Collection of this group's data for a LLM-powered weekly report #83
Labels
No labels
Acceptance
Fedora Design
Acceptance
Needs Info
Acceptance
Wont fix
Design Docs Revamp
Engagement
Long-term
Engagement
Medium-term
Engagement
Short-term
F45 Wallpaper
F46 Wallpaper
Flock 2026
needs review
Newbie
Needs research
Newbie
Well-documented
points
01
points
02
points
03
points
05
points
08
points
13
Priority
High
Priority
Low
Priority
Medium
Status
Backlog
Status
In Progress
Status
In Review
Type
Epic
Type
Request
Type
Sub Epic
No milestone
No project
No assignees
4 participants
Notifications
Due date
No due date set.
Dependencies
No dependencies set.
Reference
design/tickets#83
Loading…
Add table
Add a link
Reference in a new issue
No description provided.
Delete branch "%!s()"
Deleting a branch is permanent. Although the deleted branch may continue to exist for a short time before it actually gets removed, it CANNOT be undone in most cases. Continue?
What do you need?
Hi folks,
I'm generating a weekly report of activity in the Fedora project centered on teams and SIGs, it's called This Week in Fedora. This generation uses an LLM. The goal is to make it easier to catch up with everything that's going on in the project, and to give visibility to each group's work and requests for help or testing. I think that from a newcomer's point of view, having an insight on what a group is working on at a point in time is helpful to decide whether it's interesting and worth contributing to.
I'm collecting activity from:
design-develanddesign-team#design-teamtagIn the latest version, I've added the possiblity to gather messages exchanged in Matrix channels. The
#designchannel is public and its history is available to anyone, but a quite a few people in mutiple Matrix channels were unhappy about the LLM collecting this info, for various reasons.I would like to know whether this group is OK with my program collecting and submitting info to an LLM from the following sources:
I would like to make the case for source 3 (the Matrix channel) because I think it's less obvious: knowing the "tone" of a conversation and the currently discussed subjects before joining is very important to help contribute to it. It's like when you're added to an empty group chat and you don't know how to start. That's why we show history to new channel members, and this would be the same idea at a higher level. Plus there's actual work going on in there for a lot of groups.
That said, I recognize that the form of the tool influences its use, chat messages are usually less thought-through than emails or forum posts, and members could be indimidated that something they write there and regret end up in a visible summary (the program respects message edits, but anyway).
Since my goal is to foster participation, the one thing I don't want to do is to hinder it in another way.
I know I've asked this in the chat yesterday but someone in another room noted that people can easily miss Matrix messages, which it true.
Please decide which collected sources, if any, you are OK with (and if you work in other places that you would like to have collected, of course (I can do RSS feeds!)). If the group is OK with Matrix channel collection but some individuals aren't, I can also exclude certain Matrix usernames from collection throughout the Matrix channels that are not meetings.
I'm happy to answer questions if you have any. Thanks!
Request type
Something not covered by the above.
Problem Statement
N/A
Contacts
N/A
Deadline
N/A
Who will benefit?
N/A
Inspiration Examples
No response
Priority / Severity
Low (anything else e.g., trivial, minor improvements)
We have meetings on google meet and the summaries (as well as the raw transcripts) are somewhere on forge.
I assume this monitoring includes the design Matrix chat?
Oh yeah I'm getting your meeting from the logs in the repo, sorry, I forgot!
It's currently not including the Matrix chat, that's part of the options of the decision I'm asking for.
Personally, I am +1 to Matrix room chat, since some work does happen on Matrix and the Design Team meetings are not consistently run every week. Let's see what others think too.
I'll just follow whatever the majority says as I hold no opinion for nor against this.
+1 from me too! Thanks for reaching out and asking :)