LibreOffice Conference 2011, Personal Summary

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
14 messages Options
Christoph Noack Christoph Noack
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

LibreOffice Conference 2011, Personal Summary

Hi everyone,

I noticed some discussions that might relate to discussions we've had at
the LibreOffice Conference last week. So, if you want to spend some
minutes, then here is my personal summary:
http://luxate.blogspot.com/2011/10/libreoffice-conference-2011-personal.html

If anything is missing or unclear ... please ask :-)

Cheers,
Christoph


--
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to [hidden email]
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/design/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
nik-2 nik-2
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: LibreOffice Conference 2011, Personal Summary

Hi all,

I've noticed mention in a couple of places here of the need for us to
make it clearer how we operate.
While I don't have a complete solution, there is an aspect that affects
me (and I imagine, quite a few others) that I'd like to propose a simple
solution to;

Our "tasks/work items" page. It is too long, unkept and badly-sectioned
to be useful as a tool for knowing what needs to be done.
While I realise it isn't going to become an amazing productivity tool
overnight, there are some small improvements that we could make to make
it more useful.

I've created a quick copy on my own wiki user-page to run past you
before making any changes to the actual task-list.
Please check this link;
http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/User:Nik#Proposed_rearrange_of_Design_Work_items

I would propose we;

    * Separate out items that are "ACTIVE", "ON-HOLD" and "COMPLETED"
      into three separate tables so that people interested in doing
      things only have to check the top table.
    * Keep the items in the tables short so that our members can more
      easily see what needs attention right now and what is going on
      that they would be interested in. Colour coding will help. More
      detailed information should just be linked to.
    * We need to have deadlines, whether we meet them or not (because we
      are all volunteers). Otherwise everything will end up as an
      incomplete task that lasts forever.
    * We need to have a client and a representative who speaks on their
      behalf. That will give us a point of reference rather than having
      endless internal communication.
    * We need to be organised and update this ourselves and move
      finished jobs out, or move jobs that are on-hold into that table.
      They shouldn't just stay in the active table.


and most drastically;

    * *We should LIMIT the number of active tasks to just 3-4.* Anything
      else should not be added until something can be taken off and
      moved to the completed table. With fewer tasks, we can focus more,
      we can track them better, we can push them out faster, we can
      unify our fragmented efforts and we can be held accountable when
      we don't get things done, because it will show.


What do you think?

And just to prove I mean business, I'll happily listen to input on this
matter until the 31st of October. On the 1st of November, whether we are
ready or not, we will make changes to improve the work items page;
http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Design/Work_Items

-Nik



On 11.10.23 09:26, Christoph Noack wrote:

> Hi everyone,
>
> I noticed some discussions that might relate to discussions we've had at
> the LibreOffice Conference last week. So, if you want to spend some
> minutes, then here is my personal summary:
> http://luxate.blogspot.com/2011/10/libreoffice-conference-2011-personal.html
>
> If anything is missing or unclear ... please ask :-)
>
> Cheers,
> Christoph
>
>


--
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to [hidden email]
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/design/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Andreas Mantke Andreas Mantke
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: LibreOffice Conference 2011, Personal Summary

Hi Nik,

Am Montag, 24. Oktober 2011, 16:41:06 schrieb Nik:

> Hi all,
>
> I've noticed mention in a couple of places here of the need for us to
> make it clearer how we operate.
> While I don't have a complete solution, there is an aspect that affects
> me (and I imagine, quite a few others) that I'd like to propose a simple
> solution to;
>
> Our "tasks/work items" page. It is too long, unkept and badly-sectioned
> to be useful as a tool for knowing what needs to be done.
> While I realise it isn't going to become an amazing productivity tool
> overnight, there are some small improvements that we could make to make
> it more useful.
>
> I've created a quick copy on my own wiki user-page to run past you
> before making any changes to the actual task-list.
> Please check this link;
> http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/User:Nik#Proposed_rearrange_of_Design_Wo
> rk_items

does that mean that nobody will work on the Design / UX of the Extensions-/Templates-
Website anymore?

The project highly needs an Extensions- and Templates-Site, because we be addicted to
website in this sector, that we have no control over and that is weak and we and our
users could not rely on that site.

Regards,
Andreas
--
## Developer LibreOffice
## Freie Office-Suite für Linux, Mac, Windows
## http://LibreOffice.org
## Support the Document Foundation (http://documentfoundation.org)
## Meine Seite: http://www.amantke.de 

--
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to [hidden email]
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/design/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
klaus-jürgen weghorn ol klaus-jürgen weghorn ol
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: LibreOffice Conference 2011, Personal Summary

Hi Andreas,
Am 24.10.2011 19:19, schrieb Andreas Mantke:

> Hi Nik,
>
> Am Montag, 24. Oktober 2011, 16:41:06 schrieb Nik:
>> Hi all,
>>
>> I've noticed mention in a couple of places here of the need for us to
>> make it clearer how we operate.
>> While I don't have a complete solution, there is an aspect that affects
>> me (and I imagine, quite a few others) that I'd like to propose a simple
>> solution to;
>>
>> Our "tasks/work items" page. It is too long, unkept and badly-sectioned
>> to be useful as a tool for knowing what needs to be done.
>> While I realise it isn't going to become an amazing productivity tool
>> overnight, there are some small improvements that we could make to make
>> it more useful.
>>
>> I've created a quick copy on my own wiki user-page to run past you
>> before making any changes to the actual task-list.
>> Please check this link;
>> http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/User:Nik#Proposed_rearrange_of_Design_Wo
>> rk_items
>
> does that mean that nobody will work on the Design / UX of the Extensions-/Templates-
> Website anymore?

I don't think that it is meant so by Nik. For me it is only a proposal
with some examples. The lists must be filled in.
IMHO the idea behind the proposal is to show clearlier where we stand
and where to take the most power.

--
Grüße
k-j

--
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to [hidden email]
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/design/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
klaus-jürgen weghorn ol klaus-jürgen weghorn ol
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: LibreOffice Conference 2011, Personal Summary

In reply to this post by nik-2
Hi Nik, *,
Am 24.10.2011 16:41, schrieb Nik:
> Hi all,
>
> I've noticed mention in a couple of places here of the need for us to
> make it clearer how we operate.

