On Sat, Mar 29, 2014 at 7:14 AM, Andrea Pescetti <pesce...@apache.org> wrote: > On 27/03/2014 Jürgen Schmidt wrote: >> >> On 3/27/14 1:59 AM, Andrea Pescetti wrote: >>> >>> Is there interest for a "live" (meaning: IRC + video, like Google >>> Hangouts or similar) meeting to make sure that we (developers, QA, >>> Localization, Documentation, website...) are all on the same page >>> regarding the upcoming 4.1 release? >> >> we can try such a meeting but I don't see the benefit compared to a >> clear communication on the mailing list (can be of course improved). > > > The benefit would be: make sure that active volunteers have a chance to be > heard and to influence the release. We are doing good now; still, we can do > better. See below for concrete examples. > > >> Either we do it in a more organized way and define exactly what we >> expect or I am not interested. > > > I am not interested in the other option. Well, maybe I misunderstood what > you mean by "organized", but for sure I would find it overkill that we have > to vote for someone to be in a call to represent a certain group (say, QA) > and vote on what the call topics should be. It's an informal meeting. > >>> It wouldn't be a meeting where things are decided (we have the lists for >>> that!), but merely a meeting where people can inform each other to make >>> sure that all priorities are being addressed ... >> >> I am in favor of having such discussion mainly on the list to have it >> documented. > > > Note that it's more about being informed (about stuff that is already > somewhere on the lists), and discussion can follow on lists. > > Maybe it helps if I make a concrete past example: the "Restore windows" > problem https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=119006 has been known > for two years. It only triggered on certain versions of Mac OS X and only > after a crash. Still it caused 500+ e-mails, and probably countless forum > posts and some enraged/lost users. In retrospect, we should have evaluated > it better. > > How can we avoid the next "Restore windows", i.e., something that is known, > important to someone, already documented somewhere but that would deserve > better attention? It's important for OpenOffice as a project that active > volunteers feel that they can influence the release. And it is also very > good for OpenOffice as a product. > > Now, the obvious answer is "Just place it in Bugzilla and nominate it as a > release blocker". This doesn't always work. For a release blocker, for > example, you would require in most cases that a patch is available, and a > description that is purely technical can miss to state why it is important > to get it fixed before release. And if you look at who is nominating > blockers, you'll see that only a few people do that. > > The IRC+video meeting is the best solution I can find, but anything else > that guarantees proper escalation would work for me. Just, asking people to > simply follow the process is too demanding on volunteers and we need to > streamline it (another concrete example? we don't have 4.0 in Danish mainly > due to bad communication, since translation was completed before the 4.0 > release but after the deadlines). > > If you want yet another example... we already know that OpenOffice 4.1 is > going to have display problems for Gnome 3 users on Linux. Two bugs have > clearly been identified: no refresh on fields > https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=124482 and no scrollbars > https://issues.apache.org/ooo/show_bug.cgi?id=121627 ; the former has a > working patch by Andre and I'll nominate it as a blocker, but what about the > latter? Does it make sense to nominate it even if we don't have a fix > available? Will a meeting where active people can report on what they see on > the forums, lists etc help in making the assessment? >
We can always have a Hangout on our Google+ page. But I think that is limited to 10 people and ties us to a specific time, making it more or less convenient to people depending on their timezone. So I'm not sure it is much more inclusive. But you could make the argument that it is a best practice with Agile methodology for us to have "daily scrum" meeting to check in and review blockers. But that could also be done via the mailing list, with a new thread each day, e.g., "2014-03-29 Daily Scrum". In any case, if a PMC member wants to take the lead on a hangout, and does not already have access to our Google+ page, let me know and I can give you manager access. -Rob > Regards, > Andrea. > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org > --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@openoffice.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@openoffice.apache.org
