Conversation
|
Thanks for the PR @rrrutledge. I added some commits to make fix things discovered by the automated CI checks. Weill take a deeper look at the content of the pattern in the coming days. |
NewMexicoKid
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Neat pattern, Russ! I think some more details or examples around the level of commitment/resourcing that might be needed for a core team would be helpful.
spier
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
This pattern looks really interesting already.
Thanks for sharing this @rrrutledge!
My main question is about the preconditions for this pattern, and to some extent how the project got into the state that it is in.
It almost sounds like the project in question doesn't have any team maintaining it, and maybe also no TCs yet? I am not quite sure.
What is surprizing to me about this is that I would suspect that many organizations would subscribe to a statement along the lines of:
Every project in production should have at least 1 team maintaining it.
I might also just misunderstanding something in the current pattern description, I am not quite sure.
|
Thanks, all for the great feedback! I will take a look this week. |
rrrutledge
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Thanks for the help! Have a look at the conversations and updates.
Co-authored-by: Sebastian Spier <github@spier.hu>
NewMexicoKid
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Changes look good to me, Russ. Thanks.
Co-authored-by: Sebastian Spier <github@spier.hu>
spier
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I have reviewed this again, and suggested some changes.
The main discussion is now how and how strongly we should state that the team doesn't have an owner/maintainer before the Solution of this pattern goes into place.
Looks like we are close to resolving this.
Further I have found a couple of spelling issues that I will be committing straight away as they are not controversial.
rrrutledge
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Thanks for this review! Responded to all feedback.
patterns/2-structured/core-team.md
Outdated
| * Many teams need the project. | ||
| * Significant tech debt. | ||
| * Slow adoption and iteration on the project. | ||
| * Nobody is taking reponsibility for the project and contribution ecosystem as a whole. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Incorporated this feedback. What do you think?
patterns/2-structured/core-team.md
Outdated
| * Production bugs. | ||
| * Documentation. | ||
| * Onboarding tutorials and examples. | ||
| * Automated testing. | ||
| * CI/CD. | ||
| * Local environment. | ||
| * Modularization. | ||
| * Versioning. | ||
| * Monitoring. | ||
| * Trailblazing new classes/categories of features. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
In the Problem section the bullets are finishing the sentence that is started before the colon.
patterns/2-structured/core-team.md
Outdated
| * Production bugs. | ||
| * Documentation. | ||
| * Onboarding tutorials and examples. | ||
| * Automated testing. | ||
| * CI/CD. | ||
| * Local environment. | ||
| * Modularization. | ||
| * Versioning. | ||
| * Monitoring. | ||
| * Trailblazing new classes/categories of features. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I removed them from this list.
Co-authored-by: Sebastian Spier <github@spier.hu>
spier
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Thank you for this new pattern! 🚀
|
The Core Team is now live in our book: Congrats and thanks @rrrutledge! Two questions that I forgot to ask:
Thanks again! |
|
🎉 Thank you!
|
Is your InnerSource project difficult for people to work with, yet no one is interested in improving it? Establish a core team to take care of the project's fundamental items so that contributors are enabled to add and use the features that provide value to their scenarios.
View the rendered markdown.