+1

> While I don't have a complete solution, there is an aspect that affects
> me (and I imagine, quite a few others) that I'd like to propose a simple
> solution to;
>
> Our "tasks/work items" page. It is too long, unkept and badly-sectioned
> to be useful as a tool for knowing what needs to be done.
> While I realise it isn't going to become an amazing productivity tool
> overnight, there are some small improvements that we could make to make
> it more useful.
>
> I've created a quick copy on my own wiki user-page to run past you
> before making any changes to the actual task-list.
> Please check this link;
> http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/User:Nik#Proposed_rearrange_of_Design_Work_items
>
>
> I would propose we;
>
> * Separate out items that are "ACTIVE", "ON-HOLD" and "COMPLETED"
> into three separate tables so that people interested in doing
> things only have to check the top table.
> * Keep the items in the tables short so that our members can more
> easily see what needs attention right now and what is going on
> that they would be interested in. Colour coding will help. More
> detailed information should just be linked to.
> * We need to have deadlines, whether we meet them or not (because we
> are all volunteers). Otherwise everything will end up as an
> incomplete task that lasts forever.
> * We need to have a client and a representative who speaks on their
> behalf. That will give us a point of reference rather than having
> endless internal communication.
> * We need to be organised and update this ourselves and move
> finished jobs out, or move jobs that are on-hold into that table.
> They shouldn't just stay in the active table.
>
>
> and most drastically;
>
> * *We should LIMIT the number of active tasks to just 3-4.* Anything
> else should not be added until something can be taken off and
> moved to the completed table. With fewer tasks, we can focus more,
> we can track them better, we can push them out faster, we can
> unify our fragmented efforts and we can be held accountable when
> we don't get things done, because it will show.
>
>
> What do you think?

Good idea.

Some first thoughts/questions about it:
- Who will determine the priorities?  I think mostly our lead(s). This
should be noticed so we won't get some ugly discussion (as on the
website/wiki).
- Who will determine where to put an item (active - on-hold)?
- As I understand your proposal, the items will be more different than
the work-item-list [1]. Will you/we make a list to collect the different
items before 1st of november?
- The status "On hold" won't be necessary because then it will be in the
"ON-HOLD" list
- The status "Being finalised" won't be necessary because then it will
be in the "completed archive" list or you must have a coloumn "Status"
in this list, too.
- What is the difference between "In proposal" an "In progress"? Maybe
this should be described.
- What will happen, if someone tells that he wants to work on a
"ON-HOLD" item, but the list of active items is 'full' and the others
don't think it is extremly neceassary to work on it? We won't prevent
him to work on it. Example: Aleksander made some (great) design
proposals "out of time".
- Maybe this example can be a extra list: "GENERAL items" with no priority.
- I'm not sure if we shouldn't colour the "On-HOLD" list, too

Ok, let me stop here for now.


[1]http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Design/Work_Items


--
Grüße
k-j

--
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to [hidden email]
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/design/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Christoph Noack Christoph Noack
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Work Items Management (was: Re: [libreoffice-design] LibreOffice Conference 2011, Personal Summary)

In reply to this post by nik-2
Hi Nik, all!

Hey, thanks for going forward ... :-)

Am Dienstag, den 25.10.2011, 01:41 +1100 schrieb Nik:
[...]
> I've created a quick copy on my own wiki user-page to run past you
> before making any changes to the actual task-list.
> Please check this link;
> http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/User:Nik#Proposed_rearrange_of_Design_Work_items

An improvement, of course. But I'd like to add some more thoughts... The
most important question to me is, whether the availability of the
existing list did attract anybody to work on such items. Most of them
are still open ... unfortunately.

What I became aware in discussions at the FOSDEM, the Hackfest and the
LibO conference is, that we miss a simple way to explain new
contributors what they can do. I even discussed whether we could learn
from the EasyHacks (or EasyTasks) the developers offer - currently they
have been moved to Bugzilla, because they became unmanageable.

On the other hand, a recent (larger) tasks list would be immensely
helpful for me as well ...

So, where do we currently work on tasks and have some task management?
      * http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Design#Work_Items
      * http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Design/Whiteboards (already
        having a simple Recent Topics / Past Topics section)
      * Bugzilla (usually smaller tasks)
      * libreoffice-ux-advise (usually smaller tasks, if bigger, then
        moved to a Whiteboard)

Back to your proposal - would it help to change the objective of the
tasks list? My take ... a rough proposal:
      * Larger task will (should) automatically require a Whiteboard
        page. The whiteboards overview page might benefit from your
        proposed structure.
      * Smaller tasks that new contributors (with varying skills) might
        take, should go to a separate section like EasyTasks /
        StarterTasks. A similar structure to the task list (which still
        keeps the fun) is required here.
      * All other tasks that are less urgent, nobody takes care of
        quickly  should go to an "Open Tasks" list. Just to not forget
        them ...
      * Bugzilla and libreoffice-ux-advise should stay as they are.

What do you think?

> I would propose we;
>
>     * Separate out items that are "ACTIVE", "ON-HOLD" and "COMPLETED"
>       into three separate tables so that people interested in doing
>       things only have to check the top table.

Sounds very good, especially the "on-hold", because many items are
simply neither active nor completed.

>     * Keep the items in the tables short so that our members can more
>       easily see what needs attention right now and what is going on
>       that they would be interested in. Colour coding will help. More
>       detailed information should just be linked to.

Color coding means that somebody has to decide on the priority ...
that's something I'm unsure within a community (from experience, most
people pick the tasks they do like ... whether these are important or
not). On the other hand, I would assign a "high priority" to the
Download Page realization :-)

>     * We need to have deadlines, whether we meet them or not (because we
>       are all volunteers). Otherwise everything will end up as an
>       incomplete task that lasts forever.

Yep, if we agree that these should guide but hurt (in terms of
deadlines). Just curious - is there an other term for that?

>     * We need to have a client and a representative who speaks on their
>       behalf. That will give us a point of reference rather than having
>       endless internal communication.

Yep. At least someone will send the request ...

However, I think another helpful thing would be to provide information
that tells what we need if someone requests a certain item (I've
collected some ideas for visual design elements, but did not send them
to the list / wiki yet ... maybe the next task).

>     * We need to be organised and update this ourselves and move
>       finished jobs out, or move jobs that are on-hold into that table.
>       They shouldn't just stay in the active table.

True, but this will need help by everybody ... which I currently miss a
lot. We have many people on this list, but only veeery few who are
active (whatever small or larger task it may be).


> and most drastically;
>
>     * *We should LIMIT the number of active tasks to just 3-4.* Anything
>       else should not be added until something can be taken off and
>       moved to the completed table. With fewer tasks, we can focus more,
>       we can track them better, we can push them out faster, we can
>       unify our fragmented efforts and we can be held accountable when
>       we don't get things done, because it will show.

Mmh, I really like that for my own stuff ... when looking back at the
last weeks, my work might have appeared a bit unfocused. (Which it
wasn't, of course *g*). However, can we really limit the number of tasks
for if people are free to chose where to spend effort?

