Redefining and positioning the forgefriends project

[aschrijver]

Happy New Year

@dachary

Could you please give an example? I assume you do not refer to the umbrella concept because I think it is quite clear that is not in scope.

What I am trying to convey is a positioning of this community such that it can facilitate any initiative started by arbitrary “forge friends”, i.e. any project dedicated to the Mission and Vision. How might that looks like?

My first idea, described above:

• The umbrella → forgefriends
• Supports → coding.social (broader umbrella)
• One such initiative → forgefriends ‘IssueWelder’ (whatever name)

@dachary’s variation:

• The umbrella → forges.social ?
• Supports → coding.social (broader umbrella)
• One such initiative → forgefriends (ecosystem project)
• One such initiative → forgefed.io (ecosystem project)

That is a possibility. Another variation is… forget about forges.social. We already have coding.social:

• The umbrella → coding.social (uses forum top-level category)
• Advocacy concept: “forge friend” (ecosystem)
• Social coding toolbelt → forgefriends (ecosystem project, free software)
• Social coding toolbelt → forgefed.io (ecosystem project, free software)
• Social coding toolbelt → forgefriends lifecycle (ecosystem project, specification)

I named the specification track “Forgefriends Free Software Lifecycle” just as an example for an aggregate name that breaks down into “Issue Management”, “Code Review”, etc. specification documents. The specs would follow up where Forgefed ended.

That specification track would then be part of Social Coding documentation website, together with other specs that fan out further (e.g. Ideation).