1 |
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- |
2 |
Hash: SHA1 |
3 |
|
4 |
On Wednesday 29 October 2003 09:44, dams@×××.fr wrote: |
5 |
> I agree with GLEP integration. What about : |
6 |
> |
7 |
> |
8 |
> |
9 |
> * Exploration phase - GOAL : describe and decide |
10 |
> - throw a description here, verify validity |
11 |
> - preliminary discussion here and/or irc |
12 |
> - Optional : Prepare a prototype, testcase or a little code snippet to |
13 |
> let everybody play. |
14 |
> *** we put it here, it should be done only if usefull, and should |
15 |
> not take time. A lot of problems won't be compatible with prototypes |
16 |
> *** - APPROVAL 1 : does it worth it to handle it (see below). The |
17 |
> result should be written to the mailing list and on the xml project |
18 |
> page if we decide to handle the case. |
19 |
> |
20 |
> * Planification phase [strict deadline] - GOAL : have a GLEP |
21 |
> - add new tasks : at least some time to research further (with a |
22 |
> milestone), and some time to find a solution (with milestone). |
23 |
> - one of the tak should be GLEP writing. Possibly one people should |
24 |
> take care that the planification is conforming to GLEP standard |
25 |
> - assign people to the task, set up deadlines |
26 |
> - all this should be well written in the xml project pages, and should |
27 |
> end with a new and shiny GLEP |
28 |
> - APPROVAL 2 (see below) |
29 |
> |
30 |
> xml project pages precisions : their main goal is to organize the |
31 |
> work, and archive what's been done. They should be the canva to the |
32 |
> GLEP and development production. |
33 |
> |
34 |
> GLEP precision : should contain contain the key parts of the |
35 |
> discussions of the discussion phase, problem identification (what is |
36 |
> the problem), problem acceptation (is this really a problem), problem |
37 |
> exploration (what are the causes and possible solutions to the |
38 |
> problem) , proposed solution and the merrits of this particular |
39 |
> solution. The latter of course from later discussions. |
40 |
> |
41 |
> Decisions |
42 |
> --------- |
43 |
> We'll try to work together in a friendly manner, so no use to be |
44 |
> strict for every points. Nevertheless, rules are still usefull for |
45 |
> extreme situations. |
46 |
> |
47 |
> APPROVAL 1 : at the end of the Revision phase, we should try to come |
48 |
> to an agreement that we should handle the case. |
49 |
> |
50 |
> APPROVAL 2 : I think it'd good to warn people outside of |
51 |
> -desktop-research at this point, like leaders and other devs. They |
52 |
> should decide if they approve the GLEP. Maybe we should warn/inform |
53 |
> them before the GLEP |
54 |
|
55 |
|
56 |
I think this looks good. "Plannification phase" is not English, so might |
57 |
become "Planning phase". Further we might want to organize the |
58 |
implementation teams as subprojects. If so, this should be written down |
59 |
explicitly. |
60 |
|
61 |
Paul |
62 |
|
63 |
- -- |
64 |
Paul de Vrieze |
65 |
Gentoo Developer |
66 |
Mail: pauldv@g.o |
67 |
Homepage: http://www.devrieze.net |
68 |
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- |
69 |
Version: GnuPG v1.2.3 (GNU/Linux) |
70 |
|
71 |
iD8DBQE/n4G6bKx5DBjWFdsRAtdcAJ9HYXNi8WWLeC87Xe10e1aTzgFVJQCeKipf |
72 |
uITZuQ2yeNkkYB35FBlX7KQ= |
73 |
=ezVi |
74 |
-----END PGP SIGNATURE----- |
75 |
|
76 |
|
77 |
-- |
78 |
gentoo-desktop-research@g.o mailing list |