On 06/02/12 15:55, Guilherme Salgado wrote: > Hi Francis, > > On 06/02/12 13:57, Francis J. Lacoste wrote: >> On 12-02-03 02:28 PM, Guilherme Salgado wrote: >>> Hi, >>> >>> So, we had a chat with Matt earlier this week and while we work on the >>> user-testing for the team-based report we'd like to present our plan to >>> migrate the work items from the whiteboard to the new table. This is >>> roughly how we see this happening: >> >> Hi Salgado, >> >> It's great to see you and Linaro contribute this to Launchpad. >> >> I don't think Matt raised that already with you, but there is a new >> policy under discussion that might have an impact on that project: >> https://dev.launchpad.net/PolicyAndProcess/MaintenanceCosts >> >> This will clearly add to the maintenance costs of Launchpad (it's one of >> the primary benefit to Linaro, so that more of the work-item tracker is >> maintained in Launchpad instead of your own tools). Can you investigate >> the possibility of offsetting some maintenance costs elsewhere so that >> overall this new feature becomes a neutral addition to our maintenance >> burden? > > I think that would be fine; I'll try to confirm today or tomorrow and > will let you know.
Just confirmed and Linaro is fine with us doing some extra work in LP to offset the maintenance costs added by the work-item changes. Would something like what I described below be fine? Or maybe Robert can suggest something? :) > > BTW, I had a quick look at some blueprints bugs and found > https://bugs.launchpad.net/launchpad/+bug/735970 (+specworkload times > out for teams). > > After some investigation it turns out that +specworkload shows, for a > person, the same BPs that are shown on blueprints.lp.net/~person. The > difference being that the former has extra columns for the role the > person plays on that BP and the latter has a way to filter the list. For > teams +specworkload shows a list of team members with a BP table for > every member whereas bp.lp.net/~team shows only the BPs where the team > itself is the assignee/drafter/approver. I'm thinking that maybe we > could get rid of +specworkload and change the default BlueprintLayer > page for teams to include specs where the team members play a role as > well, just in case anyone actually uses +specworkload and objects to it > being removed. > > So, do you think this would be a change that would offset the > maintenance costs added by our work-item stuff? -- Guilherme Salgado <https://launchpad.net/~salgado> _______________________________________________ Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~launchpad-dev Post to : launchpad-dev@lists.launchpad.net Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~launchpad-dev More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
