Re: Q to Mehdi: S.M.A.R.T. metrics

[Mehdi Dogguy]

Hi martin,

On 08/04/2017 09:13, martin f krafft wrote:
> also sprach Mehdi Dogguy  [2017-03-30 02:13 +0200]:
>> I do not remember myself talking about S.M.A.R.T criteria in personal
>> discussions to be honest :-) or if it ever happened, maybe it was
>> because it was mentioned in my platform and elsewhere.
> […]
>> But anyways... I am not particularly fond of S.M.A.R.T criteria
>> […]
> 
> How do you reconcile these two statements? Why do you want your
> roadmap to consist of S.M.A.R.T. items?
> 

My statement is *not* "I do not like S.M.A.R.T". I explained in my
previous mail why it is relevant to use it to follow roadmap goals.
It helps us to measure progress of each goal.

>> In general, I have followed the same methodology for all subjects
>> I've worked on during my DPL term: I have installed a kanboard [2]
>> instance on my server ; created a project (let's call it DPL) and
>> created tasks for every subject. Depending on the nature of
>> subject, I added sub-tasks sometimes. Comments were also used to
>> track the progress of the task.
> 
> Would you see any value in having this publicly visible on official
> project resources?
> 

Of course. I can. But, I didn't find a way to leave some tasks in
"private" mode though. And I consider it a blocker. Instead of
migrating my current setup, I can try to use a public instance in
the future.

-- 
Mehdi



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Re: Q to Mehdi: S.M.A.R.T. metrics

[martin f krafft]

also sprach Mehdi Dogguy  [2017-03-30 02:13 +0200]:
> I do not remember myself talking about S.M.A.R.T criteria in personal
> discussions to be honest :-) or if it ever happened, maybe it was
> because it was mentioned in my platform and elsewhere.
[…]
> But anyways... I am not particularly fond of S.M.A.R.T criteria
> […]

How do you reconcile these two statements? Why do you want your
roadmap to consist of S.M.A.R.T. items?

> In general, I have followed the same methodology for all subjects
> I've worked on during my DPL term: I have installed a kanboard [2]
> instance on my server ; created a project (let's call it DPL) and
> created tasks for every subject. Depending on the nature of
> subject, I added sub-tasks sometimes. Comments were also used to
> track the progress of the task.

Would you see any value in having this publicly visible on official
project resources?

-- 
 .''`.   martin f. krafft  @martinkrafft
: :'  :  proud Debian developer
`. `'`   http://people.debian.org/~madduck
  `-  Debian - when you have better things to do than fixing systems
 
when everything is coming your way, you're in the wrong lane.


digital_signature_gpg.asc
Description: Digital GPG signature (see http://martin-krafft.net/gpg/sig-policy/999bbcc4/current)

Re: Q to Mehdi: S.M.A.R.T. metrics

[Mehdi Dogguy]

Dear martin,

On 25/03/2017 13:42, martin f krafft wrote:
> Dear Mehdi,
> 
> in personal discussions and in your platform(s), you've been very
> fond of the "S.M.A.R.T. way" aka. management by objectives.
> 

I do not remember myself talking about S.M.A.R.T criteria in personal
discussions to be honest :-) or if it ever happened, maybe it was
because it was mentioned in my platform and elsewhere. In fact,
S.M.A.R.T was used for Release Goals [1] and it has been also
mentioned by previous DPLs as well (although, I failed to find a
reference for that, for now).

[1] https://wiki.debian.org/ReleaseGoals/

But anyways... I am not particularly fond of S.M.A.R.T criteria but
I do recognize their value when it comes to defining goals and finding
ways to measure their progress. It is good a tool that helps us to
evaluate a goal by forcing us to think about five specific and simple
points.

> Can you identify a few objectives you've seen through in your last
> term, and specifically illustrate how you measured progress? What
> about projects still on-going?
>

In general, I have followed the same methodology for all subjects
I've worked on during my DPL term: I have installed a kanboard [2]
instance on my server ; created a project (let's call it DPL) and
created tasks for every subject. Depending on the nature of subject,
I added sub-tasks sometimes. Comments were also used to track the
progress of the task.

[2] https://kanboard.net/

-- 
Mehdi



signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature

Q to Mehdi: S.M.A.R.T. metrics

[martin f krafft]

Dear Mehdi,

in personal discussions and in your platform(s), you've been very
fond of the "S.M.A.R.T. way" aka. management by objectives.

Can you identify a few objectives you've seen through in your last
term, and specifically illustrate how you measured progress? What
about projects still on-going?

Thanks,

-- 
 .''`.   martin f. krafft  @martinkrafft
: :'  :  proud Debian developer
`. `'`   http://people.debian.org/~madduck
  `-  Debian - when you have better things to do than fixing systems
 
dies ist eine manuell generierte email. sie beinhaltet
tippfehler und ist auch ohne großbuchstaben gültig.


digital_signature_gpg.asc
Description: Digital GPG signature (see http://martin-krafft.net/gpg/sig-policy/999bbcc4/current)