Thank you GuillaumeL for your contributions to this discussion! On Fri, May 6, 2016 at 9:58 AM, Guillaume Lederrey <[email protected]> wrote:
> I am naturally suspicious of adding tools in this kind of context. > Me too. I was wondering... If the team is taking notes in a document... what is the problem of documenting in the same doc those small actions that are either too small or too private for our Phabricator usage? This is in fact what we do in the Technical Collaboration team, thanks to a good practice brought by the Community Liaisons. We don't have sprint retrospectives but we have a weekly meeting, and we record there the actions that come out of that meeting. Indeed, some tasks won't quite fit for Phabricator and, as Guillaume says, some tasks are not done a week later and perhaps even for a good reason. I think another important factor here is that we use a single document for all our weekly meetings, as opposed to one document per meeting. This has a couple of advantages, at least * The actions we wrote down last week are still there when we use the doc in the next meeting. If someone missed to complete a task assigned, all team members can see it clearly. * Since team members keep visiting the doc after the meeting, sometimes someone will leave a question or a comment next to an action, and sometimes that will lead to a small casual discussion or updates about the action. So perhaps Phabricator + single doc is all you need after all? -- Quim Gil Engineering Community Manager @ Wikimedia Foundation http://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/User:Qgil
_______________________________________________ teampractices mailing list [email protected] https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/teampractices
