2017-07-20 Meeting notes

Date

Attendees


Goals

  • Rethink the meeting structure

Discussion items

TimeItemWhoNotes
60 minsRethink the FedX group
  • Part two of our retro (see the mute mapping results here: 2017-07-06 Meeting notes)
  • Eddie will lead a discussion where we brainstorm how the FedX group should work going forward
    • Eddie will be the executive sponsor for the group
    • Need a single decision maker who can report to Eddie and others
    • Is this a working group, a chapter, an architecture meeting, something else?
    • Decide upon a meeting cadence
    • What is the typical agenda for the meeting?
    • How do we track the success of the team? What are the team's outputs?
    • Consider how often to do retros (once a quarter?)

Notes

  • Architecture team discussed four key tenets
    • autonomy
    • efficiency
    • context
      • industry experience and expertise in the team. Know where the industry is going
    • design
      • making sure that we're driving towards a high quality implementation
  • Other teams are similar
    • architecture, security, performance, FedX, DevOps, platform
    • all (other than FedX) are driven out of the Core team
    • Educator, Learner, Open Source are key stakeholders
      • Their OKRs are not around improving the platform or technologies
    • Core is the decider, drives and project manages the efforts
    • Eddie would like to see FedX move to this model
    • Who holds these groups accountable?
      • Eddie should be the executive sponsor of all teams, including FedX
      • Can go to Eddie to help drive adoption
    • Have similar challenges
      • How does the security team move things forward?
      • Performance team is a dedicated Core team so it is their job to work this
        • This approach tends to be more successful
      • Docker project is interesting
        • It started with a number of passionate individuals
        • It eventually transitioned to the Core team as an actual project
        • The end result may not be an ideal Docker implementation due to the way it was developed
  • What makes FedX different from other teams?
  • What should we do with FedX
    • Ari will lead the team as the Core representative
      • She is the decision maker for the team
    • FedX team members are active practitioners 
    • Need to define who are the stakeholders for this group
      • Product delivery teams
      • Open Source team
    • Who are our customers
      • Product delivery teams
      • Open Source community
    • All decisions made by this group should be focused on serving developers
      • Secondary benefits: time to value
    • This team should propose organizational changes too
      • This team should be the ones to propose that we need a core FedX team
      • Push for more autonomy
        • Release pipeline team was doing everyone's pipelines, training everyone
        • Had to push to give them the team's the ability to do things themselves
        • This is the only way to get the product delivery teams to scale
        • e.g. doesn't make sense that Ari has to fix all Webpack issues
        • How do we make sure that teams do follow the best practices?
    • Does this roll up to architecture group?
      • Not clear yet. FedX will be a guinea pig
      • Eddie will meet regularly with Ari as the executive sponsor for the team
    • Communication
      • Regularly share with lunch & learns, emails, engineering all hands
    • FedX is in a great position to address time-to-value for FY18
  • Concerns
    • How do we drive things forward?
      • Resourcing is still a challenge
    • Business team does not have a representative on FedX
      • Their concerns like multisite don't necessarily get heard
      • Can we find someone to become a stakeholder and attend meetings
    • Issues we need to tackle
      • Bootstrap
      • Paragon
      • Asset pipeline
    • How do we use the FedX board?
      • How do product delivery teams pick them up? How do we justify them over product features?
      • We need to make sure tickets have clear value on time-to-value
    • How will bigger questions be addressed?
      • e.g. do we want to completely separate front end from back end?
      • server-side vs client-side
      • how does this fit with full stack engineers?
      • FedX group should not be deciding these things in a vacuum
    • How can we get more help from the Open Source community?
      • They are very excited to contribute but find our stack very confusing
    • Talent acquisition and retention
      • Need to be adopting modern front end practices
    • Core team should be the center of excellence to provide best practices
    • For long running, cross-functional projects
      • e.g. fixing the asset pipeline
      • how do we resource this? Not enough resourcing within the Core team today
      • do we need a core FedX team?
      • can we spin up a short-lived team to solve big problems
        • again FedX needs to advocate for this
  • Actions
    • Are there articles that would help us? 
      • Look at how a chief security officer tries to affect change within their organization
      • Doesn't fit with "move fast and break things"
      • Maybe there are articles about driving front end technology change

Action items

  • Ari Rizzitano (Deactivated) - write up a page describing how the group is going to work moving forwards
    • develop a fuller charter for the group
    • decide how often to meet
    • consider having office hours