Dogwood Retrospective

Owned by Ned Batchelder (Deactivated)
Last updated: Jan 25, 2017 by Feanil Patel
2 min read
Date
ParticipantsNed Batchelder (Deactivated) Joel Barciauskas (Deactivated) Feanil Patel Alison Hodges

Retrospective

What did we do well?

  • Django 1.8 upgrade automated
  • Building nightly boxes now
  • Interrupt-driven devops interaction was ok
    • One devops person for whole process was good
  • "Venn diagram of success"
  • Got good with vagrant and virtualbox snapshots

What should we have done better?

  • The Dogwood wiki page had details that Ned overlooked
  • Named release process page didn't have important details (like docs details)
  • Some projects didn't know what "being in Dogwood" meant.
    • Analytics
    • Otto

  • Pulling together release notes was difficult

    • Weekly release notes are aimed at a different audience
  • Some repos didn't release properly, so the Dogwood tag is on an old commit.
  • Didn't test all the configurations
    • Sandbox
    • 12.04
  • Not clear which of the many installation methods need to be supported in a named release
  • Unclear about milestones getting to final (are we waiting on docs, devops, or eng at the moment?)
  • Needed to announce Dogwood rc cut!
    • It was announced in scrum-of-scrums
    • We never sent an email about it
  • readthedocs was very difficult
  • Tagging tool was broken at the last minute
  • Still working to make docs completely Cypress-clean
  • Lack of transparency about dogwood status
  • Doc process page was old and out of date
  • Test cycle is slow, upgrading to dogwood could take 90 min

 

Things We Know Now?

  • Being in Dogwood means "these repos work together", maybe not install, maybe not supported.

Actions