On Tue, Jun 05, 2012 at 09:57:14AM -0500, Paul Larson wrote: > > Now, if we're unable to have a proper backlog in place, it'll be quite > > hard and time consuming to get the "remote" sessions going. > > > Following last week's non-virtualized connect, I wanted to restart this > thread. Regarding the next Linaro connect, I've heard 2 options in the air: > 1. virtual connect - see issues already discussed in this thread
I don't really think there's anything that prevents us from doing a "Virtual Connect" if we are prepared to be somewhat flexible about the definition. It would be an interesting experiment and certainly avoids us doing no checkpoint summit for such a long time. > 2. smaller team sprints - save on the big event costs > Of the two options, #2 seems to be a much better choice but has the obvious > downside of having no cross-team collaboration. In particular, if we go > this route, we also need to consider the larger, cross-team efforts such as > the various big.little projects going on. There's also nothing that stops us from doing smaller sprints even if we /do/ run a virtual connect, though. And to your point about cross-team work, there's no reason why the sprint needs to be done along team boundaries - in fact, the most important thing for the sprint is to have a clear purpose and outcome. -- Christian Robottom Reis, Engineering VP Brazil (GMT-3) | [+55] 16 9112 6430 | [+1] 612 216 4935 Linaro.org: Open Source Software for ARM SoCs _______________________________________________ Mailing list: https://launchpad.net/~linaro-project-management Post to : [email protected] Unsubscribe : https://launchpad.net/~linaro-project-management More help : https://help.launchpad.net/ListHelp