If we can agree that "active tasks" means something like "Tasks in
Focus", then I'm fine.


> What do you think?
>
> And just to prove I mean business, I'll happily listen to input on this
> matter until the 31st of October. On the 1st of November, whether we are
> ready or not, we will make changes to improve the work items page;
> http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Design/Work_Items

Well, maybe more input that you've expected ... you should surely read
it as "being happy that you kicked that off" :-)

Cheers,
Christoph


> On 11.10.23 09:26, Christoph Noack wrote:
> > Hi everyone,
> >
> > I noticed some discussions that might relate to discussions we've had at
> > the LibreOffice Conference last week. So, if you want to spend some
> > minutes, then here is my personal summary:
> > http://luxate.blogspot.com/2011/10/libreoffice-conference-2011-personal.html
> >
> > If anything is missing or unclear ... please ask :-)
> >
> > Cheers,
> > Christoph
> >
> >
>
>



--
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to [hidden email]
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/design/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
nik-2 nik-2
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: LibreOffice Conference 2011, Personal Summary

In reply to this post by klaus-jürgen weghorn ol
Hi Andreas, Klaus, All,

Just wanted to clear something up, so quick response...

On 11.10.25 04:56, klaus-jürgen weghorn ol wrote:
> Hi Andreas,
> Am 24.10.2011 19:19, schrieb Andreas Mantke:
>> Hi Nik,
>>
>> Am Montag, 24. Oktober 2011, 16:41:06 schrieb Nik:
>>>
---8< snip ---

>>>
>>> I've created a quick copy on my own wiki user-page to run past you
>>> before making any changes to the actual task-list.
>>> Please check this link;
>>> http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/User:Nik#Proposed_rearrange_of_Design_Wo 
>>>
>>> rk_items
>>
>> does that mean that nobody will work on the Design / UX of the
>> Extensions-/Templates-
>> Website anymore?
>
> I don't think that it is meant so by Nik. For me it is only a proposal
> with some examples. The lists must be filled in.
> IMHO the idea behind the proposal is to show clearlier where we stand
> and where to take the most power.
>

Thanks for the rescue Klaus-jürgen! =)
Andreas I certainly didn't mean that, I'm sorry for the miscommunication.
I only meant to demonstrate what I meant through examples, like
Klaus-jürgen mentioned.
That list is by no means indicative of what I consider are active task
on the Design list!
Some of them, I just plain made up. I should have been more imaginative =(

And if you mean that my undertaking this task means I am abandoning the
Extensions task, not at all. I still intend to help with that task as
much as I can in this little gap of time I've been granted. But I'd like
to do as much "damage" as I can across as many different Design issues
as I can, /while/ I can.

Hope that clears things up?
And I share your concern. Extensions, and the ease of acquiring them, is
an essential part of the LibO user experience.
I wouldn't have chipped in a Design if I didn't think so, right? =)
-Nik




--
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to [hidden email]
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/design/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
nik-2 nik-2
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Work Items Management

In reply to this post by Christoph Noack
Hi Christoph, Klaus-jürgen, All,

Thank you both for your input, you thought of a number of things I
didn't. I'm going to try condense your questions and provide short(ish)
responses so that this thread does not become large and difficult-to-follow;

*Klaus-jürgen mentioned;*
1. Who will determine the priorities?  I think mostly our lead(s).
2. Who will determine where to put an item (active - on-hold)?
3. As I understand your proposal, the items will be more different than
the work-item-list [1]. Will you/we make a list to collect the different
items before 1st of november?
4. The status "On hold" won't be necessary because then it will be in
the "ON-HOLD" list
5. The status "Being finalised" won't be necessary because then it will
be in the "completed archive" list or you must have a coloumn "Status"
in this list, too.
6. What is the difference between "In proposal" an "In progress"? Maybe
this should be described.
7. What will happen, if someone tells that he wants to work on a
"ON-HOLD" item, but the list of active items is 'full' and the others
don't think it is extremly neceassary to work on it? We won't prevent
him to work on it. Example: Aleksander made some (great) design
proposals "out of time".
8. Maybe this example can be a extra list: "GENERAL items" with no
priority.
9. I'm not sure if we shouldn't colour the "On-HOLD" list, too

*My suggestions regarding these very pertinent questions;*
1. When added, the member adding should assign a priority of discussed
on this mailing list and then put there initials in brackets alongside
the number, eg: 3(NS). The Team leads will review this priority when
they get a chance and their reviewed ranking shoulod just be accepted to
keep things going. SC members who frequent this list (Charles, Italo)
would also be able to review priorities. Our Mailing list should not
become endless discussions and contradictions of our priorities, that is
why we appointed Team Leads.
2. Same as above, with every person making a decision adding their
initials alongside.
3. That is a good point I hadn't considered. Can someone help me
establish the current status and contacts for each of the existing
tasks. (just add it to the bottom of the current wiki task list page to
avoid complicating this thread).
4. Good point. But I kept the "on-hold" status to make it easier to
cut-and-paste a record easily between the ACTIVE tasks and the ON-HOLD
tasks. Ths way less editing is required.
5. I think we need a "Being finalised" to indicate work is complete on
the task, but we need to wrap things up (like providing a graphic in
another format, or waiting on word from the printers etc). It will also
give us a final "push" to finish the job.
6. In proposal means that requirements for the task are still being
established, while a task In-progress already has requirements defined
and is currently being worked on or available to be worked on.
7. Being realistic I think we all know we can't "force" everyone to play
the same game. We shouldn't. When additonal "out of time" contributions
are made, we should accept them and move on to what is required. The
task list on the Work-items page should be to provide focus for the
regular contributors to this team. It should give direction and make the
"endorsed" work items clear to anyone wanting to help in our everyday
operations. Right now, that is not so clear.
8. If we define such a generic list, I'm afraid everything will be
stored there, we will relax our focus on delivering results. We should
instead be more rigid: A task is either a) being worked on b)suspended
due to external influences or c)complete. No lee-way.
9. I'm not opposed to that, but I'd prefer if the only colours on the
page were alongside things that can be worked on.

