Hello, I know I am new to the adium project and code. I just want to give my opinions on meetings. I believe that meetings will help move the code forward even if a little bit at a time. I believe we should do this bi-weekly. As I know these meetings will help new developers get into the code and project.
Thanks, Shawn On Sat, Apr 24, 2010 at 9:00 AM, Jordan <jas8...@gmail.com> wrote: > I realize there might be a bit of a stigma associated with meetings > and that there'll always be a few people who can't make them, but I > think that regular meetings (bi weekly or at least monthly) might help > spur development. This includes our formerly active developers and the > new folks who might have a few questions and would like to get more > involved in the processes we use to decide on inclusion of new > features (among other things). > > It would also help us come to consensus for dates to set our > milestones - we used to follow them somewhat closely and it worked > fairly well. We could also go over some of those remaining tickets in > 1.4 and try to have Robby and I (and others?) help triage the > remaining 1.4 tickets. For example, we could specify a critical > priority for tickets to be placed in the 1.4 milestone. > > If not regular meetings, then we should probably at least have one > before the release of 1.4 just to make sure everyone is on the same > page. Although we do a pretty good job of keeping Trac in-line with > our priorities (minus some of the newer tickets that haven't been > triaged yet), there are always some things that are ambiguous and > should be discussed. > > Thoughts on this? Was it Thursdays we used to hold them on in previous > years? > > If Eric is OK with this, then he and I could take care of arranging it > as he and Chris had done in previous years. > > Have a great weekend everyone! > > Jordan > > > > On Sat, Apr 24, 2010 at 7:14 AM, Robert Vehse <robert.ve...@gmx.de> wrote: > > > > Am 24.04.2010 um 07:59 schrieb Christopher Forsythe: > > > >> I'm sorry, I mistook the 11 tickets not to a severity of Major or > >> Regression to mean that weren't as important as the 4 in those > severities. > >> If you think that keeping tickets which are "minor" in the milestone, I > >> guess the meaning of the minor severity has changed in a way that I was > not > >> aware of. > >> > >> My apologies for any offense, none was meant. I was only pointing out > that > >> the easiest thing to do to to get a release out is to get a few things > off > >> the list which can wait for a later release. > > > > No worries. I think I overreacted. Some of the tickets are not marked as > > they should be though. > > > > > >
