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 )

Reply via email to