And Christoph I'm going to snip alot of your Email to so I can keep my
responses just as "snappy";


On 11.10.25 08:10, Christoph Noack wrote:
> The most important question to me is, whether the availability of the
> existing list did attract anybody to work on such items. Most of them
> are still open ... unfortunately.
I don't think it did, because in my eyes at least, it was more of a
heavy wiki-page and not a task-list.
I want to change it to a short and snappy task list. Soemthing I can
check on quickly even when I'm off-list to get an impression of what is
happening, how we are faring.
> What I became aware in discussions at the FOSDEM, the Hackfest and the
> LibO conference is, that we miss a simple way to explain new
> contributors what they can do.
That is a different issue but relevant. We have no "starter pack", which
we've identified before.
I want to work on that soon also, but this takes priority for me. No
point making it easy to join the team when it isn't clear what you need
to work on right?
> So, where do we currently work on tasks and have some task management?
>        * http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Design#Work_Items
>        * http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Design/Whiteboards (already
>          having a simple Recent Topics / Past Topics section)
>        * Bugzilla (usually smaller tasks)
>        * libreoffice-ux-advise (usually smaller tasks, if bigger, then
>          moved to a Whiteboard)

Almost everything should remain functioning like it does now, but
detailed info should move to Whiteboards and the Work items page should
serve as a short linked index to all our tasks. Something to look over
quickly.

> Back to your proposal - would it help to change the objective of the
> tasks list? My take ... a rough proposal:
>        * Larger task will (should) automatically require a Whiteboard
>          page. The whiteboards overview page might benefit from your
>          proposed structure.
>        * Smaller tasks that new contributors (with varying skills) might
>          take, should go to a separate section like EasyTasks /
>          StarterTasks. A similar structure to the task list (which still
>          keeps the fun) is required here.
>        * All other tasks that are less urgent, nobody takes care of
>          quickly  should go to an "Open Tasks" list. Just to not forget
>          them ...
>        * Bugzilla and libreoffice-ux-advise should stay as they are.
>
> What do you think?
Larger tasks: listed on Work-items page with a link to its Whiteboard page.
Smaller tasks: Leave them on this mailing list, we should try to keep
the work-items focused.
I do not want the Work-items page tables to be about "types/categories"
of tasks, I want them to be about the "stage/lifecycle" of that task.
Just active, suspended or done. That's all that matters if we are trying
to keep it simple.

>
> Color coding means that somebody has to decide on the priority ...
>
Yep. You! Or Bernhard.
Generally a member can do this and you can review the prioritisation.
We shouldnt' get tripped up over this. We elected you both because we
trust you and this is an example.
When you get the chance review the priorities, otherwise they will be
worked out on-list with little discussion hopefully.
Less talk, more "DO".
=)

>>      * We need to have deadlines,
> Yep, if we agree that these should guide but hurt (in terms of
> deadlines).

I think they should hurt us if we don't meet them. This is about
establishing Design as a team that delivers and can be counted on. Even
if nobody else tracks this, we should. My proposal: every day that a
project/task runs over schedule should be counted and displayed on our
Design wiki "home" page. A bad (high) number will hopefully urge us to
get it done to salvage our worth as a part of this community. A good
(low) number can be a source of pride amongst ourselves that we deliver
when people need us. It will be our performance indicator.

>>      * We need to have a client and a representative who speaks on their
>>        behalf.
> Yep. At least someone will send the request ...
>
> However, I think another helpful thing would be to provide information
> that tells what we need if someone requests a certain item (I've
> collected some ideas for visual design elements, but did not send them
> to the list / wiki yet ... maybe the next task).
agreed, the requirements should be specific and in the examples, I've
demonstrated that every requirement should be a deliverable and
measurable item. Something identifiable as a satisfactory outcome or not.
>>      * We need to be organised and update this ourselves
> True, but this will need help by everybody ... which I currently miss a
> lot. We have many people on this list, but only veeery few who are
> active (whatever small or larger task it may be).
Any volunteers to help with this? we have 150 suibscribers.
Someone might be interested in helping whip us into shape?


>> and most drastically;
>>
>>      * *We should LIMIT the number of active tasks to just 3-4.*
> Mmh, I really like that for my own stuff ... when looking back at the
> last weeks, my work might have appeared a bit unfocused. (Which it
> wasn't, of course *g*). However, can we really limit the number of tasks
> for if people are free to chose where to spend effort?
>
> If we can agree that "active tasks" means something like "Tasks in
> Focus", then I'm fine.

We need to start taking this seriously. We can only get so much done in
the time we have.
That means to need to start prioritising HARSHLY!
We need to be realistic and we need to push back if we can't do it.
Otherwise we will let everything be added as a task and nothing finished.
It works in COUNTLESS methodologies.
>
>> What do you think?
>>
>>
> Well, maybe more input that you've expected ... you should surely read
> it as "being happy that you kicked that off" :-)
>
> Cheers,
> Christoph

Sorry if any of that sounded harsh. I'm on wireless, battery is dying
and this needed to be sent.
Let's get active!

-Nik

--
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to [hidden email]
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/design/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Rafael Rocha Daud Rafael Rocha Daud
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Work Items Management

Hi Nik, Christoph, $@,

Em 25-10-2011 08:00, Christoph Noack <[hidden email]> escreveu:

>
> Hi Nik, all!
>
> Hey, thanks for going forward ... :-)
>
> Am Dienstag, den 25.10.2011, 01:41 +1100 schrieb Nik:
> [...]
>> >  I've created a quick copy on my own wiki user-page to run past you
>> >  before making any changes to the actual task-list.
>> >  Please check this link;
>> >  http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/User:Nik#Proposed_rearrange_of_Design_Work_items
This is simply awesome. Work Items have been open on my browser for
weeks and I could never read it properly. This is very straight to the
point.
> Yep, if we agree that these should guide but hurt (in terms of
> deadlines). Just curious - is there an other term for that?
I think 'expiration date' or even 'term' are possible. ;-)
> True, but this will need help by everybody ... which I currently miss a
> lot. We have many people on this list, but only veeery few who are
> active (whatever small or larger task it may be).
Righteous complain, boss, I accuse myself -- but see below.

