Return-Path: X-Original-To: apmail-incubator-ooo-dev-archive@minotaur.apache.org Delivered-To: apmail-incubator-ooo-dev-archive@minotaur.apache.org Received: from mail.apache.org (hermes.apache.org [140.211.11.3]) by minotaur.apache.org (Postfix) with SMTP id D2177D65C for ; Mon, 22 Oct 2012 08:00:46 +0000 (UTC) Received: (qmail 86282 invoked by uid 500); 22 Oct 2012 08:00:45 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-incubator-ooo-dev-archive@incubator.apache.org Received: (qmail 86161 invoked by uid 500); 22 Oct 2012 08:00:45 -0000 Mailing-List: contact ooo-dev-help@incubator.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org Received: (qmail 86146 invoked by uid 99); 22 Oct 2012 08:00:45 -0000 Received: from athena.apache.org (HELO athena.apache.org) (140.211.11.136) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Mon, 22 Oct 2012 08:00:45 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=1.5 required=5.0 tests=HTML_MESSAGE,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW,SPF_PASS,T_FILL_THIS_FORM_SHORT X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (athena.apache.org: domain of kevingrignon.oo@gmail.com designates 209.85.213.47 as permitted sender) Received: from [209.85.213.47] (HELO mail-yh0-f47.google.com) (209.85.213.47) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Mon, 22 Oct 2012 08:00:38 +0000 Received: by mail-yh0-f47.google.com with SMTP id g23so420674yhg.6 for ; Mon, 22 Oct 2012 01:00:17 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :content-type; bh=w3/QG4var/HFkD74HO5OiiO+MUfafKirQHtOXl6+rVA=; b=n02NU1P66xN0V+hTGHdEpulBQWWKHOKxjFqkOIhd8+Q6MI4k5puhEzrj2DmsYEgWga WtGPr3z5SsYymj4nPD/SLnWazO+WM/ys0JeDwXZ64FYl9ZiWKzjM7gCqq9+sxH6bsL4K SOAXn+QAyvKR2g6iE4RRVZzCJvV6+yN+0SUUP7azoTNbepb0+RlU6m5RyCxVwJLJPA4L SgMJtCpA8f/sllmzEnueh7FxeixdOxIN84rEXEi1YH0EFK3v/jasVk+jn9WkXuDgKWZj bLpY2jZhl9UsIlssc3HmcZ3z4PtagSnLVYgFhs3YzefwOXIfHqbwRlM+kjtQZOv0/1VY rj5Q== MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.236.130.106 with SMTP id j70mr7629540yhi.0.1350892817665; Mon, 22 Oct 2012 01:00:17 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.236.123.41 with HTTP; Mon, 22 Oct 2012 01:00:17 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <5080550F.6040107@gmail.com> References: <5049FB92.6090802@googlemail.com> <504BB57D.8040007@apache.org> <32341571.21720.1347238326844.JavaMail.mobile-sync@iccag8> <2668894498077507778@unknownmsgid> <507DD1A0.9090703@gmail.com> <507DDA77.7020907@gmail.com> <507F2228.9070308@gmail.com> <313C53A7-CF2A-4DA2-8EF9-ABCA11B0800E@gmail.com> <5080550F.6040107@gmail.com> Date: Mon, 22 Oct 2012 16:00:17 +0800 Message-ID: Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] defining roles for management, coordination, work items... From: Kevin Grignon To: "ooo-dev@incubator.apache.org" Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=20cf3010e50186cd1004cca13e20 X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org --20cf3010e50186cd1004cca13e20 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 On Friday, October 19, 2012, Kay Schenk wrote: > > > On 10/17/2012 10:35 PM, Kevin Grignon wrote: > >> KG01 - see comments online >> >> On Oct 18, 2012, at 5:24 AM, Kay Schenk wrote: >> >> >>> >>> On 10/16/2012 03:40 PM, Rob Weir wrote: >>> >>>> On Tue, Oct 16, 2012 at 6:06 PM, Kay Schenk >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On 10/16/2012 02:47 PM, Rob Weir wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> On Tue, Oct 16, 2012 at 5:29 PM, Kay Schenk >>>>>> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> [top posting -- old discussion/business] >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I just created a little wiki schematic page based on this discussion >>>>>>> at: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> https://cwiki.apache.org/**confluence/display/OOOUSERS/** >>>>>>> Project+Management+Roles >>>>>>> >>>>>>> which will make it easy for us to add roles, people to roles, etc. >>>>>>> [The second column, intended for actual names, is blank so far.] >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>> I'm not really sure what problem we're solving here. >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> Better defining activities that we do/need to do. >>>>> Hopefully soliciting/inviting individuals to take ownership of some of >>>>> these >>>>> activities. >>>>> >>>>> >>>> But we can have a full list of roles on the wiki, but not define a >>>> single task... But maybe this is the first step. >>>> >>> >>> yes...and an oversight in my initial enthusiasm. Obviously, it is >>> difficult to determine if any list is sufficient unless the roles are >>> defined. :/ >>> >>> >>> >>> >>>> One way of making this scale and be more self-maintaining is something >>>> like: >>>> >>>> 1) Work with Infra to create a new issue tracking DB for the project. >>>> Maybe use JIRA rather than BZ. This new DB would be for tracking >>>> tasks, not for tracking bugs. (Why a separate DB? So we don't drive >>>> QA team crazy.) >>>> >>> >> KG01 - Rob, I