Use @jupyter.org as the Bluesky handle

[jtpio]

Not sure if this issue belongs to the JMS and if it should be opened somewhere else. Feel free to move it to another repo if that's the case.

As a follow-up to #168, it would be great if the Jupyter account on Bluesky would use the @jupyter.org handle.

This would give the account a more "official" look. The full URL to the account would then be https://bsky.app/profile/@jupyter.org

As mentioned in #168 (comment), it is possible to validate the account by adding to TXT record to jupyter.org.

For more information: https://bsky.social/about/blog/4-28-2023-domain-handle-tutorial

To do

• Update BlueSky to use jupyter.org
• Update jupyter.org to use the new BlueSky handle
• Update GitHub to use the new BlueSky handle
  • Blocked on: Give the @executive-council team permissions to change organization social media settings #262

[jtpio]

cc @Ruv7 @andrii-i @jake-stack @SylvainCorlay as the current members of the Jupyter Media Strategy Working Group (https://jupyter.org/governance/people.html#jupyter-media-strategy-working-group)

[choldgraf]

I agree this is an important way to make it clear which is the official jupyter account. Thanks for the suggestion @jtpio !

[fperez]

I'm not in the working group, but this sounds like a great idea. That's a neat feature of bsky that wasn't part of twitter, and I think we should take advantage of it. It helps reinforce the brand and point to the actual url of the main project.

[choldgraf]

Questions I have:

How do we get access to jupyter DNS settings?
How do we get access to the bluesky account?

I'm happy to do this but I'd need to be able to do the two things above and am not sure where to look.

[fperez]

How do we get access to jupyter DNS settings?

Ping @afshin who's been in charge of that.

How do we get access to the bluesky account?

I think that would be the folks in the media working group? Credentials should be shared/managed by that group (we've moved away from anyone managing credentials for project accounts individually).

[afshin]

Yes, we can update DNS settings, which are using Cloudflare DNS servers. It is in the Infrastructure vault of the password manager.

I updated the jupyter.org DNS to have the TXT record so this works now:

https://bsky.app/profile/jupyter.org

@choldgraf I invited you to the Jupyter password manager.

[krassowski]

Note, this requires changing the links everywhere because the old profile link (https://bsky.app/profile/projectjupyter.bsky.social) does not redirect. The jupyter website is getting updated in jupyter/jupyter.github.io#785

[fperez]

I'm reopening just b/c of @krassowski's note above, so we don't forget there's a little tail dangling before this is really wrapped up. Thanks for flagging that, Mike!

[choldgraf]

The PR to update the website is already merged. Is there anywhere else that needs to be changed? If not then I think we can re-complete this issue:

• Updated wrong Bluesky profile URL jupyter.github.io#785

A github search suggests that the website is the only place where we list bluesky in our configuration so I think we've good to close this, but I'll leave it open in case somebody knows of a place we need to change that I don't know about

[krassowski]

I do not see other places either. But maybe it would be good to add it in a few places now that it is verified. For example youi could add it to jupyter org. I do not have access, but this is how it looks in JupyterLab

[krassowski]

It looks like only four can be given:

and then it renders like that:

Maybe JMS could make a recommendation which four to use

[choldgraf]

If the @jupyter/executive-council could add me then I can make those changes. I think (?) the EC has admin permissions on the jupyter github org, but I don't seem to have them now

[choldgraf]

@krassowski I do think it'd help if you opened a separate issue about Slack stuff. I'd like to close this issue as soon as we think bluesky is appropriately linked within Jupyter, and it'll make your points above non-discoverable when that happens

also, your points above are about JupyterLab, not Jupyter as a whole, right?

[krassowski]

I do think it'd help if you opened a separate issue about Slack stuff

I just do not know where. Is this an appropriate repository?

also, your points above are about JupyterLab, not Jupyter as a whole, right?

Sorry, I do not follow.

[choldgraf]

I just do not know where. Is this an appropriate repository?

No idea - as far as I know, there isn't a repository for generic jupyter conversation. /governance kinda gets used for this and I think it is a safe place to open a new issue. I liked the suggestion that we rename this as team-compass in #184 (but I just found out that issue existed once it was closed).