>> >  and most drastically;
>> >  
>> >       * *We should LIMIT the number of active tasks to just 3-4.* Anything
>> >         else should not be added until something can be taken off and
>> >         moved to the completed table. With fewer tasks, we can focus more,
>> >         we can track them better, we can push them out faster, we can
>> >         unify our fragmented efforts and we can be held accountable when
>> >         we don't get things done, because it will show.
>    Color coding means that somebody has to decide on the priority ...
> that's something I'm unsure within a community (from experience, most
> people pick the tasks they do like ... whether these are important or
> not). On the other hand, I would assign a "high priority" to the
> Download Page realization :-)
> Mmh, I really like that for my own stuff ... when looking back at the
> last weeks, my work might have appeared a bit unfocused. (Which it
> wasn't, of course*g*). However, can we really limit the number of tasks
> for if people are free to chose where to spend effort?
>
> If we can agree that "active tasks" means something like "Tasks in
> Focus", then I'm fine.
People pick tasks they like and/or are capable of doing. There are such
tasks that no one particularly like, either because they are boring or
no-brainer, but need nevertheless to be done. If such tasks are listed
in this simple manner, one could pick them even if they don't like it,
just for the sake of progress, or in a spare time they won't be able to
use for a more complex matter. Calling this "Tasks on Focus" and using
the "Simple Tasks" category as you suggested would work for that: say I
have 1 hour, but am tired to work on a complex task. I would go to the
list, choose one of those simple tasks, and complete it, without
thinking too much about it.
This sounds a no-brainer myself, but that's me that's me.
> >  And just to prove I mean business, I'll happily listen to input on this
> >  matter until the 31st of October. On the 1st of November, whether we are
> >  ready or not, we will make changes to improve the work items page;
> >  http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Design/Work_Items
Just to prove I too mean business, I'm preparing a collection of all the
suggestions on styles management that went through this list (there are
lots of them) and making a page in the Whiteboard for it. This list
would be a starting point (just the same as UI_Elements [1], but for
styles) for knowing what proposals there are to pick from and put in the
Work Items list (after being properly discussed). Indeed there are many
of them, with mixed priority (and some that depend on others).
I'll have this up on 1st of November as well (ready or not).

> Well, maybe more input that you've expected ... you should surely read
> it as "being happy that you kicked that off" :-)
>
> Cheers,
> Christoph

Cheers, leute.
Rafael

[1] http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Design/UI_Elements

--
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to [hidden email]
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/design/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Christoph Noack Christoph Noack
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Work Items Management

In reply to this post by nik-2
Hi Nik,

before you'll never get a reply from my side ... :-)

Am Dienstag, den 25.10.2011, 14:52 +1100 schrieb Nik:
> Hi Christoph, Klaus-jürgen, All,
>
> Thank you both for your input, you thought of a number of things I
> didn't. I'm going to try condense your questions and provide short(ish)
> responses so that this thread does not become large and difficult-to-follow;

Cool, thanks!

> *Klaus-jürgen mentioned;*
> 1. Who will determine the priorities?  I think mostly our lead(s).
> 2. Who will determine where to put an item (active - on-hold)?
> 3. As I understand your proposal, the items will be more different than
> the work-item-list [1]. Will you/we make a list to collect the different
> items before 1st of november?
> 4. The status "On hold" won't be necessary because then it will be in
> the "ON-HOLD" list
> 5. The status "Being finalised" won't be necessary because then it will
> be in the "completed archive" list or you must have a coloumn "Status"
> in this list, too.
> 6. What is the difference between "In proposal" an "In progress"? Maybe
> this should be described.
> 7. What will happen, if someone tells that he wants to work on a
> "ON-HOLD" item, but the list of active items is 'full' and the others
> don't think it is extremly neceassary to work on it? We won't prevent
> him to work on it. Example: Aleksander made some (great) design
> proposals "out of time".
> 8. Maybe this example can be a extra list: "GENERAL items" with no
> priority.
> 9. I'm not sure if we shouldn't colour the "On-HOLD" list, too
>
> *My suggestions regarding these very pertinent questions;*
> 1. When added, the member adding should assign a priority of discussed
> on this mailing list and then put there initials in brackets alongside
> the number, eg: 3(NS). The Team leads will review this priority when
> they get a chance and their reviewed ranking shoulod just be accepted to
> keep things going. SC members who frequent this list (Charles, Italo)
> would also be able to review priorities. Our Mailing list should not
> become endless discussions and contradictions of our priorities, that is
> why we appointed Team Leads.

Fine.

> 2. Same as above, with every person making a decision adding their
> initials alongside.

Fine as well.

> 3. That is a good point I hadn't considered. Can someone help me
> establish the current status and contacts for each of the existing
> tasks. (just add it to the bottom of the current wiki task list page to
> avoid complicating this thread).

I can help you, but I'm offline from tomorrow/Saturday until Wednesday.

> 4. Good point. But I kept the "on-hold" status to make it easier to
> cut-and-paste a record easily between the ACTIVE tasks and the ON-HOLD
> tasks. Ths way less editing is required.

Sure. From experience I'd say these are small things that can be tweaked
afterwards ... I've refined the Agenda and Minutes for the OOo Community
Council several times - so no worries.

> 5. I think we need a "Being finalised" to indicate work is complete on
> the task, but we need to wrap things up (like providing a graphic in
> another format, or waiting on word from the printers etc). It will also
> give us a final "push" to finish the job.

Fine, although this might be optional ... if we start to have such a
fine grained tracking, a percentage value might be more helpful
(although project management experience tells us that 80% of the time
tasks reside between 95 ... 99%) ;-)

Thinking of that, I suggest to have a "last update" information. That
really helps to find orphans / clean up stuff that lies there for too
long. Having that in a separate columns makes this even sortable.

> 6. In proposal means that requirements for the task are still being
> established, while a task In-progress already has requirements defined
> and is currently being worked on or available to be worked on.

Mmh ... I think we should simply say that its in progress. Although I
love processes (and thus the separation of requirements collection vs.
solution creation), I think such fine grained status might be added to
the proposal itself (if required).

> 7. Being realistic I think we all know we can't "force" everyone to play
> the same game. We shouldn't. When additonal "out of time" contributions
> are made, we should accept them and move on to what is required. The
> task list on the Work-items page should be to provide focus for the
> regular contributors to this team. It should give direction and make the
> "endorsed" work items clear to anyone wanting to help in our everyday
> operations. Right now, that is not so clear.

Okay, the "should provide focus (=guidance) for the regular contributor"
is okay to me.

> 8. If we define such a generic list, I'm afraid everything will be
> stored there, we will relax our focus on delivering results. We should
> instead be more rigid: A task is either a) being worked on b)suspended
> due to external influences or c)complete. No lee-way.

Sounds fun ;-)

Just a question - what about new items that don't need to be active,
where do these get added. To the On-Hold list, status "in proposal"?
(Sorry if I missed that ...)

> 9. I'm not opposed to that, but I'd prefer if the only colours on the
> page were alongside things that can be worked on.
>
> And Christoph I'm going to snip alot of your Email to so I can keep my
> responses just as "snappy";
>
>
> On 11.10.25 08:10, Christoph Noack wrote:
[...]

> > So, where do we currently work on tasks and have some task management?
> >        * http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Design#Work_Items
> >        * http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Design/Whiteboards (already
> >          having a simple Recent Topics / Past Topics section)
> >        * Bugzilla (usually smaller tasks)
> >        * libreoffice-ux-advise (usually smaller tasks, if bigger, then
> >          moved to a Whiteboard)
>
> Almost everything should remain functioning like it does now, but
> detailed info should move to Whiteboards and the Work items page should
> serve as a short linked index to all our tasks. Something to look over
> quickly.

