On Tue, Mar 3, 2009 at 19:09, Tres Seaver <tsea...@palladion.com> wrote: > Different participants will report differently about the success, no > doubt. One unexpected outcome (for some) was classifying the > "decisions" taken at the PSPS as "advisory", "just talk", etc: having > no force in governing the more "tactical" decisions.
I don't remember us actually doing any "tactical decisions". There was discussions, and to a large part consensus about these, but not actual decisions. The end result of the PSPS was a bunch of actions, entered into the bugtracker, and people assigned to them. These were sometime connected to tactical decisions, but not decisions per se. I may misremember, but in any case, this to me seems (in retrospect) as a good idea, as complaints at that time was raised that it wasn't inclusive enough, which would have been a problem if it really was a decision making meeting. Instead it functioned as a way to get the contributors focused and if not on the same page then at least in the same book, and get energy into the group. As such, I thought it was a success. And fun. And I learnt a cool way to run meetings. :) I do think that this, together with day-to-day release teams is a good working solution we should try for Zope too. -- Lennart Regebro: Pythonista, Barista, Notsotrista. http://regebro.wordpress.com/ +33 661 58 14 64 _______________________________________________ Zope-Dev maillist - Zope-Dev@zope.org http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-dev ** No cross posts or HTML encoding! ** (Related lists - http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope-announce http://mail.zope.org/mailman/listinfo/zope )
