This is strange
Status: Planning
Brought to you by:
mjpolanco
Menu
▾
▴
Ok, I'm confused. What drew me here in the first place was the "want-ad" for the PMI consultant, while not being one myself I have worked every project methodology almost know to humankind.
No offense, but, it seems to be a helter-skelter "lets start here, how about starting there, no there!" hampster dance going on. So let me give my two cents of opinion from experience and will quite a bit of reading on project management:
1. Goals/Vision
2. Stakeholder definitions/Requirements
3. Architecture
4. Function point analysis (milestone for decision)/Open up a project plan (stuff like tasks, etc.) with initial sizing.
5. Use Case/Requirements analysis
6. Design
7. Implementation
8. Maintenance
By my experience, this list also constitutes a number of requirements right off the bat for what Projectile should support.
Now, if the founders/leads of Projectile don't agree with the list, then I suggest posting a straw man process that you intend to follow, without a rudder this boat won't float.
OK I have been guilty of going off on tangents. I think frankc is right. Lets follow the list and proceed to reach goals. I will set a discussion group for each topic in the list so that information can be organzied better.
Lets all start working for a great result.
Well, I do not agree. First thing first: you seem somehow attached to the term "stakeholders". You know, some time ago I participated (as a lead) in a project done for a quite big telco. The whole notion of "stakeholders" and "steering" was in the matter of fact linked to the realm of corporate politics, rather then to the project itself. By making as many important people interested in the project as "stakeholders" or members of "steering committee", we were trying to assure, the project would not get shot in yet another "reorg".
I believe, we are free of this kind of problems. There is only us and potential users, who are interested in the project. Since there is no actual users yet (they are not aware of the project very existence) we don't need to worry.
On the other hand, the suggestion, that we proceed in some organized way is a sound one. The problem with open-source project, where people participate on voluntary basis is that someone have to start. This is why I shall allow myself to post number of articles (I would do it during this weekend hadn't my computer died), that initially propose:
1. Process, we could possibly follow.
2. Initial set of V1 features.
3. Some considerations regarding architecture of the program.
Message for all:
Please, refer to appropriate messages and come out with some comments. I hereby volunteer as a secretary and I promise to prepare subsequent reviews and final versions of the documents, that we can publish on our wondrous web site.
Regards,
Marcin
Don't assume that the term "stakeholder" refers to your experience, or that your experience is germain across the board. While we all have war notes we could compare over the issues of "politics" getting in the way of the process, that was not the point of my missive.
In fact stakeholders, my use of the term, was in reference to requirements engineering. I have already given "chaoticpeace" a list of stakeholders involved in Project Management and Project Planning. The reality is probably that the list is probably shy a few. Perhaps he can post the list so that you may refer to it. It directly addresses what you termed "potential users".
Will you please post the stakeholder list again to the forums? I lost a few emails last week and that one may have been in the corruption.
Thanks
Here is the original message to SourceForge. Keep in mind that for the actual work of tasks, some of these are potential collaborators and might not be a primary role.
http://sourceforge.net/forum/message.php?msg_id=34145