Difference between revisions of "User talk:Zha Ewry/Proposed AWG Process"
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Dzonatas Sol (talk | contribs) |
|||
| Line 4: | Line 4: | ||
* What? I'm not supposed to have a sense of humor? :-) And... on a slightly less humorous note, it never hurts to keep that final goal in mind. The rest of our points are well taken, and I've tweaked the page to reflect them. -[[User:Zha Ewry| Zha]] 5:33 AM PDT, 18 October 2007 | * What? I'm not supposed to have a sense of humor? :-) And... on a slightly less humorous note, it never hurts to keep that final goal in mind. The rest of our points are well taken, and I've tweaked the page to reflect them. -[[User:Zha Ewry| Zha]] 5:33 AM PDT, 18 October 2007 | ||
* Until there are resources for the AWG Project in a JIRA domain (hosted by LL or elsewhere), I propose we use several "office hour" style allocations to gather about each subject area or discuss in a geographic-region friendly manner. That way the "groups" as suggested by the VAG proposal can actually show membership by being present at the office hour. That office hour only needs agendas to work on any viewpoint (placed on the agenda) instead of being limit to just the one listed on the current form of VAGs. What we need for these office hours are viewpoints, subjects, participation, the agenda, and the hour the dicussion takes place. Maybe two or three of these are enough for now that'll be friendly to Europe, America, and one other common timezone. [[User:Dzonatas Sol|Dzonatas Sol]] 11:36, 18 October 2007 (PDT) | |||
Revision as of 11:36, 18 October 2007
- I think that this accurately describes the process path that AWG seems be travelling at this point. Of special note is that it identifies that the work is being addressed from multiple viewpoints in parallel, and that trial implementations of parts of the system are being made early as this is of special interest to several participants. It looks good to me, a recipe for teamwork.
- The final "code it and test it" is of course just a placeholder, but still funny in its terseness. :-) No doubt we'll expand it more usefully before long, especially in terms of Quality Assurance, elements of which will end up within earlier stages of your process. For example, traceability from viewpoint concerns to elements in the design is an important aspect of QA work, one which the VAGs will be addressing. Likewise, incremental change and regression testing is paramount in a distributed grid where the sun never sets, so we'll have to think about this in the "code it and test it" section in due course. --Morgaine Dinova 02:01, 18 October 2007 (PDT)
- What? I'm not supposed to have a sense of humor? :-) And... on a slightly less humorous note, it never hurts to keep that final goal in mind. The rest of our points are well taken, and I've tweaked the page to reflect them. - Zha 5:33 AM PDT, 18 October 2007
- Until there are resources for the AWG Project in a JIRA domain (hosted by LL or elsewhere), I propose we use several "office hour" style allocations to gather about each subject area or discuss in a geographic-region friendly manner. That way the "groups" as suggested by the VAG proposal can actually show membership by being present at the office hour. That office hour only needs agendas to work on any viewpoint (placed on the agenda) instead of being limit to just the one listed on the current form of VAGs. What we need for these office hours are viewpoints, subjects, participation, the agenda, and the hour the dicussion takes place. Maybe two or three of these are enough for now that'll be friendly to Europe, America, and one other common timezone. Dzonatas Sol 11:36, 18 October 2007 (PDT)