On Tue, Aug 07, 2012 at 10:43:59AM -0400, Jason Guiditta wrote: > > I am not against this, but not sold on it either. To me, you should > just be looking at the roadmap page in redmine[1]. Yes, it could be a > tad more readable, but that is mostly our own fault for: > > 1) Not grouping things correctly (I see a lot of stuff listed as tasks > there instead of features/scenarios, which is basically what your blog > post lists). If we group them right, we can provide a link on the > main site (or even embed the content in a blog post if you wanted) > which filtered the list to just show those 2 types (filter is on top > right of page). > > 2) Writing poor descriptions in the title of the task. They could > easily be called what you have written in the blog post, but nobody > seems willing to take the time to do it - it really isnt that hard. I > am left wondering why we should spend the extra effort summarizing > instead of just being clear to begin with > > > However, regardless of these points, your post is nice, I just don't > see the duplicate work being needed.
This is something I struggled with. I think you're right, and the fact that I was doing what I was doing indicates that there's room for improvement on how we word/organize stories and tasks. But at the same time, it's not really something I see us getting better at overnight. (Though I'd love it if we did.) What I'm torn on is whether to keep going with sprint overviews like the one I posted, or if we should solely focus on making our stories better. I kind of think we should do both, until the blog/email bits are seen as sufficiently redundant. But I don't want the existence of a differently-worded summary to be an excuse for us to not write excellent stories, either. -- Matt
