On 2/28/12 7:28 PM, Juha Manninen wrote: > 2012/2/29 John Repucci <[email protected] > <mailto:[email protected]>> > > As much as I would like to get answers directly (and promptly) > from the source experts, I would prefer that the developers be > allowed to focus on development (if that is their passion). I > would rather have a set of SMEs (subject matter experts) as a > buffer. Yes, they will have to ask the developers questions, but > they can act as intelligent filters and translators (meanings of > questions, not language). This would also help develop the next > set of developers or documentation writers, as they will develop > systems to help the inexperienced help themselves. > > > Uhhh, this was another out-of-reality comment. So, can you please name > the set of SMEs. You are one of them obviously, but who are the others?
You designate SME's as part of the team. You list them in the team organization chart. You initially mark each role as vacant. If you describe the job well people will volunteer, especially if someone is identified as a coach. Something like "We need people to intermediate between core developers and users who report trouble or ask for enhancements. We call these people SME's. You watch for messages in the mailing lists and reports in the tracker and make sure they are clear. Sometimes you may need to reproduce a problem. Sometimes you may need to clean up the language used to report the issue. (Much of this can be done directly with the original poster so as to not clutter up the public forums.) When you think it is a real concern, clearly identified, and reproducible, send it on to the core team. Of course you only need to do this for items that relate to the area for which you have volunteered." By the way, I would NOT call the subject matter experts. I would just call them subject matter volunteer coordinators.
-- _______________________________________________ Lazarus mailing list [email protected] http://lists.lazarus.freepascal.org/mailman/listinfo/lazarus
