives us a way to actually make use of discussions, FPO more often with the website's topic, which we have been doing so far, but I guess there's always a scope for improvement. And then there's finally one subjective response, which tells once in a month, right? So now that we're done with the council, you know, the council's work and the community's perspective about the council objective's work, not the council's work, the council objectives work. Let's talk a bit about how the community perceived the mindset representation of the team. Were they even aware about its existence, the work they did, and if they were, what kind of perspective they have towards it. So a total of 66.67 approval we have for the awareness of the committee and its representative. So the number of people who took the poll, around a third, two thirds of people are aware about the existence of the mindset committee. And the fact that we have a representative of our team in the mindset committee. The second thing is the desire to have more fun collaborative team activities, 80% approval, clearly more than workshops and something which is a lot more towards bonding within the team members as well as within the community members that they could feel a lot more empowered, a lot more welcome to be a part of this team. And then the desire to organize more community workshops. They liked it. So they want more of it. 100% approval when it comes to that. Also clarifying question on this one. For those second two questions, you explain how that maps back to the original question. I'm just trying to understand like how people are thinking around mind share and like how those two questions specifically tie into reception of the mind share representation of the team. Right. So the way I see it, the mind share representative of our team has been really instrumental in making sure that we bridge the gap between that our team as well as the wider fit or project community, right? Trying to onboard contributors if it were to be like that, organize workshops and giving updates every now and then to the mind share updates, you know, published in the calm block stuff like that so that people are not only aware about what's happening, they would actually feel like joining it. It's one of that way that was helpful in understanding that first they're aware of its existence. Second, they are aware about what they do and if they want to have more of what they do or not. So the second and third question is of course about what they do. Conducting more fun activities for team bonding and workshops. If they want more of that and that is what the approval rating tells you about. So I guess like seeing mind share as the connection piece to enabling the team to do these kinds of things. Well, let's just say that it's not just enabling the team itself. I mean we could have workshops or team activities internally. No problems with that. I could conduct it. Franchoa could conduct it. Emma could conduct it. Ashton could conduct it. No problem. We really want to make sure that the community is also in on this, right? So if there is a workshop that's happening, we really want to make sure that the community is also a part of it so that they could, if they want to, become contributors in the team and help us with what work that we have. So that is the piece of the puzzle that the mind share representative helps us to solve. Right. So now that we have gotten around the answers that we've gotten from the survey takers, here is a list of things that we have been doing so far and we want to continue then we want to maintain the status four on these things. So when it comes to engineering, it is continuing to developing and maintaining our web applications like we do right now. People are happy with it. So we'll just continue doing so and keeping up with the federal websites, three points here, design and development, reaching out to the people with the, you know, asking them for the feedback and asking them how we can do things better. Collaborating with a design and infra team, as well as with marketing as we go forward, as well as the work groups, the six for which we are designing our websites and maintaining the CI pipelines for easing the development. Then as a part of council objective, we want to make sure that we participate in more mentorship related programs. This is not just to help us with the work that we do, but to also on board more contributors in the team, as well as in the community in the general. Who knows after spending six months or three months in the internship, people might want to become packages that would be a win for both the team as well as for the community in general. Then helping with promoting events and surveys as and when they come setting up the banners like we mentioned before and providing updates from the team in federal community events like next, of course, block now that it's happening and release parties. Coordinating running these various workshops from the team, so that, you know, the community is a part of it and they would be feeling empowered to be a part of this team. And from the mindset point of view, who actually the last point is tying into the mindset point of view, organizing more community bound workshop and then running more team bound collaborating activities so that we actually have a greater sense of friendship within the team, which happens to be one of the foundations of Fedora. So these are the things in the next slide that we plan on improving upon. In the engineering point of view, we would really want to make a better job at facilitating a local, a better local development environment. The one that we have right now is workable, but with the rewrites that we are having right now, especially the Fedora website 3.0 and in the coming batches rewrite, we are really trying to make sure that the bills that we have in the production is reproducible in the local so they