Eric Renaud wrote: > The prime effective operating size of a team is 5-8 members; and that's not > anecdotal. > Beyond that size becomes ungainly. Imagaine the number of permutations in > communication channels alone.
Absolutely. This is another reason why we should split up things into more sub-projects and more lists. Each of which is manageable. From my experience, the number 5-8 sounds about right. > the complexity involved grows inherently - and almost exponentially. It grows quadratically, but that's still pretty fast. Faster than people expect. I've been working on a set of graphics to illustrate this. I'm not done, but I can show you what I have: http://www.math.umd.edu/~dcarrera/openoffice/distributed-development.sxd Cheers, -- Daniel Carrera | I don't want it perfect, Join OOoAuthors today! | I want it Tuesday. http://oooauthors.org | --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
