[openbeos] Re: some points
- From: Olivier MILLA <methedras@xxxxxxxxx>
- To: openbeos@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
- Date: Wed, 30 Jun 2004 01:10:35 +0200
Hello Haiku peeps,
My few cents:
Since the first days of the old website I think the way progress is represented
to the public by the actual system is great. These bars give a very accurate
view on the state of the project. For those who want more details, the system to
show what's done, what's being done and what is todo (like it was too from the
first days) is great. It's quiet detailed and someone with a little view of BeOS
and his API can see very rapidly what's been done and what's left.
Nevertheless I think the actual system may indeed recquire a couple of lines to
details what is "alpha" and "beta". That's for the Users that read you, the User
OS makers.
The only problem about the actual form is that it needs the Teams Leaders to
report there status as often as they can which eats a lot of time. The best way
would be to delegate it to someone maybe. That wouldn't represent much for him
and would free time for devs. He would have to see what's being checked in CVS
with the digest and ask the team leaders if the checkin represents a step or
not.
Now about velocity. That's something very interesting. Beside SF's activity
percentile there is something that can be done: give a link from the website to
CIA and Sikosis's stat page. From there one can see the growth of lines of code
or what's being checked in weekly. Moreover many checkins logs message are quite
clear and announce futures milestones and what's going on. Finally that needs
nothing to be done from us as Sikosis already maintain this site on his side.
(And thx a lot for it Sikosis !)
so that was my cents :p
Olivier
> Maybe if I explain the problem that we were trying to solve, we can come up
> with some good solution.
>
> There was a lot of discontent that the status bars never moved. That they
> were
> not a good indicator of status because, well, they didn't move.
>
> Additionally, the point was made that some things that are not development
> complete are in alpha, so having a simple 1-10 of development followed by an
>
> alpha box and a beta box (which was in place when the new website went live,
> I
> think) was deceptive, too.
>
> So, the problem, generally is "how do we give an accurate representation of
> status?". Where status can entail a number of things, including:
> - percentage of development complete
> - is it in alpha?
> - is it in beta?
> - is it mature?
>
> Finally, there is one other feature that I would love to see, but I really
> don't know how it would work. That is velocity. How much has been done in the
>
> last, say, month. That would show activity (or lack thereof). Maybe CVS
> checkins? That is a feature that could come much later.
>
> So if anyone out there has a solution that fills all of those criteria,
> please
> feel free to speak up! :-)
>
> On 2004-06-29 at 07:20:17 [-0400], Waldemar Kornewald wrote:
> > Hi Axel,
> >
> > > I disagree here :)
> > > You can always only believe you might have a good idea about the status
> > > - a simple progress bar from 0% to 100% is surely not enough to gain
> > > real understanding.
> > > The alpha/beta status is an improvement, as would be any other of the
> here
> > > mentioned suggestions as well IMO.
> >
> > I find this confusing (as many others, too). Why can we not use a status
> bar
> > with different coloring meaning "Development, Alpha, Beta, Stable, Mature"?
>
> > Choose some five colours and there you go with a twice as wide status bar
> for
> > each team.
> >
> > Just my $0.02,
> > Waldemar
>
>
"A man does what he does because he sees the world as he sees it" A.K
http://www.generalsemantics.org/study/whatisgs.htm
Other related posts:
