[maemo-community] Monthly Sprint Proposal
From: Jeremiah Foster jeremiah at jeremiahfoster.comDate: Tue Apr 7 16:03:46 EEST 2009
- Previous message: Monthly Sprint Proposal
- Next message: Monthly Sprint Proposal
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]
On Apr 7, 2009, at 9:57, Andrew Flegg wrote: > 2009/4/7 Qole <qole.tablet at gmail.com>: >> >> So, my proposal will start out with the simple request that the paid >> maemo.org team members follow the guidelines on the Sprints page. > > > I think we need to be careful using terms like "police" and "boss", > though. I agree. > > It is interesting to me that many of the issues you raise are the > exact same ones I've seen before (in my professional capacity) in > agile processes; and the recommendations you make certainly overlap > with what we've found to be effective: This kind of perspective is invaluable, it strengthens the maemo development process. > > * Split out tasks - each task should either be "done" or "not done" > at the end of the month. > > * Activity logs - stand-up meetings or diaries. I suspect there's > some formatting work we can do to make the maemo.org ones more > accessible (and linking in to ongoing roles - or specific tasks - > may help). > > * Prioritisation - things always crop up which are part of a role > which aren't part of a specific task (i.e. p1 bugs in the website, > small packages needing attention, etc.). This is where MoSCoW can > come in: > > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MoSCoW_Method > > Once all the tasks have been identified, they are given priorities > of around 60% budget on "must", 20% "should" and 20% "could". > When they are tackled in order, the "could" tasks drop out > first when disrupting events occur. > > The latter may help with the "explain why a task wasn't completed": > the only things which should need real explanations (from _anyone_ > who's *committed* themselves to a task) are "must" and, probably, > "should" tasks. > > The big problem here is to limit the administrative overhead for > unpaid community members who are doing things in their spare time. > There are obvious benefits to the *paid* staff of some kind of > improved process (it gives them something to point to at contract > renegotiation time), and there *are* benefits to the community as > well. But the overhead shouldn't detract people from doing "real" work > in the community - especially when it eats up into their spare time. > > The advantage of an agile methodology is it allows you to pick and > choose, and react to external factors quickly. If the process needs > tweaks, and we can get consensus on what those tweaks are, there's > nothing stopping us. So, I'd especially like to hear the thoughts of > the "maemo.org four", Henri, Quim and Tero and any lay-people who've > committed tasks to the sprint process. I think this is worth a try, it sounds workable. Jeremiah
- Previous message: Monthly Sprint Proposal
- Next message: Monthly Sprint Proposal
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ]