On Sat, Sep 29, 2012 at 2:10 PM, Ilias Biris <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi folks > > http://status.linaro.org/lane/2012I3.html > > status.l.o is working once again thanks to the excellent effort from > Loic and Danilo (thanks folks!). Before asking you to link blueprints to > cards I would like to raise the question whether we want to maintain > status.l.o for future use. > > - Do you want to use s.l.o? [Y/N]
I've always thought of s.l.o as the management view of the project. I've had no real use for it. After having experimented with and abandoning monthly blueprints I found it even less useful since the burndown charts aren't too useful. > - If yes, are your teams committed to link blueprints to cards and keep > updating BPs as needed in order to show progress top-down? [Y/N] We try. And most of our blueprints are more or less up to date and linked to cards[1]. But I can't commit to updating it more than once a month. Also, I have not been asked by anybody from our member companies about these. As stated elsewhere, getting blueprints updated requires gentle persuasion followed by gentle threats. :) And they don't always work. And sometimes there are just more important things to do, like landing a feature into the kernel merge window. So several blueprints are updated long after-the-fact. Having said that, I find blueprints useful to assign work to engineers. When I want new work started, I create a blueprint, add a description of the work and assign it to the engineer for R&D. After a few weeks of nagging, it usually gets populated with useful information - work items, extended descriptions, upstream status, etc. Since engineers report weekly status in several forms (1:1, weekly meetings, weekly status reports) there is a lot of redundancy built into the reporting. Which is OK. If I could, however, tell engineers that they just need to update their blueprints and the following would _automatically_ happen, there would be a lot more compliance. - weekly status reports would be extracted from it - weekly meeting agendas wouldn't require the round table where everyone repeats what they just typed out in the weekly reports - In our 1:1s, we could annotate the auto-generated weekly report to add highlights, etc. - These annotated reports would be used to generate every other kind of report - monthly executive reports, release highlights, etc. However, I won't be the one writing these tools, so its easy for me to have Utopian visions. :) > If you answered yes in the questions above, then see [1] on how to link > BPs to cards. Otherwise please share your reservations/concerns and > suggestions. Given that the service has had its ups and downs and > requires maintenance investment (eg to fix issues, or to do updates if > there are changes in JIRA) I think we should carefully consider what to > do with it. > > I for one would vote yes on both questions, while we use LP for > day-to-day work. > > Thanks > Ilias [1] Atleast the ones related to the b.L MP project that has David Z. to help as Project manager _______________________________________________ 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