don't really have to you know, go through a lot of documentation that is spread across multiple places, but rather have it in the repository itself or at best in the Fedora website's official documentation. And that would help them to create a better local development environment and in turn help them contribute in a better way. And then posting more elaborate and frequent updates on forums about the stuff that we have been doing so now. Be it about this thing around engineering, around infrastructure, anything that would interest our community members and that would make them want to be a part of it. We'd like to go out in the open and discuss FPO in other places as well like HOM blog and talk about those things. In terms of the council objective, working towards, you know, enabling a more active communication, a connection with the community and elaborating on a documentation with more topics to make sure that, you know, we have the processes in place. And if there's something that could lead to confusion that could lead to people reaching out to others frequently, then we would want to have that thing documented too. And from the mindset perspective, being a point of contact for communication as well as for assistance. And well, that's about it around what responses that we have gotten so far and what we plan on doing with those responses, how we plan on improving. These are the people that we're thankful to. Emma, thank you so much for helping us manage the survey. Ripple and Marie as well, because I'm someone who knew nothing about the line service, so it really helped to get context from them. Joshua provided me with the engineering questionnaire, Ashlyn with the Fedora of Sites 3.0 questionnaire and Onurath with the mind share representation questionnaire. So thank you, folks. And the folks that I did not mention here, but are still instrumental in making the team what it is right now. So thanks to them as well. Yeah, so questions. I have, let me let anybody else go first on any questions on the survey itself. I've got a bigger level question. I've just got I've got a couple, but I'll just start with one and pass to Matthew first. I just want to say nice presentation and kudos to all the people who were involved in pulling this together. I definitely think this is the kind of thing we should be doing more of in the community because getting these and probably not just doing more of it but even increasing the frequency or finding that right balance of getting this feedback, because it's I think really important with many open source projects like getting that feedback and engagement can help guide you before you go super deep on any one particular thing and making sure that you're aligned with what the community is also hoping for. So my first question here and then I'll pass to Matthew. So I saw a lot of like the what the team was recognized for doing well and things that they could be improving on. I was wondering is there something that the websites and apps team feel like they should be doing less of kind of thinking of that start stop continue framework? Is there something that from the survey results you felt like maybe isn't connecting to people or maybe something that could be could be done less of? When you mentioned of that, I don't think we have had any question of that kind though it actually provides us with an interesting perspective about asking questions. Maybe we would want to include something of that kind in the next survey. But the main focus of our survey was to understand what we are doing, how we can do it better and what we could probably do more. So trying to understand if people like what we do or not. So we're kind of serving them on a plan instead of asking them if they want it or not and then asking them how much they like it. The approvals is fine, but it really begs us to ask that question if there's something that we could do less of and that is something that the survey really does not answer. We didn't have any question of that kind. It might be good to have some more open-ended things in the next survey. Oh no, we did actually have some new questions of open-ended kind that asked about the less of. But I guess it really helps to provide them with some options to begin with. Just because there were a lot open-ended and there were a lot of questions that were open-ended that were not even listed in this slide deck. But just because we had a total of zero responses in those questions, I didn't feel like listing them. Like Justin mentioned, we had those questions. It's just that maybe we would want to have something to be served on a platter, you know, some options to go around with and then probably leave it for them to decide that maybe if these options are not satisfying what you want to convey, what is it that you want to convey? Maybe that would make them want to attempt that question more instead of just leaving them with a big text box, if that makes sense. Feel your screen share here. All right, so do you want to turn the screen share off, Matthew? I think I can take it from you as the moderator. It's going to be amazing. Oh, good. Making me choose many times to get to the same thing. Do we see what I'm sharing now? Yes. Okay. Right. So this is the logic model for this objective here. And you talked to them about where you are and where you're going on things. When do we declare the subjective done? I'm looking at the vision here that has an active, engaged team that takes care of our main websites and all of our various community web apps. New folks who show up with an interesting code contributions, find this an easy place to jump in. Members of the team are empowered to do their work they're interested in or connected to other parts of the project related to getting things done. I would call us there, actually. I would say mission accomplished or vision accomplished. What do you think? Well, having an insider