I forwarded to Japanese project and asked for translation. From: Martin Hollmichel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: [native-lang] Quarterly review meetings for identifying important issues and enhancements Date: Mon, 17 Mar 2008 10:36:29 +0100
> Hi, > > in the past there were several complaints raised that some defects and > also requirements got not the right priority. In fact we've got a long > list of RFE in IssueTracker (either assigned to "requirements" or "bh") > and it is not obvious if there is ongoing work on these issues or not. > Also it is often not that transparent how decision making on spending > resources to that issues is made. > > The OpenOffice.org project leads agreed to support the proposal > <http://wiki.services.openoffice.org/wiki/Quarterly_Review> to introduce > quarterly review meetings to identify the most important issues and > request for enhancements. > > please use the [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list for feedback and watch > that list for announcements for the schedule of the various review > meetings, > > Martin > > > Proposal: > > Quarterly reviews > > Quarterly review meetings should identify the most important issues and > enhancements and establish a plan for their resolution. The outcome or > agenda of those meetings may look like this: > > 1. Status of the project > 1. what are the most severe issues in the current release > 2. which are the most requested (or needed) features (in the > press, user forums, issues, other feedback) > 2. short term planning > 1. which defect needs to go into the next release > 2. which features will be worked on for the half year. > 3. which issues needs an assignment > 3. mid/long term planning > 1. which features/bugfixes needs to be addressed in the next > two/three years > 2. unassigned feature/bugixes > > The outcome of these items should be a prioritized list of issues, in > case of not being able to assign the resources the escalation path > should be look like this: > > 1. Project Lead of the project > 2. [EMAIL PROTECTED] > 3. Engineering Steering Committee (ESC) > 4. Community Council (CC) > > > To come to a balanced assessment of issues there should be a least in > those meetings: > > - the project lead > - a qa lead > - if available one representative from user experience > - if available one representative for user base (user forum or user > mailing list maintainer and/or a marketing rep) > - if available representative from marketing project > - if available: more developer and qa folks pr any other contributing > members of the OpenOffice.org project > > I suggest to start with our main, visible projects like Writer, Calc, > Impress and Base and see later if we need to involve also other projects > in this effort. I would like to encourage these teams to organize those > meetings within the first two weeks of the each quarter (next slot would > be April 1-14th) > Implementation of Review > > It is almost impossible to get a slot defined where all parties together > at a time for an irc meeting. To involve as much poeple as possible > there might be an offline phase before an online meeting: > > * call for important issues on the project mailing list > dev@<project>.openoffice.org and put them into the wiki > > * irc meeting to check if all important issues are raised and sort > out the unimportant ones > > * call for review the list and suggest a priorization of issues on > the mailing list and put the result into the wiki > > * irc meeting to confirm the priorization > > * send out the result to [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
