# Core Contributor Sprint Retro - 15 October - 31 October **URL:** \ **Category:** Core Contributors\ **Tags:** core-sprints, retrospective\ **Created:** [November 1, 2022, 11:23am UTC](https://discuss.openedx.org/t/core-contributor-sprint-retro-15-october-31-october/8627 "2022-11-01T11:23:40Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 9\ **Page:** 1
**Author:** ![Dean](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex020/user_avatar/discuss.openedx.org/dean/32/4787_2.png) [@Dean](https://discuss.openedx.org/u/Dean)\ **Post date:** [November 1, 2022, 11:23am UTC](https://discuss.openedx.org/t/core-contributor-sprint-retro-15-october-31-october/8627/1 "2022-11-01T11:23:40Z")
Core Contributor Sprint Retro - 15 October - 31 October ## Full report @antoviaque #Working Groups > Core Contributors Find the full report attached or in Listaflow for your convenience: [https://www.listaflow.com/](https://www.listaflow.com/) There have been **366.75 hours** worked on the latest sprint, compared to 497.75 hours, 285.75 hours, and 320 hours in the previous three sprints. The Core Contributors average satisfaction for this latest sprint was **3.5 out of 5**. | Name | Hours | | --- | --- | | Sarina Canelake | 60 | | Brian Mesick | 60 | | Adolfo R. Brandes | 60 | | Ali Hugo | 21 | | Ana Garcia | 21 | | Feanil Patel | 20 | | Andrés González | 20 | | Maria Grimaldi | 18.5 | | Piotr | 12 | | Igor Degtiarov | 12 | | Xavier Antoviaque | 11.5 | | Jill | 10 | | Pierre Mailhot | 8 | | Dean Jay Mathew | 7 | | Braden | 5.5 | | Gabriel | 5.25 | | Felipe Montoya | 5 | | Giovanni | 4 | | Ilaria Botti | 2 | | Zia Fazal | 1.5 | | Pooja | 1.5 | | Omar Al-Ithawi | 1 | | Usman Khalid | | | Ivo Branco | | | Carolina De Mares | | | Matjaz Gregoric | | | Chintan Joshi | | | Ghassan Maslamani | | | Edward Edward | | | Kyle McCormick | | | Jhony Avella | | | JayRam Nai | | | Carlos Muniz | | | Nicole Kessler | | | Kshitij Sobti | | | Peter Koblyakov | | | Stefania Trabucchi | | | Peter Pinch | | | Pedro Cabral | | | Sofiane Bebert | | | Andreas Grähn | | | Dave Ormsbee | | | Juan Montoya | | | Maksim Sokolskiy | | | Jorge Londoño | | Here are the calculations of total hours: [Core Contributors - Sprint Planning & Retro - Google Sheets](https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1E4EGEBZLw1VSzVUZThnDn187cmHOKAdsgfnvncGDwF0/edit#gid=1144562890) ## Calls for help/collaboration | Is there anything where you could use help from others? Or that you would like to collaborate on? | User | | --- | --- | | Please take a look at a proposed new CC role (comments end 10 Nov): [Potential New CC Role/Access: Named Release Manager](https://discuss.openedx.org/t/potential-new-cc-role-access-named-release-manager/8588) | Sarina Canelake | | The **Paragon** Working Group would like to get members of the **Product** Working Group (and others in the community) more involved in UX discussions. This will allow individuals outside of 2U, not only to keep taps on design updates, but also to help guide the design of Open edX. The idea is to start a cross-functional meeting for context/knowledge sharing around design. Anyone interested in getting involved? | Ali Hugo | ## What should be improved? | Retrospective - Blockers | User | | --- | --- | | How to find a reviewer for this PR? [fix: added keyword substitution support in edx\_ace based bulk course emails by ziafazal · Pull Request #31044 · openedx/edx-platform · GitHub](https://github.com/openedx/edx-platform/pull/31044) | Zia Fazal | ## What went well these last two weeks / sprint? | Retrospective - What went well these last two weeks / sprint? | User | | --- | --- | | Shout out to Dean, Pierre, and many others for work on BTR testing Shout out to Maria G for working on the courses project with me and also making time for BTR Thanks to Matjaz for stepping into Release Manager role and I’m sure there’s many people I’m missing! | Sarina Canelake | | Elections being completed! 😃 | Xavier Antoviaque | | I got a lot done despite having to do a lot of context-switching. | Ali Hugo | | We had a product wg meeting where folks of the community talked about the OSPR review cycle with promising action points. And Olive testing is going incredibly well! | Maria Grimaldi | | I caught up with CC work on the LTI consumer after not being able to work on it for a while. I’m now trying to ramp up my hours to match the 20h/month commitment. | Giovanni | Please check the full report for information on: - What did CCs accomplish in the last two weeks? - What will CCs work on for during the next two weeks / sprint? [Core Contributors Listaflow Oct 14 - Oct 31 2022.csv](https://discuss.openedx.org/uploads/short-url/q1AXFNCyvBPjPUSoVtctutkLMMx.csv) (56.2 KB) [Core Contributors Listaflow Oct 14 - Oct 31 2022.pdf](https://discuss.openedx.org/uploads/short-url/dMersG4kme6Dxzfo0Y3X9jH6Jqz.pdf) (24.9 KB) ---
**Author:** ![antoviaque](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex020/user_avatar/discuss.openedx.org/antoviaque/32/32_2.png) [@antoviaque](https://discuss.openedx.org/u/antoviaque)\ **Post date:** [November 1, 2022, 7:30pm UTC](https://discuss.openedx.org/t/core-contributor-sprint-retro-15-october-31-october/8627/2 "2022-11-01T19:30:50Z")
> [@Dean](#): > > The **Paragon** Working Group would like to get members of the **Product** Working Group (and others in the community) more involved in UX discussions. This will allow individuals outside of 2U, not only to keep taps on design updates, but also to help guide the design of Open edX. The idea is to start a cross-functional meeting for context/knowledge sharing around design. Anyone interested in getting involved? @ali_hugo This is great! Thank you for bringing it up. How would it work exactly? Would some members of the product working group join the UX one, as well as the other way around? Are there some specific points/projects that could help kickstart it? CC @jmakowski > [@Dean](#): > > How to find a reviewer for this PR? > [fix: added keyword substitution support in edx\_ace based bulk course emails by ziafazal · Pull Request #31044 · openedx/edx-platform · GitHub](https://github.com/openedx/edx-platform/pull/31044) @Zia_Fazal We have mentioned your PR in the contributors meeting, so hopefully someone will be able to help. CC @itsjeyd @Michelle_Philbrick ---
**Author:** ![ali\_hugo](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex020/user_avatar/discuss.openedx.org/ali_hugo/32/5284_2.png) [@ali\_hugo](https://discuss.openedx.org/u/ali_hugo)\ **Post date:** [November 1, 2022, 9:28pm UTC](https://discuss.openedx.org/t/core-contributor-sprint-retro-15-october-31-october/8627/3 "2022-11-01T21:28:49Z")
> [@Dean](#): > > …to keep taps on design updates Oops, I meant to say “Keep _tabs_”, not taps! 🚰 > [@antoviaque](#): > > @ali_hugo This is great! Thank you for bringing it up. How would it work exactly? Would some members of the product working group join the UX one, as well as the other way around? Are there some specific points/projects that could help kickstart it? CC @jmakowski The details haven’t been decided yet, but I know @gweinberg and @arbrandes were planning to brainstorm the best platform for these discussions. I’m sure they’d be open to your and Jenna’s ideas! To give you some context: in the most recent Paragon Working Group meeting, it was decided that neither the Paragon Working Group, nor the Frontend Working Group meetings were the right place to have broader discussions around Open edX’s UX. I think the idea is to create a completely separate meeting for these types of UX-related conversations (@gweinberg and @arbrandes please correct me if I’m wrong). ---
**Author:** ![antoviaque](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex020/user_avatar/discuss.openedx.org/antoviaque/32/32_2.png) [@antoviaque](https://discuss.openedx.org/u/antoviaque)\ **Post date:** [November 4, 2022, 12:01am UTC](https://discuss.openedx.org/t/core-contributor-sprint-retro-15-october-31-october/8627/4 "2022-11-04T00:01:03Z")
> [@ali\_hugo](#): > > The details haven’t been decided yet, but I know @gweinberg and @arbrandes were planning to brainstorm the best platform for these discussions. I’m sure they’d be open to your and Jenna’s ideas! > > To give you some context: in the most recent Paragon Working Group meeting, it was decided that neither the Paragon Working Group, nor the Frontend Working Group meetings were the right place to have broader discussions around Open edX’s UX. I think the idea is to create a completely separate meeting for these types of UX-related conversations (@gweinberg and @arbrandes please correct me if I’m wrong). @ali_hugo Thanks for the context, that’s good to have in mind. If the Paragon & frontend working groups aren’t the right places for hosting these discussions, how about using the product working group for that? In a way, that’s the most generic group of the 3, and it could be useful for everyone already attending the product working group to get updates about the projects in the other two there I think? (And the other way around?) @jmakowski what do you think? ---
**Author:** ![arbrandes](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex020/user_avatar/discuss.openedx.org/arbrandes/32/158_2.png) [@arbrandes](https://discuss.openedx.org/u/arbrandes)\ **Post date:** [November 4, 2022, 3:07pm UTC](https://discuss.openedx.org/t/core-contributor-sprint-retro-15-october-31-october/8627/5 "2022-11-04T15:07:22Z")
> [@antoviaque](#): > > using the product working group for that? Last I heard, that is still on the table, yes! The big pro is not having to attend Yet Another Meeting, or worse, not being able to attend because it conflicts with another working group’s. The downside is that UX discussions can get pretty lengthy and technical, which might be counter to the purpose of the Product WG. The challenge, it appears, would be to actually get the designers that make/implement decisions to go to whichever meeting we pick. 🙂 ---
**Author:** ![antoviaque](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex020/user_avatar/discuss.openedx.org/antoviaque/32/32_2.png) [@antoviaque](https://discuss.openedx.org/u/antoviaque)\ **Post date:** [November 4, 2022, 7:49pm UTC](https://discuss.openedx.org/t/core-contributor-sprint-retro-15-october-31-october/8627/6 "2022-11-04T19:49:35Z")
> [@arbrandes](#): > > The downside is that UX discussions can get pretty lengthy and technical, which might be counter to the purpose of the Product WG. Maybe we could start by using the product meeting as a touch point, to keep each other informed of what everyone else is doing – and then branch out follow-ups and discussions as necessary outside of the meeting? It would already be a good start to get to all know each other, and be aware of respective goals/concerns? > [@](#): > > The challenge, it appears, would be to actually get the designers that make/implement decisions to go to whichever meeting we pick. 🙂 What is the blocker on that? Given the shift of leadership on the project and the progressive adoption of better open source practices, the decision-making will inevitably progressively shift to the working groups and the core/maintainers who are active in the community - so it should be in everyone’s interest to attend them to be able to keep that ability to influence the project direction? ---
**Author:** ![arbrandes](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex020/user_avatar/discuss.openedx.org/arbrandes/32/158_2.png) [@arbrandes](https://discuss.openedx.org/u/arbrandes)\ **Post date:** [November 4, 2022, 8:40pm UTC](https://discuss.openedx.org/t/core-contributor-sprint-retro-15-october-31-october/8627/7 "2022-11-04T20:40:07Z")
> [@antoviaque](#): > > Maybe we could start by using the product meeting as a touch point That sounds like a good idea to me. Let’s wait to hear if @jmakowski (or anybody else) has any objections. > [@antoviaque](#): > > it should be in everyone’s interest to attend them to be able to keep that ability to influence the project direction? Of course! The challenge, as I see it, is in percolating this idea across the organizations in our community, in particular decision makers. Not saying it’s an _insurmountable_ challenge, or even technically a blocker: just that we may have to do some campaigning. ---
**Author:** ![jmakowski](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex020/user_avatar/discuss.openedx.org/jmakowski/32/3607_2.png) [@jmakowski](https://discuss.openedx.org/u/jmakowski)\ **Post date:** [November 4, 2022, 9:06pm UTC](https://discuss.openedx.org/t/core-contributor-sprint-retro-15-october-31-october/8627/8 "2022-11-04T21:06:00Z")
Thanks for all of this! I agree, I think the Product Working Group could be a forum for UX discussions, and for Paragon, Frontend and Product to align. For the record though, I do see UX as a distinct and separate thing from product, though it very closely intersects with product. The Product Working Group would not be the right space for deep technical UX discussions, but rather a space to ensure that high level UX decisions and designs align, especially when it comes to new features, MFEs, etc. I’m happy to create a regular agenda item on the WG schedule for now. Two immediate projects that come to mind as ripe for this conversation are the MFE standardization that @arbrandes is working on, and the Modular Learning project that @ali_hugo is involved in. It’d be great to have edX+broader community UX guidance on these. The next WG meeting is Tues Nov. 8. Is that too soon? We’ll likely cancel the next session on Nov. 22 due to the holidays, so that means the next session would be Dec. 6. ---
**Author:** ![antoviaque](https://sea2.discourse-cdn.com/flex020/user_avatar/discuss.openedx.org/antoviaque/32/32_2.png) [@antoviaque](https://discuss.openedx.org/u/antoviaque)\ **Post date:** [December 7, 2022, 2:10am UTC](https://discuss.openedx.org/t/core-contributor-sprint-retro-15-october-31-october/8627/9 "2022-12-07T02:10:46Z")
@jmakowski @ali_hugo I forgot to ask about this this morning – we did integrate an update from @ali_hugo on modular learning which was great! 🥳 Do we know if other members/projects from the UX group will join too to give updates in future meetings?