W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-sdwig@w3.org > April 2018

[Minutes] SDW IG Chairs and Task leads call - 2018-04-17 (was: RE: Proposed working practices for SDW-IG - no more regular teleconferences)

From: Francois Daoust <fd@w3.org>
Date: Tue, 24 Apr 2018 11:15:44 +0200
To: "'Clemens Portele'" <portele@interactive-instruments.de>, "'Jeremy Tandy'" <jeremy.tandy@gmail.com>
Cc: "'Linda van den Brink'" <l.vandenbrink@geonovum.nl>, <public-sdwig@w3.org>
Message-ID: <023f01d3dbac$d3d33b10$7b79b130$@w3.org>
Talking about the minutes of the call, here they are for reference and archival:



Same minutes copied as raw text below.






SDW IG Telco on Telcos

17 April 2018


   [2]IRC log


      [2] https://www.w3.org/2018/04/17-sdw-irc





          Bill Roberts, Francois Daoust, Jeremy Tandy, Linda van

          den Brink, Michael Gordon












     * [3]Meeting Minutes

         1. [4]Do we need regular teleconferences?

         2. [5]F2F meetings

     * [6]Summary of Action Items


Meeting Minutes


   Jeremy: SSN stuff seems to be happening without teleconferences



   Linda: That seems to be the case indeed. Some activity on



   <jtandy> @brinkwoman says that SSN is working without regular



   <jtandy> ... perhaps we can learn from how they are operating?


   <jtandy> Two topics: (1) how to operate effectively without

   regular teleconferences


   <jtandy> (2) F2F planning ... Fort Collins OGC TC meeting &

   TPAC 2018


   <jtandy> TPAC 2018 is in Lyon in France...


Do we need regular teleconferences?


   Jeremy: Linda and I are struggling to find a convenient time

   for SDW IG following switch to summer time. No time works for

   US, EU and Australia.

   … If we select a time that is friendly for US, and EU, we may

   lose our Australian friends.

   … If we select a time that is friendly for Australia, we may

   lose others.

   … Throwing some ideas around. Is it plausible to work without

   regular teleconferences?

   … We can always schedule a telco for a specific issue, such as

   this one.

   … Is it possible to do regular work without telcos?


   Bill: I think that's possible. Stats call haven't been well

   attended either. No specific reason, clash with Dataset

   Exchange Working Group is responsible for some of that.

   … We would need to have some effective management activity to

   meet deadlines. The calls are often used a reminders that you

   have actions to perform.

   … Talking to each other from time to time is important. If we

   have fewer phone calls, then F2F become more important.

   … We can have fewer calls as long as we compensate that through



   Michael: Overall, I agree.

   … We probably don't need regular teleconferences.

   … For a range of things, we may be able to handle them through

   GitHub issues, using milestones to track progress, and pull


   … We could draft something for the group to review.

   … If we have reviewers for pull requests we issue, then that's


   … If that works out, we can have only occasional telcos.


   Linda: Does GitHub do milestones?


   Jeremy: Yes, it does. You can bundle issues together into a

   milestone. GitHub tells you how many issues still need to be

   addressed for a given milestone.


   Michael: Yes, I've been using that in other projects. We don't

   have a vast amount of issues, but that should be good for us.


   Linda: Michael and I talked about it last week. One thing is

   that we have one GitHub repo for the whole group, and it might

   get crowded if all the activity happens in the same place.


   Jeremy: Do you think that tagging things would help us?


   Linda: Yes, probably that would work.


   Jeremy: Everytime you do an update on GitHub, it sends an email

   to the mailing-list, so that people subscribed to the

   mailing-list see some notification even if they don't follow



   Linda: But you cannot easily see labels and milestones in these

   emails though.


   Jeremy: Right.


   Michael: Most of the existing issues are tagged. Don't know if

   we feel that's not enough, but they are.


   Jeremy: As leaders of your activities, can you find what you



   Michael: I can filter down issues related to Best Practices. If

   we end up doing more Pull Requests and issues, the question

   might become whether that's going to be too much, with too much

   noise for people interested in a particular topic.

   … We can continue for now, until we find it's problematic!


   Jeremy: I agree with that.


   Bill: Just to agree with that. Not too many issues for now.

   Should be easy to track down.


   Francois: We can probably improve the notification tool to

   report labels and milestones (provided the GitHub API reports

   them). Weekly digests can replace individual emails if we have

   too many emails.


   Jeremy: [going through Francois' email]

   … Bill says that deadlines help. I agree. I wonder if it's

   worth having 2-3 days scheduled in a month where we try to

   resolve some issues as a collective.


   Linda: That's a good idea.


