On Thu, Jul 26, 2012 at 02:32:10AM +1000, Justin Clift wrote: > On 24/07/2012, at 8:58 PM, Angus Thomas wrote: > > On 07/23/2012 09:28 PM, Matt Wagner wrote: > >> If people agree that this is useful, I'd be happy to take a stab at > >> writing it up next sprint during/after the planning call. What do you > >> think? And should Conductor/Infra emails be separate, or combined? > > > > This is a good idea, and ties in well with other discussions which have bee > > going on recently. For example, the QE team have requested more information > > about planned stories, so that they're well enough informed to start > > creating updated tests which will exercise the new features. > > > > I think I should take on this responsibility, and leave you free to > > actually implement stuff, since it falls in the realm of organising the > > sprints. > > > Yep, more fleshed out descriptions for what is being worked on each > sprint definitely sounds highly useful. > > Would it be possible to either have it done via the mailing list, > or an email each time (to aeolus-devel) with a link to the new > sprint content?
On Friday, I took a stab at writing something like I described above, but for the blog versus email: http://blog.aeolusproject.org/conductor-sprint-2012-8/ I personally find it much easier to read / more approachable than viewing the Redmine backlog. I did find that I spent a while rewording things to be more catered to end users. So my question is -- is this useful? Is this something that should become standard practice for each sprint's start? (Looking back at the subject of this email thread, it occurs to me that when I said "Sprint summary," I probably chose my words poorly -- I intended an email at the _beginning_ of a sprint, summarizing what they would contain. But "Sprint summary" seems to imply the end of a sprint, which is a different matter -- though we should do something good there, too.) -- Matt
