[openbeos-cdt] Re: CDT regrouping: why and how?

  • From: Eddy Groen <eddyspeeder@xxxxxxxxx>
  • To: openbeos-cdt@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • Date: Mon, 16 Nov 2009 12:14:33 +0100

Thanks to Humdinger's input:

T.I. = thread initiator, the individual who came up with the idea
T.S. = team spokesperson (or secretary)
CDT = team as a whole

1. Find something to improve (by CDT or by T.I.)
2. Come up with an initial idea / proposal (by T.I.)
3. Discuss divergently in CDT (iterative process: brainstorm,
     conceptualize, prototype, summarize by T.I., repeat)
4. Discuss convergently in CDT (reaching a point of agreement)
5. Formulate the idea into a clear plan including sketches (by T.I.)
6. Present the idea to others (general list, non-tech users; by T.S.)
7. Evaluate the feedback from the presented idea (by T.S.)
8. Write Trac entry (by T.I.), have it checked (by CDT)
9. Post a Trac entry (along with the necessary attachments, by T.I.)
10. Evaluate the eventual implementation (by CDT)

Step 5 and 7 should as well be in the responsibility of the topic
> starter, again if nobody else wants to do it.

I don't think it should be the topic starter at all times who presents the
idea to the general list. I even think it ought to be one person who acts as
the main spokesperson for the CDT, who also gathers the feedback that has
come in (in response to certain topics or in general.

Stephan requested the Trac entries to be clear and extensive. I think it
would indeed be okay if the author were the topic initiator, but that at
least one other CDT member should check whether it's elaborate enough to be
posted to Trac. (Especially for the first few entries we need to do this, as
Stephan pointed out, to gain enough credibility with the developers.

It should be clear that
> if you feel a topic is worth serious discussion and the time of many
> other people thinking and posting about it, one has to take
> responsibilty.
> Maybe this will also limit the number of active topics and help focus
> forces.

Yes, very good, I agree. So the thread initiator should be the one keeping
track of the progress of the divergent discussion. I think the decision to
reach a point of agreement should be made by the list as a whole. The
presentation outward (steps 6/7) should be done by the same person.


Other related posts: