linaro-project-management team mailing list archive

[Ricardo Salveti <ricardo.salveti@xxxxxxxxxx>]

On Fri, May 11, 2012 at 2:05 PM, Christian Robottom Reis
<kiko@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Piggy-backing on Ilias' thread on process changes, I wanted to bring up
> an idea I've had for cards.
>
> Could we make it a pre-requisite for submitting a card for allocation to
> a quarter that it have the names of the engineers involved in the work?
> In other words, a card would also have the team working on it identified
> as early as being allocated to a quarter, which would promote better
> visibility for the TSC as to which assignees (from which companies in
> particular) are working on what tasks, and also, the general size of the
> work.

Sorry to ask, but what problem exactly do you think having the
engineer at the card description would solve? For me it seems it
doesn't help much from the planning perspective.

In general I'm against at "pre-allocating" engineers for a quarter, as
this decision happens at the time we finish planning one specific
cycle. In my opinion the team itself should always be responsible, as
we can later move people depending on the availability and the
importance of the work.

I also don't like the idea of exposing the engineers to the TSC, as it
could appear that a card wasn't done because someone wasn't capable of
doing it, while in reality a bunch of other things could have
happened.

Cheers,
-- 
Ricardo Salveti de Araujo