Personally, I'd like to avoid doubled statuses (e.g. Whiteboard page and
tasks page). Then it gets a bit tricky ... I already work on two or
three Whiteboard tasks that might be less relevant to others. So to me
its active ... How would that look like on the Tasks list, if we only
have 4 active items?

> > Back to your proposal - would it help to change the objective of the
> > tasks list? My take ... a rough proposal:
> >        * Larger task will (should) automatically require a Whiteboard
> >          page. The whiteboards overview page might benefit from your
> >          proposed structure.
> >        * Smaller tasks that new contributors (with varying skills) might
> >          take, should go to a separate section like EasyTasks /
> >          StarterTasks. A similar structure to the task list (which still
> >          keeps the fun) is required here.
> >        * All other tasks that are less urgent, nobody takes care of
> >          quickly  should go to an "Open Tasks" list. Just to not forget
> >          them ...
> >        * Bugzilla and libreoffice-ux-advise should stay as they are.
> >
> > What do you think?
> Larger tasks: listed on Work-items page with a link to its Whiteboard page.
> Smaller tasks: Leave them on this mailing list, we should try to keep
> the work-items focused.
+1

> I do not want the Work-items page tables to be about "types/categories"
> of tasks, I want them to be about the "stage/lifecycle" of that task.
> Just active, suspended or done. That's all that matters if we are trying
> to keep it simple.
>
> >
> > Color coding means that somebody has to decide on the priority ...
> >
> Yep. You! Or Bernhard.
> Generally a member can do this and you can review the prioritisation.
> We shouldnt' get tripped up over this. We elected you both because we
> trust you and this is an example.
> When you get the chance review the priorities, otherwise they will be
> worked out on-list with little discussion hopefully.
> Less talk, more "DO".
> =)

Hehe, hope that will work fine for everybody ...


> >>      * We need to have deadlines,
> > Yep, if we agree that these should guide but hurt (in terms of
> > deadlines).
>
> I think they should hurt us if we don't meet them. This is about
> establishing Design as a team that delivers and can be counted on. Even
> if nobody else tracks this, we should. My proposal: every day that a
> project/task runs over schedule should be counted and displayed on our
> Design wiki "home" page. A bad (high) number will hopefully urge us to
> get it done to salvage our worth as a part of this community. A good
> (low) number can be a source of pride amongst ourselves that we deliver
> when people need us. It will be our performance indicator.

Here, I object ... the deadlines should help us to coordinate the work
in advance. But as long as few people actively contribute its hard to
balance many of the tasks. And since "normal life" sometimes happens,
nothing should hurt.


> >>      * We need to have a client and a representative who speaks on their
> >>        behalf.
> > Yep. At least someone will send the request ...
> >
> > However, I think another helpful thing would be to provide information
> > that tells what we need if someone requests a certain item (I've
> > collected some ideas for visual design elements, but did not send them
> > to the list / wiki yet ... maybe the next task).
> agreed, the requirements should be specific and in the examples, I've
> demonstrated that every requirement should be a deliverable and
> measurable item. Something identifiable as a satisfactory outcome or not.
> >>      * We need to be organised and update this ourselves
> > True, but this will need help by everybody ... which I currently miss a
> > lot. We have many people on this list, but only veeery few who are
> > active (whatever small or larger task it may be).
> Any volunteers to help with this? we have 150 suibscribers.
> Someone might be interested in helping whip us into shape?

<insert_contributor_name_here>

> >> and most drastically;
> >>
> >>      * *We should LIMIT the number of active tasks to just 3-4.*
> > Mmh, I really like that for my own stuff ... when looking back at the
> > last weeks, my work might have appeared a bit unfocused. (Which it
> > wasn't, of course *g*). However, can we really limit the number of tasks
> > for if people are free to chose where to spend effort?
> >
> > If we can agree that "active tasks" means something like "Tasks in
> > Focus", then I'm fine.
>
> We need to start taking this seriously. We can only get so much done in
> the time we have.
> That means to need to start prioritising HARSHLY!
> We need to be realistic and we need to push back if we can't do it.
> Otherwise we will let everything be added as a task and nothing finished.
> It works in COUNTLESS methodologies.

Fine, but let's be a bit flexible and allow some change in priorities if
that's required due to external circumstances.


> >> What do you think?
> >>
> >>
> > Well, maybe more input that you've expected ... you should surely read
> > it as "being happy that you kicked that off" :-)
> >
> > Cheers,
> > Christoph
>
> Sorry if any of that sounded harsh. I'm on wireless, battery is dying
> and this needed to be sent.
> Let's get active!

Thanks for that - really, really, appreciated :-)

I'm not on wireless, the laptop's battery is fine, but I'm running out
of energy. So, good night everyone!

Cheers,
Christoph



--
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to [hidden email]
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/design/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Kévin PEIGNOT-3 Kévin PEIGNOT-3
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Work Items Management

Hy

I just come back from holidays and check my mails so sorry to be late.
It's just to say your idea is great. Really. It will help a lot to see what
need to be done. I think changing priority and adding tasks should be
something to ask and discuss on this mailing list with only our leads able
to make the changes. I think it offers flexibility while staying strict.

Maybe this have already been sayed, but I have so much mails to read I must
read very fast.

Just to +1 ;)

Kévin
---
Sent from gmail for Android
Le 27 oct. 2011 23:55, "Christoph Noack" <[hidden email]> a écrit :

