PMC Functional Meeting 20100219
Date: 2010-02-19
Time: 5PM GMT
Venue: irc #adempiere-team
Support Spreadsheet: Adempiere PMC Functional
Chat times in GMT-5
(11:05:50) jsSolutions [~4b64bbbd@gateway/web/freenode/x-zvspwrlorpszgfit] entered the channel.
(11:55:11) trifon has left the channel (quit: Quit: ChatZilla 0.9.86 [Firefox 3.5.8/20100214235958]).
(12:00:19) CarlosRuiz: hi
(12:01:45) CarlosRuiz: ready for functional meeting?
(12:01:45) jsSolutions: good day!
(12:02:00) jsSolutions: let's begin!
(12:02:20) jsSolutions: do you have any words of wisdom before we start Carlos?
(12:02:45) CarlosRuiz: :-) not from here
(12:03:57) kai7: The is no way to peace, peace is the way. (Gandhi)
(12:04:08) kai7: Is this what you looked for? :-)
(12:04:42) jsSolutions: very nice- that can be our topic :)
(12:05:00) jsSolutions: we have Carlos, Kai, anyone else present?
(12:05:47) CarlosRuiz: jsSolutions: I like your proposal for agenda, can we start with last point - because probably Kai must go on the middle
(12:06:10) CarlosRuiz: and is the easier point to define :-)
(12:06:28) jsSolutions: sure- maybe some others will come
(12:06:50) jsSolutions: i guess the question i thought we would answer before that would be how often we can commit to
(12:06:59) jsSolutions: I would prefer weekly to start
(12:07:25) CarlosRuiz: weekly 1h - I'm ok with that
(12:07:39) CarlosRuiz: we can review later if it's not needed and change to every two weeks
(12:07:42) jsSolutions: my experience shows anything else is quickly forgotten...
(12:08:09) jsSolutions: ok, 2/3rds majority
(12:08:11) jsSolutions: weekly it is
(12:08:25) CarlosRuiz: weekday? time?
(12:08:28) jsSolutions: Kai is there a better meeting time for you?
(12:08:36) kai7: OK, it's fine by me too
(12:09:00) kai7: Time: One hour would be better actually
(12:09:07) kai7: (earlier)
(12:09:40) kai7: I know, then it's early for you. ;-)
(12:10:24) jsSolutions: Friday 4PM GMT?
(12:10:36) bcahya_ has left the channel (quit: Ping timeout: 245 seconds).
(12:10:42) kai7: That's fine by me.
(12:11:36) CarlosRuiz: for me it's ok too - just wondering if it can be 3PM GMT to make it adjacent to usability
(12:12:22) CarlosRuiz: or we can move usability 1 hour later, kai
(12:12:22) jsSolutions: actually, one of my questions from scope of our team is whether we should combine usability with functional
(12:12:38) kai7: Yes, we could do this
(12:12:47) jsSolutions: it seems the appropriate team would be the same
(12:12:58) jsSolutions: but perhaps you have some ideas for usability that are different
(12:13:13) jsSolutions: I guess this falls under #2
(12:13:17) jsSolutions: in our agenda
(12:13:57) jsSolutions: Carlos, can you explain your thoughts on the difference between usability group and functionality group?
(12:13:58) CarlosRuiz: just sent you the link for the usability doc we collected with kai
(12:14:28) CarlosRuiz: ok - then let's do friday 4PM GMT - and we move usability to be 3PM GMT - right?
(12:14:45) kai7: OK
(12:15:10) jsSolutions: i see- that's a nice focused purpose
(12:16:12) CarlosRuiz: ok - I'm creating the meeting in adempiere calendar, we can move to the next point
(12:16:36) jsSolutions: ok, lets stay with #2 - what should the parameters of this group be?
(12:17:43) jsSolutions: we need a mission statement ;)
(12:18:12) CarlosRuiz: ok ready - invitation sent
(12:19:08) CarlosRuiz: there will be intersection points between usability, architecture and functional -
(12:19:24) CarlosRuiz: I guess we'll end joining all the wishlists in just one and organize it different
(12:19:36) CarlosRuiz: but at this moment let's try this way
(12:21:16) jsSolutions: one purpose of this group IMO must be: Review contributions that change existing functionality to make sure it is generally acceptable
(12:21:41) kai7: Good point
(12:22:02) CarlosRuiz: agree
(12:22:38) kai7: "Generally accetable" could be a tough point. ;-)
(12:22:47) CarlosRuiz: applicable also for new things
(12:23:16) jsSolutions: for new things it would be nice to have a standard for proposing functionality
(12:23:39) kai7: Yes, that the community could help before desining it
(12:23:45) jsSolutions: similar to the form we made years ago for sponsored development- an organized way to propose an addition
(12:23:52) CarlosRuiz: yes - a specification template
(12:24:39) CarlosRuiz: I'm planning to work on specification template to take into account all the edges - functiona, architecture, usability, documentation, etc
(12:24:51) CarlosRuiz: I'll validate with the whole PMC
(12:25:31) jsSolutions: if it is to work, i think the group must take responsibility to complete the worksheet before an enhancement moves to release version
(12:25:51) jsSolutions: so if the contributor/developer is negligent, we help to finish it
(12:26:51) CarlosRuiz: we can - when overwhelmed then we prioritize where to focus
(12:27:31) jsSolutions: yes, i think that means we also need to review functional contributions to decide which ones we want to move forward
(12:27:45) jsSolutions: similar but a bit different that #1
(12:28:12) CarlosRuiz: ok, agree too
(12:28:14) kai7: What about a form post to ask the community which functionality they are missing most?
