Hello, Le 02/12/2014 22:42, Jared Zimmerman a écrit : > Do we have agreement on what being part of a phabricator team means?
I don't think we have any. > Should only foundation employees be members of teams? > > Should team membership be open? It seems by default the projects / teams are joignable and editable by anyone. My team (release engineering) has "aude" from Wikimedia Deutschland and "jeremyb" an happy and much helpful volunteer. > What do we think it means to be a member of the team? To me that express interest in whatever this team is working on and potentially help them out. We could ask ourselves what a "team" means to us and I think it is an obsolete concept in a flat / agile organization. I really like the description from Spotify which shows overlaps between groups of people: http://blog.crisp.se/2012/11/14/henrikkniberg/scaling-agile-at-spotify Some of our projects are shared by the whole organization. The beta cluster is assigned to the release engineering team but is maintained by a guild that has memberships in the whole organization. > What does member vs watcher mean on a project? A member: - can edit the project when edit is restricted - receives a notification when a task CC the project A watcher: - receives notifications for any action on any task being a member of the project (read: spam) I am a watcher of the 'zuul' tag, a software we use to support our continuous integration. So anyone adding task to 'zuul' will get me a notification. If I want to send a task for triage to the 'operations' team: I add their team to the list of projects. Members will receive nothing but the task will be on their workboard, watchers will get a notification. If I want to spam all 'operations' people, I would add their team to the CC field. Sorry if that sounds slightly confusing :-/ -- Antoine "hashar" Musso _______________________________________________ teampractices mailing list [email protected] https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/teampractices
