----- Original Message ----- > One thing I love about the MoCo meetings is that if I don't go, I > don't miss anything except the chance to ask questions: mbrubeck &co > create detailed minutes (really, transcripts) of every meeting, which > I can read on my schedule. He then e-mails the transcript out to > everyone, so I don't even have to remember to go looking for it. > > Since in-person attendance at the MoCo meetings is non-zero, it seems > clear that some people prefer being in live attendance. That's > totally fine. But at the very least, I think it's useful to > recognize > that not everyone is willing or able to attend the meetings live, and > if we think what's going on there is important, we should make an > effort to broadcast it to a larger audience.
Good point. > Last time I checked the wiki isn't a canonical record of the > engineering meeting's contents, and last time I checked there's no > way > to get notified when a meeting's notes are up (via RSS or e-mail or > whatever). The wiki does have point form information of the topics raised but is definitely not a transcript. The minutes are available as soon as the meeting is over. I can create a notification but only if you think that's helpful without the transcript. > On a related note, I think the engineering meeting is a bad place for > having discussions or debating decisions. Inevitably, many of the > people in attendance won't care about this particular issue, so we're > just wasting their time. And similarly, at our current numeric and > geographic scale it's inevitable that people who do care about the > issue won't be in attendance at the meeting and thus won't be able to > participate. I think therefore that discussions / debates are > better-suited for our newsgroups or for smaller meetings. If this is in response to my comment about flagging mailing list discussions, I do this so that people are aware of the active discussions and have the links to comment. We have not spent much time discussing any of these items in the meeting itself. Lawrence > > -Justin > > On Wed, Apr 24, 2013 at 2:26 PM, Lawrence Mandel > <lman...@mozilla.com> wrote: > > tl;dr > > I would like to make the platform meeting more relevant for > > engineers. I have already made some changes (see below) and am > > interested in your feedback on what you would like to get out of > > this meeting. If you don't currently attend, what would make this > > meeting relevant for you? > > > > --- > > Since taking over management of the Platform meeting in February, > > my goal has been to make it more engineer driven and more relevant > > to the day-to-day activities of engineers. I think that there is > > value in having a forum for Mozilla's engineers to speak with one > > another on a regular basis. However, with the size of Mozilla's > > engineering base, creating a useful forum is a challenge. > > > > Some of the changes that we've made are: > > > > - Engineers are once again doing the talking - Many of the > > technical updates were being given by project managers. No more. > > Updates for engineers, by engineers. So far, I think this has been > > successful in changing the tone of the meeting. > > > > - More talk about work in progress - Reporting about completed work > > is great. However, we are now also talking about active projects. > > I think work that touches common sections of the code base or work > > that is likely to impact other teams is especially useful to flag. > > > > - Identify topics that are stalled / need more attention - Over the > > last month I have seen a new focus on stability and orange factor > > issues. I have also seen a number of calls for help in identifying > > the source of issues. > > > > - Invite other teams to speak with engineering - I invited Sheppy > > to join us to discuss documentation. I would encourage the > > invitation of other teams with which we collaborate to join the > > meeting for specific topics. > > > > - Flag important discussions from across Mozilla's mailing lists - > > A number of people have commented to me that there are too many > > lists to track. This meeting is an opportunity to surface key > > online discussions to ensure they have the participation of the > > right people and reach a conclusion. > > > > Some other suggestions are: > > > > - A review of best practices and anti-pattens in order to build the > > technical vitality of the Mozilla engineering organization. > > > > - More involvement by more people. The product and project sections > > of the agenda do not have a specific owner. You can bring up any > > related work wherever you think it makes sense. There are also the > > catchall sections "Key Issues" and "Roundtable" if you are not > > sure where your update belongs. > > > > I want this meeting to be relevant for you. However, I am just a > > steward for this meeting. I need your help. Why do you attend the > > platform meeting? If you previously attended the meeting, why did > > you stop? Do you have ideas to make the Platform meeting more > > useful? > > > > Thanks, > > > > Lawrence > > _______________________________________________ > > dev-platform mailing list > > dev-platform@lists.mozilla.org > > https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-platform > _______________________________________________ dev-platform mailing list dev-platform@lists.mozilla.org https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/dev-platform
