Personal tools
  • We're Hiring!

You are here: Home Community Minutes Conference Calls 2010 2010-01-21 Thursday Meeting

2010-01-21 Thursday Meeting

Agenda

  • Project management
    • Status of process survey, finished by? Filled out by?
    • Status of tool testing, installed by? Evaluated by?
    • Completion for 4.2?
  • 4.2
    • On "schedule"?

Notes

  • Process surveys

    • Scott: created document today
    • next week go over a skeleton draft Tues
  • Tool installation

    • Chris: mingle installed. various problems
    • looked at it with Donald
    • has jabber integration (not working yet)
    • source code integration wasn't working properly
      • synchronization issues on our 6K revisions
    • try with new subversion today
    • mingle then hosed
    • then we'll have an idea for what environment we need to test
    • J-M: any about trac integration solutions?
      • Chris: acunote we have to sign up and pass our access to them
      • Chris: also trying to get Jira
    • by end of today, we should have a mingle
      • where play won't be wasted
      • visualization options
      • problem: 5 users
    • tuesday next week, should have jira and mingle
      • mingle requires VPN outside of the unversity
  • proj. mgmt for 4.2

    • J-M: testing phase during the process
      • discipline should be in place for 4.2
    • chris: have tried with Melissa during cleanup
      • it's a bit rough
      • when it started, what the tickets are, etc.
      • similar to Donald's suggestion on using trac (page per roadmap item)
      • https://skyking.microscopy.wisc.edu/trac/java/wiki/BioFormatsCleanup
      • adding pages about items not on roadmap
        • big images, ...
      • helps us to describe why we're doing everything
        • wiki-->tickets-->commits
    • Josh: need to figure out which of the proj. mgmt stuff is on the graffle
      • Chris: several things need discussion
      • Jean-Marie: assumed everything on that page is agreed on
      • Chris: sure, but don't know what they mean
      • Jean-Marie: with wiki page, can review and say "too ambitious"
      • Jean-Marie: a practice we should adopt
      • Brian: i like this idea
      • Donald: do we have to break them down?
      • Chris: yes, and take a day.
      • Donald: sooner rather than later
      • Chris: do any of us know how long 4.2 will take? No.
      • Andrew: risks
        • risk of not completing, risk of not delivering on a promise
        • "must" "would like"
        • any big "must" puts as risk
  • anything communications missed?

    • no mailing list item
    • forums? only bernhard. Josh will look at it.
  • web ui review

    • 3 panel is mostly finished
    • be a while until it is installed
    • should we do a demo? Yeah.
  • wiki pages

    • took 1 hour to create wiki pages for all roadmap bullets
    • don't need tickets on roadmap page then
    • description at top
    • usage at the top (screenshots at bottom?)
      • looks better from external point of view
    • too many things on a single page?
      • Josh: if I have to create a wiki page per ticket, I won't
    • if something has only one ticket?...
    • what's the purpose of the wiki pages?
      • showing external how done it is
      • knowing when they can download
      • status
    • no tables in formatting
    • must-have / good-to-have?
      • lots of discussion
      • Jean-Marie: "good-to-have" has no choice of being done
      • Andrew: related work, good to have it together
      • should only be tickets
    • per milestone? Yes
    • dependencies?
    • estimates?
    • ... we just spent an hour building a tool
      • just treat the must haves?
      • ..
    • numbers or bullets
      • do the best we can
    • what's it all giving us
      • users
        • description, link how to use it
        • helpful for writing documentation ("Getting started")
        • users know what to expect
      • devs
        • numbers for high priority (musts)
        • bullets for rest
        • must be tickets in 4.2!
        • must have estimates, days? PP? Days (6 hour blocks, ideal days)
        • research/investigation page
    • @now
      • all pages and estimages up by end of tomorrow
      • 20 minute lunch questions?
      • tuesday we will review all the pages/estimates
    • then
      • Jason: times in the pages? Nah, use tickets and graffle
      • Chris: then we use commits to see how long things take
      • Jason: review, is scrolling through
      • Jean-Marie: having build on the story (marked on QA) !!
        • Chris: hudson links! (trac plugin)
        • Josh: acceptance tests for knowing if something breaks
        • have to test the builds.
        • ...if it's a pain for us, it's a pain for others
        • compare how many hours per person
        • we need to get some HISTORY for learning!
Document Actions