Versions Compared

Key

  • This line was added.
  • This line was removed.
  • Formatting was changed.

...

  • How should we handle deprecation?
    • Johnson: Reach out to product owners and discuss the possibility of scheduling sprints
    • Product Owners should have a model for sprints which allows them to assign work
  • Asking if we should deprecate
    • Do we need to further identify projects which have a Product Owner but don't meet standards
    • That's every Gem identified (i. e. none meet the requirements)
      • Maybe some small percentage does (example: hydra-derivatives)
  • Sprint Structure
    • This group should decline to schedule sprints for projects which don't meet the minimum requirements
    • Getting all of the projects classified as Core Components up to minimum requirements should be the highest priority
  • Phase 2
    • Pendragon:
    • Understood Phase 2 to be less focused upon generating sprints and demand to product owner requests for features
    • Instead, getting Core Components up to spec consistently
      • Following this, then scheduling sprints for future features would be possible
    • Johnson:
      • Understood Phase 2 to be a more general call for availability for Core Component development sprints
      • Has work ready on Active Fedora, but no mechanism to schedule a sprint using this Working Group
    • Botimer:
      • Where there is more ambiguity, push these off to gain more momentum later