On Tue, 20 Aug 2019 at 15:30, Dusty Mabe <dusty@xxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote: > > > > On 8/19/19 6:09 PM, Kevin Fenzi wrote: > > > > Well, this I think is related to our "agile transformation" (or if you > > prefer "reorganizing how we work"). Right now, you find it hard to get > > stuff done because everyone is busy on other things, so you have to nag > > us to get stuff done which makes things worse for us, etc. > > Right. It has been this way for a long time. It's not your fault and it's > not my fault, but both of us feel like we've got the short end of the stick. > > > > > Ideally I think we can get to a place where we do a lot more scheduling > > and a lot less having to yell for cycles. You note a few things were > > just 5 min for someone to do... but the way we are working now someone > > does that thing for you finally, but then goes back to the other stuff > > they were working on, meaning in 30min you need another thing... repeat. > > > > If you can come to us and say "hey, this is my project, I need it > > deployed by X" we can look at it, gather info we need, put it in our > > queue and then tell you "hey, we can work on that next tuesday". Then > > next tuesday we can devote a block of time to getting everything done. I > > think thats a win for everyone in the end and I would really like to get > > there. Can we? I sure hope so > > > > > > In fact perhaps we could start doing this now somewhat: block off say... > > wed into 2 hour blocks. Sign up people who have projects or pet > > bugs/issues they want to get solved for those blocks and work on them? > > > I think blocking off time and doing some scheduling is a great idea. My advice > here is that we have a shared calendar with blocks that people can sign up for > automatically (i.e. if the block is open anyone can reserve it as long as they > have a FAS account). > > The only counter point that I have is that sometimes a "block of time" isn't > always what's needed. Sometimes it will be something very small, but rather > fundamental, that requires quite a bit of rework by the end user. For example, > you and I have a 5 minutes session where some revelation comes to light and I > need to go rewrite a portion of my application. I then spend two hours doing > that and have to wait a week for the next block of time. > I think this is the symptom of a lack of upfront cooperation and design. This is what we are currently putting in place, if you need something consequent from us you come up with a spec that explain the WHAT and the WHY. Then we work together on the HOW and WHEN, once we have a good idea of the HOW and WHEN the work will be prioritized on our side (might have a dedicated team assigned to it) which I think will make cooperation easier. It is never too late to start, so maybe we should spend some time to write down everything that is needed for Fedora CoreOS, write down HOW this will be done and what the work being Done means. That way we could probably dedicated a few people to focus on that work until completion. How does that sounds ? > One thing that we might be able to do for that is have separate blocks of > time the next day that is specifically for follow ups to the previous day. > > > > > Anyhow, I think the answer is in working better/smarter rather than > > granting people more perms in general. Of course increasing the pool of > > people who can do specific things might also help, but also those people > > will need to learn when to do things and when to ask about doing things. > > I think working smarter is definitely going to be what we need to do over time > to support the rest of Fedora and "initiatives" better. For Fedora CoreOS, for > right now I really do think it would help if one of the Fedora CoreOS team were > given more access so we can self service better. Right now we either need more > access or we need more dedicated attention for the various needs we have. If we > could get a one hour a day scheduled commitment I think that would help us quite > a bit. We won't always need help (i.e. we cancel) and we won't always need the > whole hour, but right now it would really make a difference in our progress. > > WDYT? > > Dusty > _______________________________________________ > infrastructure mailing list -- infrastructure@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > To unsubscribe send an email to infrastructure-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx > Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ > List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines > List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/infrastructure@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx _______________________________________________ infrastructure mailing list -- infrastructure@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to infrastructure-leave@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx Fedora Code of Conduct: https://docs.fedoraproject.org/en-US/project/code-of-conduct/ List Guidelines: https://fedoraproject.org/wiki/Mailing_list_guidelines List Archives: https://lists.fedoraproject.org/archives/list/infrastructure@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
