This is a very good way of getting an effective process going
mapping what tools are going to get used. IMHO once we can get
"docs" publishing going in the WG site, this would be a good start.
One thing I would suggest thinking through now in discussion as well
as we move to the forum; one more stage that is needed is managing
transition or hand off of a project at milestone/completion...
(release, training of users, finalize wiki content documenting the
solutions deployed state and ongoing management contacts and info
On 10/21/2011 7:50 AM, Chaz Cheadle wrote:
I would suggest we need a 'forum' for website
development/technology discussions, and then when a decision is
made that the idea is fully speced out and then moved to Redmine.
I also think the IWG forum on the current website should more of a
public facing exchange of ideas. This provides a three stage
process. Public ideas/concerns <-> internal IWG
discussion/spec/implementation <-> Redmine:
The public can suggest something like a twitter feed widget
and hash out ideas and concerns on the NYCGA-IWG forum. Once it
seems the project is ready for actual development it moves
internal for the detailed discussion of exact technologies and
who will do the work/qa/etc and assemble the team. Then the
project is entered into Redmine where the work is done. Progress
reports can be sent back to the Internal IWG, and information on
progress can be then published to the NYCGA-IWG forum.
The public need not know what PHP is being coded, and the
coders necessarily need to hear people opinions of the icon
size. Relavant information can be passed by the internal IWG
group. I think this may even play very well into the Agile
On Fri, Oct 21, 2011 at 9:29 AM, <firstname.lastname@example.org>
hi all -
It was great to meet the team who have been working so hard
to make the new website happen and also to chart the vision
for future work by this group. Thanks for all your efforts!
I have a process question:
I have IA recommendations for the new website.
Should this kind of input be posted to:
a. this google group list
b. the Internet working group forum on the new website
Can we clarify the intended use of these three channels, and
also some roles responsibilities for the people doing the
real work of the group?
I am uncomfortable with the idea of independently creating
tasks in redmine with no sense of who will be prioritizing
and assigning the tasks - without that, my input can easily
add to noise that will detract from other potentially more
I have an observation about redmine that I will send out