On 9/12/2012 1:50 AM, Rubén Pérez wrote: > I'm +1 for the 3 months proposed by Xavier. I'd even say 2 instead, but one > month does not really make a difference. I agree 1 month can be too short. > > I'm +1 for the rest of Michelle's proposals. I also like Xavier's idea of > classifying the developers by areas of expertise.
3 months seems reasonable to me. I definitely understand that local issues are unavoidable sometimes, and I'm not trying to be unreasonable, but I did want to stimulate discussion around ensuring that we know who is actually active and who has moved on to other projects. I think I've succeeded on that point! It's good to see a number of people, both committers and other community members, come out of the woodwork almost immediately to point out better solutions. This will no doubt come up at the next developer meeting, but Xavier's suggestion of listing areas of competence is something we should absolutely follow up on. Not only will it be useful for us as committers so that we can see who knows which parts of the system, but it will also be useful for users and (potential) contributors so they know who they can address detailed technical questions to on list. G > Regards > > Rubén Pérez > TELTEK Video Research > www.teltek.es > > > > 2012/9/12 Xavier Butty <[email protected]> > >> Hi, >> >>> 3 (Proposal). Continuing from point 2, committers who have not >>> contributed in more than a month will retire to committers emeritus. >>> Hopefully this will prompt our institutional leads to commit to public >>> Matterhorn development. >> -1: I also think that one month is too short. If people are in holidays or >> other (like the 3 annual weeks of military services for us in Switzerland), >> a month is quickly over. >> But 6 month is too long as well. If you are not able to >> commit/contribute something during 6 month, it definitely means that you >> are not active. Therefore --> committers emeritus. >> 3 month would be a good compromise. >> >>> 4 (Proposal). We keep a list of committers and their organizations on >>> the front project (or wiki, whichever's easiest) page. This will >>> highlight those who are contributing. >> +1: Should we also list the committers per fields of competence. It could >> help to assign/contact someone to work on tickets and assign the related >> people for the code reviews. >> >> Xavier >> >> On Sep 11, 2012, at 6:24 PM, Greg Logan <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> Hi folks, >>> >>> Sorry for the crosspost, but I wanted to make sure I hit everyone. As >>> we sat at the dev meeting today, we realized that our normal ticket >>> review would be silly because no tickets had been resolved in the last >>> week. After much discussion, we came to a few conclusions: >>> >>> A. We have little to no visibility of actual developer availability. >>> We don't know how much time in a given week that a developer has to work >>> on public Matterhorn related tickets. >>> >>> B. The attendance in the developer meeting has been going steadily down >>> hill. In theory, if you have commit privileges you are expected to >>> attend these meetings. This hasn't been happening. >>> >>> C. Tasks which are assigned frequently don't get finished (see point >>> A), but tasks which are unassigned are extremely unlikely to ever be >>> addressed given that very few developers are looking through the >>> unassigned task list. >>> >>> To address these issues, we propose that the project will try the >> following: >>> >>> 1. We ask that the committers and developers let us know how much time >>> they have tasked to public Matterhorn tasks. I'm going to be working >>> with the board to try and get these numbers nailed down. There's no >>> shame in not having any time to work on Matterhorn, but if you don't >>> have time then your tickets won't get done, which leads to point 2. >>> >>> 2. Developers should go through their tickets, and unassign those which >>> they do not have the time to work on. If you're currently working on it >>> mark it as in progress and post a comment explaining where you are, and >>> if you're going to do it but haven't had a chance yet then put a comment >>> on the ticket explaining what's blocking your progress. Concentrate on >>> the 1.4 tickets for now. In one week I will be going through and >>> unassigning tickets which have not been updated in a week. >>> >>> 3 (Proposal). Continuing from point 2, committers who have not >>> contributed in more than a month will retire to committers emeritus. >>> Hopefully this will prompt our institutional leads to commit to public >>> Matterhorn development. >>> >>> 4 (Proposal). We keep a list of committers and their organizations on >>> the front project (or wiki, whichever's easiest) page. This will >>> highlight those who are contributing. >>> >>> 5. To address B, I'm going to revive Adam Hochmans' habit of setting a >>> developer meeting agenda ahead of time. Every week I'm going to call >>> out a specific group of developers to come forward and explain what they >>> are working on, and what is blocking their progress. This doesn't need >>> to be 20 minutes, but it should be 5 to 10. >>> >>> 6. To address C, I'm going to start sending out emails containing a >>> summary of the unassigned bugs for the current release. This will >>> increase the visibility of these tickets so that developers become aware >>> of them and address them. >>> >>> Please note the two proposals. Voting begins now, and lasts for 72 >> hours. >>> >>> G >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> Matterhorn mailing list >>> [email protected] >>> http://lists.opencastproject.org/mailman/listinfo/matterhorn >>> >>> >>> To unsubscribe please email >>> [email protected] >>> _______________________________________________ >> >> _______________________________________________ >> Community mailing list >> [email protected] >> http://lists.opencastproject.org/mailman/listinfo/community >> >> >> To unsubscribe please email >> [email protected] >> _______________________________________________ >> > > > > _______________________________________________ > Community mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.opencastproject.org/mailman/listinfo/community > > > To unsubscribe please email > [email protected] > _______________________________________________
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ Matterhorn-users mailing list [email protected] http://lists.opencastproject.org/mailman/listinfo/matterhorn-users