   Jeremy: It doesn't have to be always the same day.

   … Activity leaders should do a monthly report.

   … Are calls fortnightly or monthly for now?


   Michael: Monthly for the Best Practices


   Bill: Same for Stats


   Jeremy: So we could do a monthly editorial, published on the

   Wiki somewhere, and share with the mailing-list.


   <billroberts> +1


   [General agreement to proceed with suggested idea to write

   monthly editorials down]


   Jeremy: It doesn't require everyone to be around, but if people

   can focus on the group for a couple of days every month, that

   would be excellent

   … I think that we have consensus that we will try and operate

   without regular telcos. On monthly basis, activity leads and

   group chairs will try to do some editorial writing up and focus

   on issues that need attending to.


   <MichaelGordon> +1


   <brinkwoman> +1


   Jeremy: And we'll use GitHub to track things down.

   … If we need an issue specific telcon, we will call one.

   … First of all, one of us needs to write to the group. I don't

   mind taking that action.


   [discussion about who gets to play with that process first,

   probably Stats on the Web]


   Linda: The few days each month, would that be the same days for

   all of us, or different days for different sub-groups?


   Jeremy: Good question, I was sort of imagining that there would

   be a week for plenary, a week for Best Practices, etc.

   … I'm thinking we should try to stick to the same days each



   Linda: I was thinking that the same days for everyone might be

   useful too, so that we can ping people more easily.

   … Can we chat on GitHub?


   Jeremy: I believe gitter.im could be used


   Linda: OK. I guess there's nothing wrong with IRC.


   Jeremy: do people use other platforms?


   Linda: Slack is one we use.


   Jeremy: OK, we'll look at IM to supplement GitHub. The reason

   I'm looking at a plug-in for GitHub is that it should be easier

   to link discussions with GitHub issues.


   Action: Jeremy to send an email to the SDW IG about new process


   <trackbot> Created ACTION-388 - Send an email to the sdw ig

   about new process [on Jeremy Tandy - due 2018-04-24].


   Action: Linda to review IM tools to supplement GitHub



   <trackbot> Created ACTION-389 - Review im tools to supplement

   github discussions [on Linda van den Brink - due 2018-04-24].


   Bill: I would agree with Linda that we should start with

   everyone in the group having the same "SDW days". I think that

   would be more valuable.


   <MichaelGordon> +1


F2F meetings


   Jeremy: Fort Collins' OGC meeting is in June. Do we think that

   2 half-days would be good? Or do you think we need more?


   <jtandy> Topics for F2F: stats, BP, SSN, funnel, roadmap ...


   Linda: Peter Rusthforth already asked me for time slots to

   discuss MapML


   Jeremy: Good. In the Netherlands, we had 1.5 days, and that

   seemed like the right amount of time.

   … There will be a bunch of programs running in parallel. A

   minimum would be 2 half-days slots. And we'll grab the next

   half-day if we can.


   Linda: Would be worth asking Scott for a room for 1.5 days. I

   think they're using the university.


   Jeremy: Do we want consecutive blocks?


   Linda: Either way works for me.


   Jeremy: I'd like to travel on the Monday. It would be pleasant

   for me if we can push for the Tuesday.


   <jtandy> Jeremy would like the F2F to be Tuesday or later


   [Discussions on best day and times]


   <jtandy> Suggest Tuesday PM, Wednesday AM, Wednesday PM ...

   perhaps with gap to accommodate open OAB session??


   <jtandy> +1


   <brinkwoman> +1


   <MichaelGordon> +1


   <billroberts> 0 - I don't think I will be able to come to Fort

   Collins unfortunately


   <jtandy> Try to schedule 1-day of time ... across 1.5 days


   <jtandy> Accommodate overlaps??


   <jtandy> Minimum one day!!


   Bill: I should be able to attend remotely, but not in person.


   Linda: OK, so we can schedule a session on Stats.


   Jeremy: What about TPAC?


   Linda: We are supposed to already tell W3C organization which

   days we want to meet at TPAC.




      [7] https://www.w3.org/2018/10/TPAC/Overview.html


   Linda: TPAC is in Lyon, 22-26 October 2018.


   Francois: Best way would be to choose days and tell that we

   want to avoid overlap with the Dataset Exchange Working Group


   Action: Francois to talk with Dave about F2F days of the

   Dataset Exchange Working Group at TPAC


   <trackbot> Created ACTION-390 - Talk with dave about f2f days

   of the dataset exchange working group at tpac [on François

   Daoust - due 2018-04-24].


