\uD83D\uDDD3 Date
\uD83D\uDC65 Participants
🎥 Recording and Chat Log
🤖 AI-Generated Meeting Summary
Quick recap
The team discussed their recent travels and potential future skiing trips to Chile. They also addressed the impact of recent layoffs and reorganization on the project's maintenance, including the increase in the "elephant factor" and the need for adjustments to facilitate broader participation. The team also considered a proposal from Axiom to improve the current open edX release process, including the idea of assigning maintainers the responsibility of fixing bugs reported by the Btr after the testing process is completed. The team also discussed the importance of maintaining a bug-free repository and the responsibilities of the repository maintainer. The team also discussed the introduction of a management tool to prevent micromanagement and foster goal-setting discussions.
Summary
Travel and Technical Issues in Argentina
Xavier and Adolfo, who were in Argentina, discussed their recent travels and the potential for future skiing trips to Chile. Xavier mentioned that they would wait a bit to start the meeting due to some participants' internet connection issues. They encountered difficulties with the meeting recording, but were eventually able to resolve this with Felipe's help. The meeting was set to proceed with screen sharing through the main board.
Impact of Layoffs and Reorganization on Project Maintenance
Xavier discussed the impact of recent layoffs and reorganization on the project's maintenance. He highlighted that the changes have led to an increase in the "elephant factor", meaning more organizations or individual contributors are involved in project maintenance and development. He suggested that this might require adjustments to facilitate a broader participation. felipe mentioned leading initiatives related to the changes. Xavier also encouraged others to contribute more to the project. Sarina acknowledged hearing her name and confirmed her participation in the discussion.
Axiom's Proposal for Open edX Release Process Improvement
The team discussed a proposal from Axiom to improve the current open edX release process. One of the suggestions was to assign maintainers the responsibility of fixing bugs reported by the Btr after the testing process is completed. The team also discussed the potential for maintainers to be responsible for fixing issues they introduced. The idea of having a nightly branch for tutor plugins to be tested continuously was also proposed. The team agreed to continue the discussion and involve the Maintainer's Working Group for their input before making any decisions.
Maintaining Bug-Free Repository: Roles and Responsibilities
The team discussed the importance of maintaining a bug-free repository and the responsibilities of the repository maintainer. Adolfo and Sarina shared their perspectives on the maintainer's role, with Adolfo emphasizing the importance of fixing bugs and Sarina advocating for a community spirit. felipe also contributed, but his input was unclear. Maria highlighted the role of the book triad in fixing bugs during the testing period, stressing the priority of fixing release blockers. She raised a question about the appropriate intervention of the book triad when maintainers do not prioritize certain bugs. Xavier agreed on the importance of collaboration but emphasized the need for clear task assignment. EduNEXT stressed the importance of emphasizing tasks related to phonetics in this process, which occurs every few months.
Commitment Increase and Testing Takeover Proposal
The team discussed a proposal from the Verdict working group to increase their commitment for every open edX release and take charge of the testing process. Omar suggested that his team could dedicate some of their QA capacity, which Adolfo agreed would be helpful. Omar also expressed interest in contributing to the payments and e-commerce area, but noted that their use of it was inconsistent. Xavier suggested that Omar could still contribute by committing to basic parts of maintenance, even if he couldn't push the development forward significantly. The team agreed to continue the discussion in March when the testing plan is due for release.
OKRs for Results-Driven Objectives
EduNEXT expressed the need for a clearer framework to measure the impact of their community's efforts, proposing the implementation of OKRs (Objectives and Key Results). The aim of this system is to better understand the community's output and outcomes. Adolfo requested examples of what such a system might look like, and Sarina expressed support for the idea. EduNEXT agreed that providing examples could be a next step. The discussion also revolved around the implementation of results-driven objectives as opposed to output-driven ones in the Lm 5 factor and the use of OKRs as a flexible framework that allows teams to devise their own strategies to achieve high-level objectives.
Introducing Management Tool to Prevent Micromanagement
The team deliberated on the introduction of a management tool to prevent micromanagement and foster goal-setting discussions, as proposed by Xavier. The plan was to begin with a wiki list for the first year and expand it in the second year. EduNEXT agreed to hold a synchronous discussion on objectives. Xavier also touched upon advertising, contributors' increased responsibility, and changes in acceptance and maintenance. A broad announcement about these changes was planned. The implementation of core contributors as backup reviewers on repositories was also discussed. Xavier initiated a discussion about potential changes related to project reviews, but Cassie clarified that they were waiting for survey results before proceeding. The involvement of Ellie in project reviews was mentioned, but no further details were provided. Xavier also raised the issue of assigning reviewing parts of project proposals, but no clear response was given.
Upstream Reviews and eduNEXT Progress
Xavier and Cassie discussed the upstream reviews on pull request and the need for more core contributors to be involved in the reviews. Cassie mentioned that a similar product level process is being discussed by the Call Working Group. Xavier also mentioned the need for reviewers for debugging persistent issues and plans to follow up with Brayden. Cassie updated the team on the progress of the survey and the need for a clear cutoff time due to late check-ins. Lastly, eduNEXT discussed the community's efforts on maintenance and proposed improvements to the openings release testing process. The team agreed to review and provide feedback on these proposals.
\uD83D\uDDE3 Discussion topics
Discussion topics for the agenda are tracked at https://github.com/orgs/openedx/projects/62/views/1 - to add a topic to the agenda, add a ticket to the project, in the column “Upcoming meeting agenda”. Alternatively, add it to the table below and ping Xavier Antoviaque or Jorge Londoño .
Topic | Presenter | Meeting notes | ✅ Action Items |
|---|---|---|---|