1Hive works on various projects: Each project is represented by a github repo and each project task is represented by a github issue.
Each task needs to be funded, assigned, and reviewed. We use the Projects application manage this.
To minimize the need to vote on every stage of this workflow, we've also created two roles: curator and reviewer:
Curators look after the funding of issues (project tasks). They help create, refine, and prioritize them (you can think of curators as product managers of sorts).
Reviewers approve task assignments and review work. You can think of them as mentors.
Honey-based vote is required to add or remove someone from the curator or reviewer role.
Expectations of Curators
Curators are responsible for:
Refining tasks to ensure that they are well specified and can be scoped accurately.
Funding high priority issues (based on their estimate of the amount of time and level of experience required to complete a task).
Soliciting feedback from other members of the organization (but the final decision and responsibility is theirs alone).
All tasks are funded with
Honey and all projects share the same budget of
Honey, which is periodically minted by vote of
Bee token holders.
This is done for the sake of simplicity. However, it's obvious that some projects will need more (or less) funding than others. To handle this, the curators are expected to coordinate with the rest of the organization offline to strategically allocate budgets between projects.
Expectations of Reviewers
Reviewers are responsible for:
- approving task assignments
- reviewing completed work.
There is only one reviewer role for all types of projects, and any reviewer can approve and review work on any task. However, reviewers are expected to coordinate with Workers and Curators to only approve and review work in their areas of expertise.
The reviewer acts as mentor both when choosing whether to approve a worker for a task and when reviewing completed work. If a worker is not a good fit for a task, the reviewer can suggest a more appropriate one.
If submitted work needs improvement, the reviewer should provide guidance.
Expectations of Workers
Workers are responsible for:
- reviewing tasks and asking any questions they may have about the requirements and scope before applying to work on task.
- keep track of the time spent and report this when submitting their works
- complete assigned tasks on time.
While we all know time tracking is tedious, we insist on it because it allows curators and reviewers to more accurately scope and assign tasks. And the more accurately they can scope and assign tasks, the more fairly we can compensate workers for their effort.