Reading/Web/Preference Persistence For Anonymous Users/Notes/TDF Feedback/20230424 Notes
Appearance
- Full TDF Feedback responses here
- Next steps:
- Figure out if what you wrote was clear - any feedback that points things out that we should fix? The problem statement will be the umbrella behind the statements. Next step is the decision record.
- Make corrections, then contact the people who gave feedback
- Bryan’s thoughts re: layman’s terminology
- Thiemo re: “on-wiki storage” - Post clarification around localstorage in the phab ticket?
- James: volunteer usage?
- Setup the workgroup - what teams need to be there - and brainstorm together
- Try to come into this without a solution in mind - the point is to get to a decision record– describes what you chose and what you considered
- Make corrections, then contact the people who gave feedback
- See which teams told you they should be participating / need to be involved. Delve deeper: for those who said they would participate, create your own RACI; also: who is not there that should be?
- Performance - initially indicated no
- Other organizational changes happening - we should wait a week ; things might change in the next few weeks
- Design Systems - ResourceLoader / SSR
- Which teams said yes:
- Developer Advocacy
- Language Engineering
- WMDE Technical Wishes
- Product Analytics
- Security
- Not present but maybe should be:
- Performance
- SRE Data Persistence
- Roan / maybe DST?
- Editing?
- Figure out if what you wrote was clear - any feedback that points things out that we should fix? The problem statement will be the umbrella behind the statements. Next step is the decision record.
- Cross-departmental, and cross-team
- Did things appear that we forgot about?
- Transition from anonymous -> logged in (we haven’t thought about this re:limited width). IP Masking will make this distinction complicated. (timeline is within a year or so, but we should decide on this anyway)
- Who needs to be in the room?
- We want to avoid people who should be in the room not being there later
- There are questions about what teams people will be on in a few weeks
- Did things appear that we forgot about?
- Maybe we can change the process to focus on concerns / changes we may need?
- Scope of this proposal
- Implications of volunteers
- This is less about the technical solution than the boundaries - this won’t just be used for 3-5 features but open up 6000 features. How to do this is semi-solved, the framing is ore important
- We should look to define what is and is not in scope for this mechanism:
- A/B Testing?
- Volunteer usage?
- A continuum from Vector-only to literally anything
- It may be that there is a team we can work with around this - we are essentially building an API
Action items
[edit]- Today: figure out who needs to be involved
- By Wednesday this week: Nick/Nat to reach out to the teams we agree about
- Next week: Moriel can run exercises around boundaries / modeling