> > what we really need is > some dedicated PM time going forward. Is that something you think you can > help resource from your side?
Not a ton, but I think enough yes. (Also, thanks for all the efforts exploring this either way!!) Happy to help. On Sun, Feb 2, 2020 at 2:46 PM Nate McCall <zznat...@gmail.com> wrote: > > <snip> > > My .02: I think it'd improve our ability to collaborate and lower > friction > > to testing if we could do so on JIRA instead of the cwiki. *I suspect > *the > > edit access restrictions there plus general UX friction (difficult to > have > > collab discussion, comment chains, links to things, etc) make the > confluent > > wiki a worse tool for this job than JIRA. Plus if we do it in JIRA we can > > track the outstanding scope in the single board and it's far easier to > > visualize everything in one place so we can all know where attention and > > resources need to be directed to best move the needle on things. > > > > But that's just my opinion. What does everyone else think? Like the JIRA > > route? Hate it? No opinion? > > > > If we do decide we want to go the epic / JIRA route, I'd be happy to > > migrate the rest of the information in there for things that haven't been > > completed yet on the wiki (ticket creation, assignee/reviewer chains, > links > > to epic). > > > > So what does everyone think? > > > > I think this is a good idea. Having the resources available to keep the > various bits twiddled correctly on existing and new issues has always been > the hard part for us. So regardless of the path, what we really need is > some dedicated PM time going forward. Is that something you think you can > help resource from your side? > > (Also, thanks for all the efforts exploring this either way!!) >
