Re: the bug team and gnome2.2

[hobbit aloss ukuu org uk]

On Wed, Aug 28, 2002 at 11:34:24AM +0200 or thereabouts, Vincent Untz wrote:
> Le Mardi 27 août 2002, a 20:33, John Fleck a ecrit :

> > Let me suggest that "be a team" may require a name, a slightly more
> > formal organization (which is in a sense what you're suggesting below)

This is part of the reason I liked "bugsquad" as the name of the
list. I _think_ I even suggested it. Kjarten would know.

[snippage]

> > My experience with the GDP is that being part of the "GNOME
> > Documentation Project", rather than being one of "a bunch of people what
> > work on GNOME docs" carries some intangible weight and value for
> > participants. Although we don't, sadly, have T-shirts or socks with nice
> > logos.
> > 
> > A more formal organization would make it easier to assign specific roles
> > and responsibilities.
> 
> That's a good point.
> 
> I like the comparison with the GDP. How well did it work before its
> formation ? Did new people come in when it became a 'formal
> organization' ?

The GDP had been around for ages before I got involved, but it
was mostly quiet with little happening. If you wanted to get
involved, it was basically "Cool! Pick a doc, write it!"

I had not the confidence to do that. Most of the apps were things
I didn't use, didn't understand, didn't have the latest version 
of, didn't know how to document...

I wanted someone to tell me what to do the first time. What tools
I needed, what should go in the doc, what needed documenting, and
so on. These are things I can perfectly well do myself now, but
as a first step it seemed a gigantic one.

I think two things made us a 'team':

* The growth of the IRC channel to a stage where there was always
someone else on and active. I well remember the day when someone
said "hey look! /names #docs is in double figures!" and there was
great excitement :) These days there are regularly twenty people
on (not that I'm there often).

* The doctable. This was (is) a webpage with a whacking great
table on it of every package in what we considered to be GNOME,
every application within it, and the stage the docs were at.
There was a cycle they were supposed to go through. Like Bugzilla,
actually. Docs became assigned, in progress, written, proof-read,
linked in, and done. And then, often, "needs updates" :) 

I didn't made much use of it because I was on a 28.8 modem and
the giant table was taking an age to download, but it _definitely_
helped.

I also think templates of "how a doc is laid out" and a GDP
guide including that and "if you meet this, then.." and how to
get the tools working and just about everything anyone met
more than once helped a lot.

The doctable went into action as the releases of gnome-core and
gnome-applets 1.1 were being made. And yes, I do think more
people got involved. Actually, that's a third thing: having a
goal and a date. "Get stuff done" is easy to put off. "Get
stuff done by..." is not. 

Telsa (have I really not closed 200 bugs? How crap.)