proposed new team structure
James E Keenan
jkeen at verizon.net
Tue Oct 26 11:09:38 UTC 2010
Christoph Otto wrote:
> is a pretty radical change from the current approach, but we also think
> it will be a significant improvement in our process and and in improving
> our bus numbers.
My sense from reading through discussion on #parrot yesterday is that
people are, in fact, interested in working in groups that have a defined
scope and time horizon.
1. In response to user shockwave's comments about his experiences trying
to embed Parrot on one of whiteknight's blog posts, there appears to be
considerable interest in overhauling our APIs and documentations in that
area. I saw at least four developers and/or contributors suggesting ideas.
Suppose we call this "Task Force Embedding." It falls under the general
rubric of what we've been calling Product Management. If it is not
quite "the" Product Management team, it is at least "a" product
management team. I would like to encourage those who participated in
the discussion about embedding yesterday to constitute themselves as a
focused task force and to create a Trac ticket outlining the plan of
action for the task force.
2. Similarly, it appears that at long last we're seeing some momentum
toward working on Lorito. This falls more under the rubric of
Architecture and Design and, again, if not "the" Architecture and Design
team, certainly sounds like "Task Force Lorito" underneath A&D. I would
like to encourage those who have been partaking in that discussion to
constitute themselve as a Task Force, create a Trac ticket, etc.
One further suggestion: #parrotsketch is an underused resource. While
we reserve it for our Tuesday general meeting, we could certainly
allocate time on other days for these task forces or teams to hold their
own online meetings.
Thank you very much.
More information about the parrot-dev