Re: Process, Tracker and Bugzilla

Can you propose the initial set of components (work packages)?


On Fri, Jun 14, 2013 at 2:01 PM, Sean Hayes <Sean.Hayes@microsoft.com>wrote:

>  All.****
>
> ** **
>
> I am considering how we can better manage, and hopefully accelerate, our
> process a little in the run-up to TPAC when we may have to take on
> additional workloads incurred by a revised charter and WebVTT work..****
>
> ** **
>
> I have been finding of late that the tracker software, while good for
> keeping track of action assignments, is not so good for actually
> maintaining our various specifications. I note that many groups have
> transitioned to using Bugzilla. In particular the WebVTT CG is doing so,
> and in anticipation of a smooth transition of their work items into our
> group, I therefore propose that we transition to Bugzilla, sooner rather
> than later to get used to the workflow.****
>
> ** **
>
> In preparation for this, and to estimate a burn-down rate between now and
> November, I have been analyzing the open issues and I believe they fall
> into about a dozen major classes, which I’ll call for want of a better term
> work packages.  I’ll be following up later with this breakdown.****
>
> ** **
>
> I propose with the groups consent to do the following:****
>
> ** **
>
> **1.      **Have Philippe set us up with a bugzilla repository.****
>
> **2.      **Consolidate all of the existing issues into the broad work
> packages identified.****
>
> **3.      **Create a new straw-man change proposal/placeholder on the
> wiki for each work package which summarizes all of the issues related to
> that package.****
>
> **4.      **Have each work package be identified as a component for bug
> tracking purposes, as well as components for SDP, SE and 1.1****
>
> **5.      **Identify an owner for each work package (don’t all volunteer
> at once J)****
>
> **6.      **Close out all of the existing issues****
>
> **7.      **Register all new issues going forward as bugs in bugzilla.****
>
> ** **
>
> Then as an ongoing process I would like to run each work package
> effectively as its own mini project using an Agile/Scrum like methodology,
> where the identified owner keeps up to date with the backlog for that work
> package, prioritizes the backlog; and defines iterations for the package of
> about 2 weeks with specific actions for the top work items from the backlog
> for that iteration, and at the end of each iteration we’ll transfer
> whatever we have at that point for each work package into the edit queue(s)
> for Glenn to process.****
>
> ** **
>
> We will close out work packages as and when their backlog is cleared.****
>
> ** **
>
> I’m opening this up for debate now, with a view to adopting this plan this
> at next week’s call. Silence will be deemed consent, however you are
> encouraged to actively voice approval if you agree.****
>
> ** **
>
> I do not plan to debate this during the meeting, it will be a simple Go/No
> go decision. So if you have questions, or an issue with this plan please
> raise it in response to this email in advance of the meeting.****
>
> ** **
>
> Thanks****
>
> ** **
>
> Sean.****
>