like the idea of a new system that supports scope items in >> addition to work items. We could benefit from more PPM tooling. >> > > Kevin-- > > Maybe you could raise this as an additional issue or a separate discussion > item, and explain to the community what you mean by this. I don't know how > many folks involved here know what "PPM tooling" is. KG02 - PPM = project and portfolio management. The PPM process include objects for scope and work. Some change management systems that manage work items realize the PPM conceptual model. > >> >>>> 2) In the database we put in all the tasks that we know needs to get >>>> done, from running a RAT scan before a release, to verifying the new >>>> Norwegian translation, to UX exploration tasks, etc. There are >>>> probably 100+ tasks that we could think of, more than would be fun to >>>> track on the wiki. >>>> >>> >> KG01 - In fact, I'm already in the midst of populating a ux opportunity >> backlog as BZ does not serve my business needs. >> >> >>>> 3) Project members can comment on issues and take ownership of them. >>>> >>>> 4) If a project member is focused deeply on a specific issue, then >>>> they can set themselves as the default "owner" for that issue >>>> category. >>>> >>>> In this way, roles are defined implicitly by what tasks you claim and >>>> what categories you set yourself as the default owner. >>>> >>> >> KG01 - agreed, less role oriented and more work item oriented. >> > > "work items" pretty much determine role I would think except in some > specialized cases at Apache. KG02 - Not necessarily, many work items are boundary objects that apply, or could be performed by a variety of role. My previous comment was to encourage us to focus on work and tasks, and focus less on role. > > > > The nice thing about this approach is it helps with the communication > challenges of a large project. None of us can read everything on > every mailing list. But we can all read the JIRA notifications that > come directly to us as an issue owner. > > > Well this part is certainly true. It's difficult to overlook what you > signed up for, when you get notifications. > > > Another nice thing about this approach is it lets us set up a backlog > of things that are "nice to do someday" but where we have no > volunteer. For example, spell checking the website, or updating the > Indonesian translation. We don't even have a person in the role of an > Indonesian Translator today. But if the tasks are defined in JIRA > then we can the unassigned tasks as a way to recruit new volunteers. > It makes it easier to see where we need help. > > > KG01 - backlogs also allow is to create candidate release and iteration > plans > > > I think the JIRA/BZ approach definitely has merit in the long run. > For now, I think it would be advantageous to just flesh out the page a bit > more to supply definitions and see what we're missing in terms of typical > actions/roles that we take on, or should be taken on. > > And, although people could indeed "enroll" for tasks right on the page, > I'm not explicitly suggesting that as some categories, for example, > developer, would have MANY entries. However, I do think it is valuable for > site visitors to at least identify mailing list moderators, and maybe BZ, > wiki, etc. admins. > > > > > > For example, if person X is assigned role Y, I assume we don't want to > encourage people to contact person X directly for questions or > assistance. We should do our work on ooo-dev. > > I assume we also want to avoid the type of hard-coded roles that > existed with OOo, where the names, personal email addresses and even > phone numbers of community manages, press contacts, etc., were on > hundreds of web pages. > > > > Well these are good points actually. > > Yes, we should absolutely continue discussions on ooo-dev. I was thinking > of > putting in names for the roles. The "roles" are not "hard" as you suggest > here. We don't hire people and they don't have "official" positions. Maybe > more of a way of providing information both to the outside and (P)PMC. > > > > I suggest keeping this light-weight, non-exclusive, open to all who > are interested, etc. > > > > No problem with that of course. PLEASE self-sign up! This is encouraged! > I was tempted to assign Juergen permanent "release manager" but thought > better of it. :} > > > So more like "areas of interest" or "contact > > > point" rather than hard-coded roles. > > > > Well, OK. Still I think explicitly defining roles is good for the project > in some ways. It will show us what types of activities "someone" needs to > take ownership of. > > > Remember, people do go on > > > vacation, volunteers come and go, real life intervenes. So we cannot > "assign" someone a role in the same way we can an employee. > > > > Exactly, we need overlap! > > > > > > Rob referenced the following page as part of this thread: > > http://incubator.apache.org/**openofficeorg/ppmc-faqs.html#**status > > Which probably needs updating or ???? O > > --20cf3010e50186cd1004cca13e20--