On Mon, Mar 30, 2020 at 12:31 PM Neal Gompa <ngompa13@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
On Mon, Mar 30, 2020 at 7:27 AM Iñaki Ucar <iucar@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
> On Mon, 30 Mar 2020 at 13:20, Neal Gompa <ngompa13@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> >
> > On Mon, Mar 30, 2020 at 7:02 AM Leigh Griffin <lgriffin@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> > >
> > >>
> > >> I was really looking forward to reading what
> > >> Neal (as he's doing now) and others had to say about the requirements
> > >> *before* any decision was taken, and how each tool covers them or not,
> > >> and what kind of effort would require to cover it in the latter case.
> > >> This is *very* disappointing.
> > >
> > > I'm sorry this is disappointing but even reading the analysis by Neal it is looking at the merit of the requirement and not looking at the fact that it is valuable to somebody. Each stakeholder group had their own means to discuss and debate the merits and had them rolled into CPE who in turn analysed them and published the full story list.
> >
> > I'm not bothering with the other aspects because there's no point. You
> > *already* decided. Why should I evaluate the merits of the
> > requirements when you've already decided they mattered enough to use
> > them for deciding for GitLab?
>
> I think he's arguing the opposite: that you shouldn't be evaluating
> the merits of the requirements published just because they are
> valuable to *someone*, which is crazy.
That is nuts, no agile process I've ever heard of does it that way.
Part of the job of a product owner and project manager is to filter
these down, determine the merits of them, and determine the importance
of them after that. If you don't do that, you'll be bogged down in
useless requirements effectively forcing decisions for you.
We done that as a Management team and with our Product Owner among other stakeholders. We did evaluate the merit of the requirements from a practicality perspective but we did not question or force our opinion on the validity of their asks, as we respect that it serves some demographic of their stakeholder group. I don't feel it's appropriate for one stakeholder group to criticise or attack the merits of a requirement from another group, that's the essence of my point.
--
真実はいつも一つ！/ Always, there's only one truth!
_______________________________________________
devel mailing list -- devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
To unsubscribe send an email to devel-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/devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Leigh Griffin
Engineering Manager
Communications House
Cork Road, Waterford City
lgriffin@xxxxxxxxxx
M: +353877545162 IM: lgriffin
_______________________________________________ devel mailing list -- devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx To unsubscribe send an email to devel-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/devel@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
