On 17/10/15 00:08, Pasi Lallinaho wrote:
On 2015-10-17 01:47, [email protected] wrote:
On 16/10/15 21:13, Pasi Lallinaho wrote:
Since the meetings have been far apart, and not many people have
been around, let's do the voting on the meeting structure changes on
the mailing list. Here's the proposal again for clarity:
1) Stop running the "Team updates" section
Pasting the updates in a meeting means more work (through having to
memorize/note down items) for contributors. It also means that those
who can't attend the meeting (which means many people per meeting),
can't paste the updates unless somebody does this for them.
Since we now have a timeline tab [2] in the tracker, most of these
updates can be seen live.
The only real change in action contributors would need to take would
apply to work items. Practically this means that everything that
could be worth mentioning for people outside the team - or added in
the release notes - should be in the blueprints. Doing the updates
like this also improves their findability. As I see it, this isn't
much different from what we currently do, or at least what I try to do.
Finally, the updates that aren't worth/important enough to add to
the blueprints could still be shared in the meeting, thus...
2) Rename the "Announcements" section to "Updates and Announcements"
This is just semantics, but it should be done to avoid confusion and
be more accurate.
Team members, cast your vote by sending +1, -1 or +/-0 on this list.
If you wish to vote privately, you cand send a mail to Simon or me
(you'll find the emails - or can ask on IRC).
We'll have a week for the votes. The results are gathered and
published after next Friday (or after 21UTC next Friday) when me and
Simon crash on IRC at the same time.
Cheers,
Pasi
The other side of this being - how long do we wait as a team for
members of that team to vote?
I see no reason why we'd not be good to expect a response for
something 'less important' as no more than a month.
For something that has importance to Xubuntu as a whole I would
expect some response somewhat faster - even if that response was
'foo' caught me on the phone, I'm not able to vote, my feeling is
*this*'
Thus we can take into consideraration people's POV.
example - there are 14 (currently) of us
we have a vote, two of us are awol (ish), team is 14
vote gets taken and stands at 6 +, 6- with 2 to vote, 1 does, the
second does *life* stuff*
at 2 weeks, the vote is now 7+,6- and the vote carries
just thinking aloud here - but how long should a team wait for one of
it's members before making that member's vote null, you have to bear
in mind here the length of a support cycle, at 6 months should we
wait for someone taking 4 months to make a preference?
just a thought, provocative perhaps, but just a thought ;)
If the vote result was that close, it would most likely warrant
further discussion and not carrying on with whatever was voted on. If
it's important, and several people haven't voted after the set
deadline, then we should consider what would be the best way to either
try to get a hold of them - or resolve the issue without them.
Just my two cents,
Pasi
wfm
I'd just be concerned about stagnation is all
--
xubuntu-devel mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/xubuntu-devel
