2023-07-10 - RFC retrospective

2023-07-10 - RFC retrospective

Date

Jul 10, 2023

Attendees 

  • @Craig McNally 

  • @Marc Johnson 

  • @Jenn Colt 

  • @Tobias Stumpp 

  • @Olamide Kolawole 

  • @Jeremy Huff 

  • @Florian Gleixner 

Discussion items

Time

Item

Who

Notes

Time

Item

Who

Notes

1 min

Scribe

All

Jenn scribes

*

RFC Retrospective

All 

Background: 


Notes/Actions/etc:

  • We didn't follow the process closely so it seems like there isn't consistency

  • The metadata at the top about PR/issues approval is confusing

  • Moving between stages is unclear

  • If  community engagement is light  is such  a heavy process needed?

  • Heaviness discourages. Also what is being asked for is "sure"

  • Topics tackled from retro board:

    • Update docs to reflect action items that impact process

    • Hard to tell when it has been approved

      • Remove unneeded metadata from the top of the template and add a status field and an outcome field, bullets for each stages PR. Remove start date

    • Exit criteria are unclear

      • how to get into the first stage. RFC process just says create a PR. Created PR back into FOLIO. Instead closed and open for public review. RFC process description doesn't work with the branch mechanics. Try being more explicit about the mechanics

      • remove timeframes

      • preliminary review/timeframes haven't worked well, partly because we haven't really been following the process. don't really have enough data to know how long each step takes.

    • work on branching mechanism instructions

  • Process may need more complete overhaul

Action Items