Quick reminder for core contributors, to remember to fill the sprint check-ins, before the end of the day today.
You should have received an email on Tuesday & Wednesday from “Friday <email@example.com>” titled “Core contributors - Sprint Retrospective & Planning: please add an update”. Please fill it today!
- Still too few answers to the check-ins — which based on discussions and answers to the survey, seemed to be partially attributable to a lack of core contributor work in some areas. There are governance discussions about this scheduled for the conference
- I want more visibility into the development/support status of components, especially MFEs. If a legacy frontend is being rewritten as an MFE, I think there should be a DEPR ticket for the legacy frontend from the get-go.
- Discuss posts (Core contributors sprint & meetup) have helpful information, but I haven’t found the time to read through them thoroughly. So I should include that as part of my CC tasks. I reviewed a PR (since it fixed an issue I was having) and then realized it already had an assignee on the Jira board (I then @ the assignee to let him know). What should we do in that case?
To follow-up on some of the points from the check-ins:
@mgmdi Thanks for offering! You’re in luck, there is also a call for help right above by @kmccormick about this, mentioning how to do that:
This is important btw, so bumping it for all core contributors ^^
@Eden_Huthmacher you might be the right person to answer this? Not sure if there is much that can be done though, it’s tough to find a time slot that can work for everyone.
@kmccormick +1, that would avoid a lot of surprises – this way the discussions about it can happen when the decision is taken, and while those who would prefer another option to jump in while it can still be changed. And if someone takes over the maintenance to avoid the deprecation, they have time to properly prepare.
This was discussed during the contributors meetup today, where it prompted a good conversation about this (cf the meeting notes when they will be posted).
Action item: @feanil will add an agenda item to next deprecation working group meeting to continue it.
@mgmdi We also discussed this quickly during the contributors meetup today, and it’s completely fine to review PRs you’re not assigned to! It can only add to it, and the assignee is likely to be happy to have work already done – and can either review something else, or just comment on the specific points that they see. It’s worth pinging the assignee to let them know though
Thank you @kmccormick and @antoviaque for the call. This has already been fruitful with @mgmdi and others offering to take on some test cases/tickets. Pierre informed me that @ghassan was already promoting such an idea so I’ve added him to the test team too in hope that he will be pleased
Ned Bachelder (2U)
Kyle McCormick (tCRIL)
Pierre Mailhot (EDUlib)
Régis Behmo (Tutor)
Xavier Antoviaque (OpenCraft)
Peter Pinch (MIT Open Learning)
Kaleb Abebe (MIT Open Learning)
Maria Grimaldi (eduNEXT)
Ghassan Maslami (independent)
Dean Jay Mathew (ABC Online Courses)
On Monday during the BTR-WG meeting I’ll briefly demo the draft Test Plan that I along with Pierre, Peter, Kaleb and Ghassan have contributed to developing so far.
There will be a simple leaderboard for testers so we can have some fun so I urge everyone to join Monday’s meeting if possible to get started early.
Together, we’re going to have a superb test plan moving forwards, especially with such a huge team brewed in just a single sprint!