(12:28:23) kai7: form=forum
(12:28:36) jsSolutions: maybe it is: review incomplete functional contributions to decide which ones we want to move forward
(12:28:57) CarlosRuiz: I would propose as an initial task to make an inventory of functionalities and its status
(12:29:12) CarlosRuiz: before going to collect the wishlist
(12:29:50) kai7: You mean the functionalities which are not integrated?
(12:30:07) CarlosRuiz: no, I mean an inventory of all adempiere functionalities and its status
(12:30:15) kai7: OK
(12:30:33) hengsin [~hengsin@115.164.74.105] entered the channel.
(12:30:39) kai7: Agree
(12:30:54) jsSolutions: i guess if nothing else, a deliverable of that could be to update the Beta flag
(12:32:31) jsSolutions: do we need to inventory the not-integrated functionalities as well?
(12:32:45) CarlosRuiz: I'm creating some samples on a page "Functionality Inventory" for your review of what the format I think it must be
(12:33:43) CarlosRuiz: it will be really long - but I think it's worthy
(12:34:05) CarlosRuiz: indeed I think it's needed - we've never collected such thing
(12:34:42) CarlosRuiz: I can work on that - and you review
(12:34:48) kai7: And if it's really a well maintained document it could be really valuable
(12:35:31) jsSolutions: i think we should review the outstanding bug reports/feature requests, classify which ones are functional issues, test, close what we can, and get the others fixed
(12:36:51) CarlosRuiz: jsSolutions: the task inventory the non-integrated appeared also in release document - Norbert already have some advance here:
(12:36:51) CarlosRuiz: http://www.adempiere.com/index.php/Feature_Development_Collaboration
(12:37:30) jsSolutions: yes, thats good
(12:37:31) CarlosRuiz: and also the triage of current bug reports > 400 appeared as a task there - because we need to work on roadmap and next stable release
(12:37:47) CarlosRuiz: so, there is an intersection point here within the two groups
(12:37:50) CarlosRuiz: what is ok
(12:38:21) CarlosRuiz: we simply need to coordinate how to join the effort
(12:39:46) CarlosRuiz: Joel, we have Tasks, Functionality Inventory, Wishlist
(12:39:46) CarlosRuiz: maybe we can try a new page also for outstanding features to work on
(12:39:46) CarlosRuiz: like standard costing, average costing, cash management
(12:40:00) CarlosRuiz: we know for sure they're partially working or broken
(12:40:15) jsSolutions: so perhaps the inventory of functionality is the responsibility of the documentation group?
(12:41:02) jsSolutions: i think bug triage must fall under our group
(12:41:08) CarlosRuiz: no, I think it belongs here - because we need the experts to know if something is working or not
(12:41:13) CarlosRuiz: right
(12:41:19) CarlosRuiz: let's add triage to the tasks
(12:41:45) kai7: I am sorry guys, but I have to leave now
(12:41:53) CarlosRuiz: now that I remember - what I wrote on release document is that in release we need to define the triage requirements, not do it
(12:41:55) kai7: But I see, you are doing a great job. :-)
(12:42:01) CarlosRuiz: thanks kai
(12:42:04) jsSolutions: ok, any tasks you want to volunteer for before you leave?
(12:42:05) CarlosRuiz: c u later
(12:42:08) jsSolutions: :)
(12:43:22) kai7: I look to the list when you finished it. :-)
(12:43:44) CarlosRuiz: I added an outstanding features to review to try to focus on top priorities now / because the creation of the whole inventory will be slow
(12:43:53) kai7: bye
(12:44:09) kai7 has left the channel (quit: Quit: Bye).
(12:45:23) CarlosRuiz: jsSolutions: are you ok with the changes I'm proposing to the spreadsheet?
(12:45:31) jsSolutions: maybe this group should own the functionality inventory, and documentation group monitors it for clarity and release notes?
(12:46:02) CarlosRuiz: yep - sounds better
(12:47:06) jsSolutions: what's the difference between 5 & 8 in the doc?
(12:47:54) CarlosRuiz: wishlist vs outstanding features?