> Hi Nik,
>
> before you'll never get a reply from my side ... :-)
>
> Am Dienstag, den 25.10.2011, 14:52 +1100 schrieb Nik:
> > Hi Christoph, Klaus-jürgen, All,
> >
> > Thank you both for your input, you thought of a number of things I
> > didn't. I'm going to try condense your questions and provide short(ish)
> > responses so that this thread does not become large and
> difficult-to-follow;
>
> Cool, thanks!
>
> > *Klaus-jürgen mentioned;*
> > 1. Who will determine the priorities?  I think mostly our lead(s).
> > 2. Who will determine where to put an item (active - on-hold)?
> > 3. As I understand your proposal, the items will be more different than
> > the work-item-list [1]. Will you/we make a list to collect the different
> > items before 1st of november?
> > 4. The status "On hold" won't be necessary because then it will be in
> > the "ON-HOLD" list
> > 5. The status "Being finalised" won't be necessary because then it will
> > be in the "completed archive" list or you must have a coloumn "Status"
> > in this list, too.
> > 6. What is the difference between "In proposal" an "In progress"? Maybe
> > this should be described.
> > 7. What will happen, if someone tells that he wants to work on a
> > "ON-HOLD" item, but the list of active items is 'full' and the others
> > don't think it is extremly neceassary to work on it? We won't prevent
> > him to work on it. Example: Aleksander made some (great) design
> > proposals "out of time".
> > 8. Maybe this example can be a extra list: "GENERAL items" with no
> > priority.
> > 9. I'm not sure if we shouldn't colour the "On-HOLD" list, too
> >
> > *My suggestions regarding these very pertinent questions;*
> > 1. When added, the member adding should assign a priority of discussed
> > on this mailing list and then put there initials in brackets alongside
> > the number, eg: 3(NS). The Team leads will review this priority when
> > they get a chance and their reviewed ranking shoulod just be accepted to
> > keep things going. SC members who frequent this list (Charles, Italo)
> > would also be able to review priorities. Our Mailing list should not
> > become endless discussions and contradictions of our priorities, that is
> > why we appointed Team Leads.
>
> Fine.
>
> > 2. Same as above, with every person making a decision adding their
> > initials alongside.
>
> Fine as well.
>
> > 3. That is a good point I hadn't considered. Can someone help me
> > establish the current status and contacts for each of the existing
> > tasks. (just add it to the bottom of the current wiki task list page to
> > avoid complicating this thread).
>
> I can help you, but I'm offline from tomorrow/Saturday until Wednesday.
>
> > 4. Good point. But I kept the "on-hold" status to make it easier to
> > cut-and-paste a record easily between the ACTIVE tasks and the ON-HOLD
> > tasks. Ths way less editing is required.
>
> Sure. From experience I'd say these are small things that can be tweaked
> afterwards ... I've refined the Agenda and Minutes for the OOo Community
> Council several times - so no worries.
>
> > 5. I think we need a "Being finalised" to indicate work is complete on
> > the task, but we need to wrap things up (like providing a graphic in
> > another format, or waiting on word from the printers etc). It will also
> > give us a final "push" to finish the job.
>
> Fine, although this might be optional ... if we start to have such a
> fine grained tracking, a percentage value might be more helpful
> (although project management experience tells us that 80% of the time
> tasks reside between 95 ... 99%) ;-)
>
> Thinking of that, I suggest to have a "last update" information. That
> really helps to find orphans / clean up stuff that lies there for too
> long. Having that in a separate columns makes this even sortable.
>
> > 6. In proposal means that requirements for the task are still being
> > established, while a task In-progress already has requirements defined
> > and is currently being worked on or available to be worked on.
>
> Mmh ... I think we should simply say that its in progress. Although I
> love processes (and thus the separation of requirements collection vs.
> solution creation), I think such fine grained status might be added to
> the proposal itself (if required).
>
> > 7. Being realistic I think we all know we can't "force" everyone to play
> > the same game. We shouldn't. When additonal "out of time" contributions
> > are made, we should accept them and move on to what is required. The
> > task list on the Work-items page should be to provide focus for the
> > regular contributors to this team. It should give direction and make the
> > "endorsed" work items clear to anyone wanting to help in our everyday
> > operations. Right now, that is not so clear.
>
> Okay, the "should provide focus (=guidance) for the regular contributor"
> is okay to me.
>
> > 8. If we define such a generic list, I'm afraid everything will be
> > stored there, we will relax our focus on delivering results. We should
> > instead be more rigid: A task is either a) being worked on b)suspended
> > due to external influences or c)complete. No lee-way.
>
> Sounds fun ;-)
>
> Just a question - what about new items that don't need to be active,
> where do these get added. To the On-Hold list, status "in proposal"?
> (Sorry if I missed that ...)
>
> > 9. I'm not opposed to that, but I'd prefer if the only colours on the
> > page were alongside things that can be worked on.
> >
> > And Christoph I'm going to snip alot of your Email to so I can keep my
> > responses just as "snappy";
> >
> >
> > On 11.10.25 08:10, Christoph Noack wrote:
> [...]
> > > So, where do we currently work on tasks and have some task management?
> > >        * http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Design#Work_Items
> > >        * http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Design/Whiteboards(already
> > >          having a simple Recent Topics / Past Topics section)
> > >        * Bugzilla (usually smaller tasks)
> > >        * libreoffice-ux-advise (usually smaller tasks, if bigger, then
> > >          moved to a Whiteboard)
> >
> > Almost everything should remain functioning like it does now, but
> > detailed info should move to Whiteboards and the Work items page should
> > serve as a short linked index to all our tasks. Something to look over
> > quickly.
>
> Personally, I'd like to avoid doubled statuses (e.g. Whiteboard page and
> tasks page). Then it gets a bit tricky ... I already work on two or
> three Whiteboard tasks that might be less relevant to others. So to me
> its active ... How would that look like on the Tasks list, if we only
> have 4 active items?
>
> > > Back to your proposal - would it help to change the objective of the
> > > tasks list? My take ... a rough proposal:
> > >        * Larger task will (should) automatically require a Whiteboard
> > >          page. The whiteboards overview page might benefit from your
> > >          proposed structure.
> > >        * Smaller tasks that new contributors (with varying skills)
> might
> > >          take, should go to a separate section like EasyTasks /
> > >          StarterTasks. A similar structure to the task list (which
> still
> > >          keeps the fun) is required here.
> > >        * All other tasks that are less urgent, nobody takes care of
> > >          quickly  should go to an "Open Tasks" list. Just to not forget
> > >          them ...
> > >        * Bugzilla and libreoffice-ux-advise should stay as they are.
> > >
> > > What do you think?
> > Larger tasks: listed on Work-items page with a link to its Whiteboard
> page.
> > Smaller tasks: Leave them on this mailing list, we should try to keep
> > the work-items focused.
> +1
>
> > I do not want the Work-items page tables to be about "types/categories"
> > of tasks, I want them to be about the "stage/lifecycle" of that task.
> > Just active, suspended or done. That's all that matters if we are trying
> > to keep it simple.
> >
> > >
> > > Color coding means that somebody has to decide on the priority ...
> > >
> > Yep. You! Or Bernhard.
> > Generally a member can do this and you can review the prioritisation.
> > We shouldnt' get tripped up over this. We elected you both because we
> > trust you and this is an example.
> > When you get the chance review the priorities, otherwise they will be
> > worked out on-list with little discussion hopefully.
> > Less talk, more "DO".
> > =)
>
> Hehe, hope that will work fine for everybody ...
>
>
> > >>      * We need to have deadlines,
> > > Yep, if we agree that these should guide but hurt (in terms of
> > > deadlines).
> >
> > I think they should hurt us if we don't meet them. This is about
> > establishing Design as a team that delivers and can be counted on. Even
> > if nobody else tracks this, we should. My proposal: every day that a
> > project/task runs over schedule should be counted and displayed on our
> > Design wiki "home" page. A bad (high) number will hopefully urge us to
> > get it done to salvage our worth as a part of this community. A good
> > (low) number can be a source of pride amongst ourselves that we deliver
> > when people need us. It will be our performance indicator.
>
> Here, I object ... the deadlines should help us to coordinate the work
> in advance. But as long as few people actively contribute its hard to
> balance many of the tasks. And since "normal life" sometimes happens,
> nothing should hurt.
>
>
> > >>      * We need to have a client and a representative who speaks on
> their
> > >>        behalf.
> > > Yep. At least someone will send the request ...
> > >
> > > However, I think another helpful thing would be to provide information
> > > that tells what we need if someone requests a certain item (I've
> > > collected some ideas for visual design elements, but did not send them
> > > to the list / wiki yet ... maybe the next task).
> > agreed, the requirements should be specific and in the examples, I've
> > demonstrated that every requirement should be a deliverable and
> > measurable item. Something identifiable as a satisfactory outcome or not.
> > >>      * We need to be organised and update this ourselves
> > > True, but this will need help by everybody ... which I currently miss a
> > > lot. We have many people on this list, but only veeery few who are
> > > active (whatever small or larger task it may be).
> > Any volunteers to help with this? we have 150 suibscribers.
> > Someone might be interested in helping whip us into shape?
>
> <insert_contributor_name_here>
>
> > >> and most drastically;
> > >>
> > >>      * *We should LIMIT the number of active tasks to just 3-4.*
> > > Mmh, I really like that for my own stuff ... when looking back at the
> > > last weeks, my work might have appeared a bit unfocused. (Which it
> > > wasn't, of course *g*). However, can we really limit the number of
> tasks
> > > for if people are free to chose where to spend effort?
> > >
> > > If we can agree that "active tasks" means something like "Tasks in
> > > Focus", then I'm fine.
> >
> > We need to start taking this seriously. We can only get so much done in
> > the time we have.
> > That means to need to start prioritising HARSHLY!
> > We need to be realistic and we need to push back if we can't do it.
> > Otherwise we will let everything be added as a task and nothing finished.
> > It works in COUNTLESS methodologies.
>
> Fine, but let's be a bit flexible and allow some change in priorities if
> that's required due to external circumstances.
>
>
> > >> What do you think?
> > >>
> > >>
> > > Well, maybe more input that you've expected ... you should surely read
> > > it as "being happy that you kicked that off" :-)
> > >
> > > Cheers,
> > > Christoph
> >
> > Sorry if any of that sounded harsh. I'm on wireless, battery is dying
> > and this needed to be sent.
> > Let's get active!
>
> Thanks for that - really, really, appreciated :-)
>
> I'm not on wireless, the laptop's battery is fine, but I'm running out
> of energy. So, good night everyone!
>
> Cheers,
> Christoph
>
>
>
> --
> Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to [hidden email]
> Problems?
> http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
> Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
> List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/design/
> All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be
> deleted
>