   Jeremy: back to "SDW days". First week of each month seems



Summary of Action Items


    1. [8]Jeremy to send an email to the SDW IG about new process

    2. [9]Linda to review IM tools to supplement GitHub


    3. [10]Francois to talk with Dave about F2F days of the

       Dataset Exchange Working Group at TPAC




From: Clemens Portele <portele@interactive-instruments.de> 
Sent: Friday, April 20, 2018 6:51 PM
To: Jeremy Tandy <jeremy.tandy@gmail.com>
Cc: Francois Daoust <fd@w3.org>; Linda van den Brink <l.vandenbrink@geonovum.nl>; public-sdwig@w3.org
Subject: Re: Proposed working practices for SDW-IG - no more regular teleconferences


I saw in the minutes that you had a discussion about chat tools related to GitHub. 


In the WFS development we use Gitter. It works quite well and the integration with GitHub is useful. We used it heavily during the WFS 3.0 hackathon to communicate (including with the remote participants).





On 20. Apr 2018, at 18:36, Jeremy Tandy <jeremy.tandy@gmail.com <mailto:jeremy.tandy@gmail.com> > wrote:


Hello SDW-IG folks...


It’s been a while since we had a [plenary] teleconference; it’s been difficult to find times that suit participants from all time-zones, and now that we’re in boreal summer, it’s even more difficult.


So earlier this week, Linda, François, Bill, Michael and myself met (virtually) to figure out if teleconferences were essential - and, if not, what alternatives we could use. Minutes [1]


We concluded that we don’t need the regular teleconferences. Instead we will aim to complete our work by correspondence using GitHub and the SDW-IG mailing list.


That said, this will put more emphasis on our F2F meetings to discuss and debate complex issues. The next one is planned as a side-event during the upcoming OGC Technical Committee meeting in Fort Collins, CO (USA) which runs from 4-8 June.


Also, if we find there’s a need to talk about a specific issue, we can simply schedule an ad-hoc WebEx (or whatever) at any time. François can set up WebEx calls as required. 


Below are some recommendations about how to work in GitHub to keep things moving along. Working in this way will likely require the activity leaders (like Bill, Michael, Armin) and IG chairs to “animate the show” to keep up momentum of activity.

1.	Make sure comments raised here and there appear in a GitHub issue - and raise a new issue if comments don’t seem to have a home 
2.	Make sure issues are labelled/tagged correctly 
3.	Consider grouping sets of related issues into Milestones to make it easier to track progress 
4.	Make sure issues are assigned to someone - or, if no one is willing to lead, then write a comment to that effect ... most likely this will mean that work on that issue will stall or progress very slowly 
5.	Make sure that proposed resolutions to issues get reviewed 
6.	Make sure that Pull Requests (PR) are linked to issues - as this makes the PR review easier to complete (e.g. it should be obvious what the change is and why it is proposed) 
7.	Regularly ping assignees to check on progress 
8.	Set deadlines 
9.	Close issues when appropriate - so that we can focus on the open ones    


While GitHub issues often relate to very specific topics, we can still use issues to capture broader discussions too.


Pretty much, these are already things that we’re doing in the IG. Thank you!


We’ve configured the mailing list to capture everything that the GitHub mailer sends out - so there’s no escape even if you’re not paying close attention in GitHub, albeit its not particularly easy to follow those threads because the labelling/tagging isn’t evident. François says we can amend these settings if we find it’s not meeting our needs (e.g. volume of email on the list from GitHub starts to become an irritant!). Indeed, he took an action to see if we can get the GitHub labels/tags and milestones included in the mailing list - so long as the GitHub mailer API supports that!


Having a regular schedule of calls helps keep pace on things...


In addition to assigning deadlines on specific issues, we’re also suggesting that we identify 2-3 days in the first week of each month where we, the IG membership, will have a focused “sprint” on moving things forward. This should help us plan our time and participation.


We’ll use the same days for all the plenary and sub-group activities - no reason why they can’t all be done in parallel.


To help this along, we (editors and sub-group leads) will write a short “editorial” or monthly summary outlining the priority issues and topics to try and focus the work.


We’ll kick this off next week, with the first “sprint” at the beginning of May. I’ll do a plenary “editorial” too.


Finally, we talked about whether we needed multiple repositories for our work; e.g. one for each sub-group. For now, we’ll stick with a single repository. If we find this gets too crowded/congested, we can adapt!


Please let us know if you’re happy with this approach. As a minimum, it should mean an end to regular late night/early morning calls!


Best regards, Jeremy & Linda


[1]: https://www.w3.org/2018/04/17-sdw-minutes.html


Received on Tuesday, 24 April 2018 09:15:48 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.3.1 : Tuesday, 24 April 2018 09:15:49 UTC