[Framework-Team] trying to improve the process

Graham Perrin G.J.Perrin at bton.ac.uk
Fri Feb 29 08:43:53 UTC 2008

On 28 Feb 2008, at 20:44, Andreas Zeidler wrote:

> perhaps cleaning up the pages on plone.org can be the icing

+1 to progressing in that order.

'...document that clearly sets out the responsibilities...' (amongst  
the points ticketed by Martin) may negate the need to co-maintain  
pages elsewhere. The less duplication, the better.

Low priority, for when pages at plone.org are ultimately updated...

Framework Team spokesperson, leader, co-ordinator

> spokesperson

'spokesperson' is certainly clearer and more concise than the FAQ's

>> lead ... responsible for communicating

-- from the FAQ, I previously imagined that communicating was just  
_one_ of _multiple_ responsibilities of the _leader_.

> the team doesn't have a leader

>> One member of the group is chosen from within the group as the  
>> framework team lead

-- the FAQ is slightly contrary.

> discussion of possibly having some sort of leader / co-ordinator  
> for future teams to help sorting out logistics and keeping the team  
> on track, so to say.

Noted, understood and agreed.

Framework Team members and the larger team

> there are no non-voting members

in which case,

* FAQ expression 'voting members' can mislead

* condensed FAQ expression 'members ... making the formal decision by  
voting' is clearer.

FAQ is quite contrary:

>> [on the advise of the larger team] a small group in a similiar  
>> timezone is chosen to cast the actual votes.


-- that sounds very much like, a larger Framework Team choosing (from  
within its membership) a smaller group of voters.

Current essence: review, vote, communicate, decide

>> * reviewers
> the members are the reviewers.  the reviews are the main job of the  
> team after all.

So ... my overly-condensed view of the _current_ process becomes:

* Framework Team comprises five people, all of whom review and vote

* for discussion and for formal note-taking, the Framework Team and  
others use Trac, framework-team at lists.plone.org etc.

* Framework Team votes are communicated by Framework Team  
spokesperson to Release Manager and to plone- 
developers at lists.sourceforge.net

* Release Manager decides.

A constitutional question

Is it coincidence that the Release Manager is not on the Framework Team?

To me, there's logic in this separation. IMHO, an overview gained by  
the Release Manager will be _most balanced_ if involvement in  
Framework Team _processes_ (as we know them) is kept to a reasonable  
level. Release Manager involves himself/herself as much as he/she  
deems necessary for decision making etc..


Reviewers in the future

> but again, it's been suggested to change this in the future and  
> have external reviewers, which i also think is a good idea.

Noted, understood and agreed.

The list

>> * framework-team at lists.plone.org subscribers

> would be very difficult to keep this up-to-date.

I don't imagine a list of subscribers. The less admin, the better :)

Just a sentence describing it as, something like,

'an open list for use by Framework Team members and other concerned  

That would be harmonious with at least

 > +1 allowing FT members to bring in others to aid in the review
 > process can only help matters, both in terms of making their job
 > more manageable and making it clearer that the FT is not some all-
 > powerful cabal.

Choose for yourselves a suitable sentence :)

I'm aware that Framework Team is small, and that too much noise on  
this particular list is not necessarily helpful.

(I'm still in my noisy phase, a side-effect of learning Plone and  
related routines, but my noise won't last forever ;)

Let's predict that sooner or later, future noise will be more  
meaningful and manageable (99% related to PLIPs) (1% related to Team  

> cheers,
> andi

Thanks to all,

More information about the Framework-Team mailing list