[sorry to reply to GP] > On Tue, Nov 25, 2008 at 3:30 AM, Ralph Hyre <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> [gregdek wrote] > >> On Mon, 24 Nov 2008, Walter Bender wrote: > >> > >> > I think the idea of a roadmap (with project schedules) within each > >> > team would address much of this need. > >> > >> Agreed. > >> > >> Project management is a pain in the ass[...]
> > I have to express the contrary view here, based on 15 years of consulting > > experience. > > If the teams are involved in delivery, there needs to be roles involved in > > keeping things > > on track, especially in a meritocracy like an open source effort. Having 15 years of software development experience (as I'm sure many other people do - don't want to say I'm the most-/best-qualified), I disagree and agree with Walter/gregdek. More clarity and simplicity of vision, more development, less talking and bug-tracking and emailing. > > Infrastructure is needed, but there need to be about 3 'PM' roles (there are > > 3 sense of PM) Please, please, no. The last thing contributors want to have to wade through is another set of byzantine socio-/meta-technical rules to become contributors. Martin
pgp8JFZlC6oUu.pgp
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ IAEP -- It's An Education Project (not a laptop project!) [email protected] http://lists.sugarlabs.org/listinfo/iaep