To me, a reasonable system would be something like:

• jupyter/team-compass is the source of truth for all issues relating to Jupyter, unless there's an explicitly better place for those issues.
• If a sub-project wants to use its own space to track issues/conversation, create a github repository for it and document it, then we can point users there and no longer use this repo for it (this is what we do with most sub-projects)

So in this case, you've got a question for the Jupyter Media Strategy group. They haven't defined a specific place to track questions and issues, so this repository would default to it (assuming this repository would be team-compass rather than governance. If we want to keep this governance-focused, we should create another org-wide repository for it).

Either way, I'd suggest opening an issue in this repository for now.

also, your points above are about JupyterLab, not Jupyter as a whole, right?

I just mean that the slack room in question is a JupyterLab space, not a Jupyter-wide space.

[krassowski]

So in this case, you've got a question for the Jupyter Media Strategy group. They haven't defined a specific place to track questions and issues, so this repository would default to it

Ok. I will take this. I've sent an email to JMS asking them to consider having a public discussion place. Lack of it really adds to the decision fatigue, you can also see that this very issue starts with:

Not sure if this issue belongs to the JMS and if it should be opened somewhere else

Also, I would argue that JMS should have a repo given https://jupyter.org/governance/standing_committees_and_working_groups.html#common-points:

-"Carry out their functions in a manner that is as open and transparent as possible given the unique dimensions of their charter."
-"Maintain a public GitHub repository with basic information (council members, charter, public meetings, SSC representative, etc.) for purposes of transparency and consistency."

Another argument for the need for a place for JMS to communicate its decisions, allow public discussions, and avoid spreading the discussion across multiple issues is existence of jupyter/jupyter#761.

I take that the EC could already help with a decision and create a team compass for JMS (and JMS could decide how much they want to use it).

[krassowski]

I just mean that the slack room in question is a JupyterLab space, not a Jupyter-wide space.

I don't know. I don't have a way to see inside so I do not know for what it is being used, but the name does suggest some focus on jupyterlab. That said, security group uses @ipython.org address and is not focused on IPython.

[krassowski]

I opened #258

[ivanov]

If the @jupyter/executive-council could add me then I can make those changes. I think (?) the EC has admin permissions on the jupyter github org, but I don't seem to have them now

You were already part of that team, @choldgraf - but there were no roles assigned to the team. I just added a role for the team to be admins on all repos here. Like those beverage commercials say: Enjoy responsibly ;)

[choldgraf]

I've opened an issue to track the GitHub permissions issues: #262 . I've also added a todo list in the body of this issue.

I suggest that if we don't have the bandwidth to solve this one in the next week or two, that we create a new issue out of the final remaining task above, and close this issue as completed. That way we can close-out the original purpose of this issue (changing the bluesky handle) and disentangle it from follow-up work (to add the handle to github)

to your points about JMS here:

Another argument for the need for a place for JMS to communicate its decisions, allow public discussions, and avoid spreading the discussion across multiple issues is existence of jupyter/jupyter#761.

I take that the EC could already help with a decision and create a team compass for JMS (and JMS could decide how much they want to use it).

It sounds reasonable to me that the group have their own repository! I am very new to the JEC so I'm not sure what kind of scope it has yet, so may not have good intuitions. My feeling is that the JEC could encourage working groups to have their own repositories, but not force them to do so, since they may not end up using it at all. However, I do think we should give others clarity for where cross-project issues should be opened up and am happy to talk about that further

[ivanov]

I figured out how to update the handle and went ahead and did that to unblock.

[ivanov]

@krassowski wrote:

I take that the EC could already help with a decision and create a team compass for JMS (and JMS could decide how much they want to use it).

@choldgraf replied:

It sounds reasonable to me that the group have their own repository!

Yes, reasonable and already established as an expected requirement by the current governance docs. Opened #263 to track that, JMS isn't the only group / committee currently without an expected team compass.

I think the other main stuff that this issue was about is now resolved and unblocked, so closing it. Thanks everyone!