(12:48:39) CarlosRuiz: when I mean outstanding features is just to try the most needed things to say that we really have an ERP :-)
(12:48:56) CarlosRuiz: or important broken functionalities that we already know they're broken
(12:49:05) jsSolutions: isnt that the same as wishlist?
(12:49:15) CarlosRuiz: when we talk about a wishlist - is wider
(12:49:37) CarlosRuiz: anybody could ask for any thing - even crazy things - and that could land in a wishlist
(12:49:42) CarlosRuiz: to be prioritized and reviewed later
(12:50:26) CarlosRuiz: for example - finish the project management functionality, is it outstanding? or wishlist?
(12:50:26) CarlosRuiz: integrate fixed assets?
(12:50:26) CarlosRuiz: develop serial capture?
(12:50:37) CarlosRuiz: or develop a totally new thing?
(12:50:59) jsSolutions: yes, shouldnt those be on a single priority list?
(12:51:02) CarlosRuiz: in other words - I'm thinking on the outstanding features needed to release the next stable, and the wishlist as the future roadmap
(12:51:11) jsSolutions: i see
(12:51:25) CarlosRuiz: they can be on the same list - but I'm worried that wishlist will become too long
(12:51:38) CarlosRuiz: and I would like to keep an eye to outstanding features
(12:51:44) CarlosRuiz: because we need to solve them soon
(12:52:07) jsSolutions: how about that?
(12:52:25) CarlosRuiz: ok
(12:53:03) jsSolutions: does that step into release group ground?
(12:53:21) jsSolutions: should they tell us what needs to be there, and we figure out what/how its gonna be?
(12:53:44) CarlosRuiz: no, I think in release group we define the strategy - but the definition of what is needed or not is here
(12:55:33) CarlosRuiz: Joel, I'm ok if you want to manage it different
(12:55:47) jsSolutions: sounds ok
(12:56:10) jsSolutions: we have 5 mins- i think this is good for a first pass. Should we pick the most important?
(12:56:20) CarlosRuiz: sure
(12:56:54) jsSolutions: most important to me are
(12:57:17) jsSolutions: 1- define spec process
(12:57:24) jsSolutions: 2- triage bug reports
(12:58:00) jsSolutions: you already have started on inventory of functionality
(12:58:37) jsSolutions: for next week, I could draft a spec process, and start the bug triage
(12:59:21) CarlosRuiz: great
(13:00:15) jsSolutions: this can be enough for me for this week, and maybe we will get some more volunteers next week
(13:00:39) CarlosRuiz: based on my experience on bug day - triage those 400 bug reports will take a lot of time
(13:00:39) CarlosRuiz: I triaged like 60 in like 8 hours
(13:01:03) CarlosRuiz: so, we could ask for volunteers to help on that
(13:01:20) jsSolutions: that's about like my experience the first time
(13:01:26) jsSolutions: Low, AYT?
(13:02:13) jsSolutions: carlos, are you posting the logs from todays meetings?
(13:02:19) CarlosRuiz: yes
(13:02:34) CarlosRuiz: in wiki, and publishing also the links to the spreadsheets - etc
(13:02:39) CarlosRuiz: later
(13:02:57) jsSolutions: great- ok, we can formally conclude this meeting
(13:03:01) CarlosRuiz: ok / as you said, I think it's enough for a start :-)
(13:03:09) CarlosRuiz: thanks a lot Joel for leading this effort
(13:03:14) jsSolutions: yes, small achievable goals
(13:03:53) jsSolutions: ha ha - challenge coordinating a discussion between you and me :))
(13:04:12) CarlosRuiz: :-D
(13:05:33) hengsin: hi joel
(13:07:26) jsSolutions: hi low, was wondering if Angela would be able to start a triage of the outstanding bug reports?
(13:08:49) hengsin: just one suggestion here: it might be beneficial to first limit the scope to a few key area and triage those bug first, it can be difficult to work for a release without such scoping.
(13:09:20) hengsin: joel, if time permitted, she can start doing that next week.
(13:09:43) CarlosRuiz: my feeling is that from 400 bug reports there must be like 50 valid
(13:10:53) CarlosRuiz: I'm trying to keep an eye to avoid invalid bug reporting
(13:10:56) jsSolutions: when I triaged last, about 30% i couldnt reproduce in the current version, or the details are not enough
(13:11:37) jsSolutions: the first step could be to review and assign if it is a functional issue or technical/architecture issue
(13:12:07) jsSolutions: then we could focus on reproducing the functional bugs, close the ones we cant
(13:12:30) jsSolutions: close the ones we cant reproduce
(13:17:40) jsSolutions: Angela can work on this as time permits. If the use case is unclear, she can assign to me
(13:19:36) jsSolutions: Carlos, I added some details notes to the spreadsheet, maybe you can see if I caught the spirit?
(13:30:51) CarlosRuiz: sure Joel - good notes
