Re: [Opensg-core] [Opensg-users] Future of OpenSG workflow

[Allen B. <al...@vr...>]

Dirk Reiners wrote:
> 	Hi Allen,
>
> Allen Bierbaum wrote:
>   
>>> I agree with using Trac.  The only thing I have a slight problem with is 
>>>   the idea of asking people to start a ticket for new things and then 
>>> combining that into the roadmap.  I think it needs to be done the other 
>>> way around (within reason)
>>>
>>> I have a pretty simple (and possibly naive) suggestion here.
>>>
>>> 1. We make a webpage for each release/iteration (maybe the roadmap page)
>>> 2. We make a list of things we know we want to go in and things we would 
>>> like to see worked on (Dirk and other leaders start the page and others 
>>> contribute to it)
>>> 3. We prioritize the list a bit and turn the tasks into tickets
>>> 4. People pick the tickets they are willing/able to work on and put 
>>> their names with them.  If they can, they try to give a time estimate, 
>>> something like "done before the end of October" or something else simple.
>>> 5. When a task is done, cross it off the list.  When the tasks are all 
>>> done the iteration is ready to go.
>>>       
>
> I basically agree, but I think we can skip 1 to 3 for 1.8. For 2 it 
> might make more sense as there are bigger fish to fry.
>   
True.  I was thinking more about the 2.0 work flow.  I agree that 1.8 
should just finish off the remaining tasks and head out the door.

>   
>>> This is a very simple workflow and has very little overhead.  It would 
>>> allow people to put in features that they or their company need that 
>>> others may not, but it also allows people to know what is coming and to 
>>> work together to plan the needs.
>>>       
>
> Don't underestimate step 3. That can be a lot of work.
>   

Definitely.  Note that I said a "simple" work flow not an easy one.  All 
the items in the work flow will take time and effort but I hope they 
outlined steps will impose minimal overhead or unneeded effort.

>>> It also gives new contributors a place to look for things they can help 
>>> with and it gives users a place to look to see what is going to be 
>>> worked on next and for what iteration.
>>>
>>> So what do y'all think?  Would this work for OpenSG and are the core 
>>> developers interested in trying things this way for a while?  If it 
>>> doesn't work we can always change.
>>>
>>>       
>> Does anyone have comments on this proposed method of operation?  What do 
>>   y'all think about using a roadmap to list the things we all agree need 
>> to be done and then prioritizing them and picking out the things you are 
>> willing/able to do?
>>     
>
> OK.
>
>   
>> I know I am an outsider 
>>     
>
> You are certainly anything but.
>   
I still don't know how to fully add a new fc or how to extend the system 
to rendering a new node core, so I think I am still an outsider. Maybe I 
am just a slightly more involved (ie. louder) outsider. :)

-Allen

> 	Dirk
>
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Using Tomcat but need to do more? Need to support web services, security?
> Get stuff done quickly with pre-integrated technology to make your job easier
> Download IBM WebSphere Application Server v.1.0.1 based on Apache Geronimo
> http://sel.as-us.falkag.net/sel?cmd=lnk&kid=120709&bid=263057&dat=121642
> _______________________________________________
> Opensg-core mailing list
> Ope...@li...
> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/opensg-core
>
>