perspective, I think that we still have some parts to go where it comes to our applications. Our websites, we are doing an incredible job. If I may say so far within the team, I know it does not count, but the team has been doing a great job in communicating with the infrared team, with the design team, with the marketing really open to have this cross team collaboration. When it comes to our applications, things become a bit complicated. We have our applications. We have a group of them, by the way, that interact with other applications that are not in our remit. It requires them to reach out to folks, maybe break some stuff on the way, and try to make sure that things work. I would say that we are not quite there yet. I would really like to make use of the Fedora badges rewrite. I actually dragged that to our remit. I told you what badges won't stay as a different thing. It's a Fedora websites and apps initiative, and we would really want to take care of that. With badges, which happens to be a system having multiple projects, it's not just one project, but an election project. That is what we'd like to make use of to make sure that the community feels really empowered to interact with these applications. If it requires them to break them, of course they prefer not to, but they should really feel like reaching out to the infrared team and become a part of it instead of just having a realization that maybe it's something that a paid team is there to handle. Once badges is done, as a part of the websites and apps team, I would really feel like the team would have reached that point in time where they feel empowered to have that connection. I do want to push back on that a little bit because the goal of this is to revamp the team, not to revamp all of the websites because there's an infinite amount of websites work to do, and it will never be done because it's software. From the summary as part of the initiative proposal, I agree with Matthew. It reads to me it's basically done at this point. The team is thriving and healthy and can take on the new work. I would like to do better about saying, hey, let's celebrate our accomplished initiatives. It's done, and move on to another thing. Possibly badges itself could be an initiative. I'm not sure what the proper way to do that is, but I also hear what you're saying is that there's part of the mission that doesn't feel done. It is the apps thing and that having an example app go a little further would be a part of it. We don't necessarily have to decide this right now, but something us to think about, Ben, as program manager, this is a program thing. What do you think? I think with the release coming up and revamp the redone websites as targeted for alignment with the final release, that seems like a good time to put a bow on this specific objective. Maybe a follow-on objective could be appropriate for if there's more things that need to be done. I think badges sounds like a project within the websites and apps team, unless there are certain things where the council could really step in and help on an active ongoing basis. To me, this seems like a pretty successful initiative that's ready to wrap up. We're not trying to kick you off the council, Akash, that's nothing. Actually, Matthew, you get my point properly. We're trying to make sure that bad is as used as an example to make sure that people feel comfortable with interacting with all those complicated infrastructure things. We're really trying to make sure that we make use of something that is in place to make sure that things are not really complicated and you know how things have been. If this example stands in place that we establish these processes around maintaining our applications or rewriting them for that matter, I think we'd be able to establish this in the community that there's no paid team to handle it and it's all you. You can actually own that code base, make changes and make that foundation happen and maintain it in the long term. That being something that's understood by the team as well as the community so that they could actually be a part of this team in order to contribute to bad is ranking of that kind if it makes sense. I guess I'm thinking we should aim, like Ben said, March, April, May. We should aim to have this initiative with the bow tied up on it at the website release thing in May, after May and have maybe a ceremony or something at that point. Does that make sense? In that case, if we want to have balance as a different thing, implementation details, but yeah, something of that kind. I see Peter Boy is talking, but I did not hear you, Peter. Did you have something to say? I'm here. Yeah. Do you hear me? Okay. Yes, go ahead. No. Oh, I don't have... I'm just listening. Okay, no problem. Does anybody else have something to add here? Yeah, I'll jump in here. No raise hands button on Blue Gene, so I'm like, I don't have video like I have now. Go ahead. Anyway, maybe just building on that last piece before I go into my questions here. I think maybe one way to think about this for next steps is I'd love to think around how websites and apps can you do evolve in terms of a community initiative, which we're in the process of phasing out the objectives, language to call them community initiatives, but I'd love to think around how the next community initiative could tie into the five year strategy that we're working on. Like the idea that I put in the chat was maybe we could have something around accessibility on our websites and apps, because that's one key objective of the 18 point strategy was making sure that our websites and our applications do have accessibility features, people who have disabilities can use them effectively. Perhaps that might be one thing of interest to look at instead of going on to a specific application, not to pull away from Fedora badges, but I would love for a Fedora council level objective to really take a