[IAEP] getting things done (was Re: [Sugar-devel] Language Learner, a GSOC 2010 idea proposal)

[Simon Schampijer]

On 03/30/2010 10:59 AM, Tomeu Vizoso wrote:
> On Tue, Mar 30, 2010 at 10:22, Christoph Derndorfer
> <christoph.derndorfer at gmail.com>  wrote:
>
> <snip>
>
>> <slight general rant>
>> I generally feel like there's still a real lack of activities aimed at
>> teaching, learning and practicing basic skills such as writing, speaking,
>> using the keyboard/touchpad, learning basic Mathematics, etc. This is
>> *exactly* what primary schools all around the world are doing yet I think we
>> haven't done a great job at addressing this when it comes to providing
>> appropiate activities.
>> </slight general rant>
>
> This gives me an opportunity for ranting myself ;)
>
>> From time to time someone shows frustration because SLs hasn't been
> able to achieve something. This in itself is a great thing to happen
> because shows an opportunity to get closer to our goals. But isn't
> actually useful unless we accompany that burst of energy with the will
> of putting in place whatever is needed for that something to be
> achieved.
>
> In this particular case, we could ask the Activity team coordinator to
> call for a meeting and add it to the agenda. If the team likes the
> goal but it turns out that there aren't available resources for
> tackling the specific work that derives from that goal, we could see
> if the Community team wants to add to their TODO list finding people
> interested in working on that kind of activities.
>
> We again request the community manager to add to their meeting agenda
> this item, the community team meets and sees if their recruitment
> strategy is adequate or if it can be improved in order to find
> activity developers.
>
> It may seem that I'm proposing adding bureaucracy for the sake of it
> or that I want to put bosses on top of volunteers, but rather what I'm
> saying is that unless we give visibility to issues, explicitly discuss
> things and people take ownership of responsibility areas, most things
> won't happen.
>
> So I want to know: do people agree that a team structure with named
> coordinators and members could help us do more and better, or are
> people happy with just hoping that someone will fall from the sky and
> do the right stuff?
>
> Regards,
>
> Tomeu

a) It is good to put a structure in place with coordinators for specific 
areas (e.g. testing team,...) This may sound like a lot of work, but I 
am sure it is doable in the end if one concentrate on one role (see 
point c as well). [1] is a good example. Could have been done by the 
testing team, based on the release notes. In the end I did it because I 
thought this would help to get testing going (the result can be seen in 
the page history).

b) People that proposes something should try to help to make it happen, 
this will not be possible all the time, but enhances the chances that 
things get done.

c) We need more people to actually take action items. If that will not 
happen we will always be in the same situation, a few people do many 
things, can not address them really and will be burned out quickly.

Regards,
    Simon

[1] http://wiki.sugarlabs.org/go/0.88/Testing