--
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to [hidden email]
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/design/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted

klaus-jürgen weghorn ol klaus-jürgen weghorn ol
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Work Items Management

In reply to this post by nik-2
Hi Nik, Christoph, *,
Am 25.10.2011 05:52, schrieb Nik:
[...]

> *Klaus-jürgen mentioned;*

[...]

> 3. As I understand your proposal, the items will be more different than
> the work-item-list [1]. Will you/we make a list to collect the different
> items before 1st of november?

[...]

> *My suggestions regarding these very pertinent questions;*

[...]

> 3. That is a good point I hadn't considered. Can someone help me
> establish the current status and contacts for each of the existing
> tasks. (just add it to the bottom of the current wiki task list page to
> avoid complicating this thread).

I have started now such a list of collection [1]. Work on it, put things
to the list, delete it. Mention also on our Whiteboards [2].

[1] http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Design/work_items_collection
[2] http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Design/Whiteboards

--
Grüße
k-j

--
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to [hidden email]
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/design/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
nik-2 nik-2
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Work Items Management

Hi all,

...

On 11.10.30 22:54, klaus-jürgen weghorn ol wrote:
> Hi Nik, Christoph, *,
>
> I have started now such a list of collection [1]. Work on it, put
> things to the list, delete it. Mention also on our Whiteboards [2].
>
> [1] http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Design/work_items_collection
> [2] http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Design/Whiteboards
>

Thanks for all the feedback so far. While I said I would act on this
today, with Bernhard's announcement, it doesn't feel right to jump
straight in and carry out "business as usual" for me. I have everything
I need to proceed, but I'm just going to leave this for a week, as a
sign of respect. My "2 minutes of silence", if you will.

-Nik

--
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to [hidden email]
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/design/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted
Rafael Rocha Daud Rafael Rocha Daud
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Work Items Management

In reply to this post by nik-2
Hello all,

I will join those two minutes. Actually I will be out of town until
Sunday, and will not be able to answer, maybe not even read the e-mails
frequently, so I'll delay until then the page I promised following Nik's
iniciative. It's already half complete though, a collection of all
proposals about style management in LO so far in the mailing lists. I
just don't want to throw it in here and then not be able to follow the
discussion (I hope there'll be some when I do ;-)).

Best regards./

Em 01-11-2011 17:00, Nik <[hidden email]> escreveu:

> Hi all,
>
> ...
>
> On 11.10.30 22:54, klaus-jürgen weghorn ol wrote:
>> Hi Nik, Christoph, *,
>>
>> I have started now such a list of collection [1]. Work on it, put
>> things to the list, delete it. Mention also on our Whiteboards [2].
>>
>> [1] http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Design/work_items_collection
>> [2] http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Design/Whiteboards
>>
>
> Thanks for all the feedback so far. While I said I would act on this
> today, with Bernhard's announcement, it doesn't feel right to jump
> straight in and carry out "business as usual" for me. I have
> everything I need to proceed, but I'm just going to leave this for a
> week, as a sign of respect. My "2 minutes of silence", if you will.
>
> -Nik

--
Unsubscribe instructions: E-mail to [hidden email]
Problems? http://www.libreoffice.org/get-help/mailing-lists/how-to-unsubscribe/
Posting guidelines + more: http://wiki.documentfoundation.org/Netiquette
List archive: http://listarchives.libreoffice.org/global/design/
All messages sent to this list will be publicly archived and cannot be deleted