wide view instead of just looking at one application. So maybe just some thoughts as we can kind of push that conversation forward. We can keep that one going on the council level, but I did want to come back to the survey piece. So I had two questions here and then I guess my wish item for coming out of this presentation. The first one is before you developed the survey with the team, did you spend any time thinking around your like an analyzing who your target audience was for the survey? So trying to think of like, who exactly are you trying to reach out to? Is it like people around the websites and apps circle or kind of bubble? Or is it any Fedora contributor? Is it the whole world or the whole open source ecosystem? I'm just curious like who the team felt like was the target audience? Who was that ideal person, type of person to fill out this survey? Right, so to answer that question, when I reached out to friends, Shoa, Ashlyn, as well as Onurad, with the questions as well as some from my side, the general perspective about who would answer these questions was of course contributors of Fedora project. We were really specific that it was just the contributors. It did not have to be the team members or those from the outside, but community members who might or might not be aware of this council initiative, but they would be aware of the things that we do because well, the websites that they make use of to download Fedora Linux or the applications that they used to maybe fetch calendar details or get meeting logs are something that we have been working on and we have developed, we are maintaining them at this point in time. So if they're not aware of who we are, they probably would be aware of what we do. So Fedora for the contributors is what we targeted over here, irrespective of if they are part of the team or not. One idea that I have is maybe for next time, I think it could be really nice to try to target specific groups of the of the Fedora community, like to pull on one example that's on the top of my head, say the join SIG. So the join SIG is in many ways that first front door of the project for many people, they are using our websites and apps all the time, they're guiding people on where to get started. I feel like that would be one group that would have a lot of very specific feedback around say onboarding and getting involved in Fedora and getting those voices in a survey could be really interesting just to see how those people feel like we're doing, if there's things that they kind of wish for or things that they think are doing great, like what are things that the join SIG is really happy about. Those would be some kind of insights I would definitely like to know more about, especially as we're talking a lot around mentoring and onboarding with the five-year strategy. So that's maybe just one idea for next time. And then my last question, I know we're pretty much right up on the end of time here, is did you work with the marketing team on the survey at all? Well, no, we are working with them right now for the website 3.0, but when it came to developing this survey, like I mentioned, at that point in time, we were really getting started with the website 3.0 efforts. Everyone was really full with the work and we could not really ask for more effort to be put over here. And whatever effort was put was excessive from what they were doing already. So I'm really, really appreciate, I really appreciate the time that they spent on writing these questions. We could have reached out to them, maybe they could have helped us to reach out to more people with this survey link of us so that we could have gotten more results, some more insights at this thing. But yeah, this is something that we might end up doing for the next one. Heck, we might as well use our own banners for ourselves and let people know that, yeah, this is something that's happening and we could really use your feedback on this. Yeah, so I think that'll tie in to kind of what my wishlist item was. I would definitely love to see a growth in, if we're taking a very broad lens to the number of responses we have, or if we take a focus lens, trying to make sure that we're targeting a specific team pretty well and that we're making sure that they have visibility on the survey. I think the marketing team, definitely better to work early and start the communication early on, but I know one thing that they're looking at a lot is trying to kind of cross pollinate things across the project in the community and things that might be like this survey. So maybe starting that conversation early with the marketing team, maybe even while you're writing the questions to let them know like, hey, we're trying to do this thing. We know we want to share it with the community. Can you help us with that? I think that could be a really good way of trying to grow the number of responses because I think the questions are really interesting to me, but I definitely would have liked to see a larger pool of people who engage with it because this is a really important area in the community and knowing how people feel about our websites and apps, that is really important, which ties back to what I said in the very beginning is like, I'm really excited that we're doing things like this because getting this kind of feedback, bringing it to the surface, it really is important work in the community. Ben, we have scheduled video meetings coming up. We have not any guests scheduled for April yet, so action be cotton, but the next meeting will be April 12th at 10 a.m. Eastern, which would be post-time change for 1400 UTC. We also will have some non-IRC, I'm not sorry, non-video meetings, matrix text meetings in the meantime, so business always goes on. Looking forward to talking to everybody in all of our various platforms. And again, thank you, Akash, and thank you to the whole websites and apps team. This has really been nice.