[sakai2-tcc] TCC review

[Anthony Whyte]

The September "should we continue?" question is for the TCC to answer according to the goals it set for itself back in July.  A more comprehensive review involving others in the Community could/should, in my opinion, take place at a later date, triggered by an event of some substance such as issuance of the first 2.8 release candidate.   This would permit reviewers in order to test the TCC proposition across a period of time sufficient to evaluate the TCC's ability to deliver on goals that require something more than a few weeks of committed effort.

Anth


On Sep 7, 2010, at 4:07 PM, csev wrote:

> I think that we should somewhat follow the pattern of the PC in their evaluation with a few tweaks.
> 
> I think that first we should do a self-evaluation and put it up in Confluence.  This should include what we have done well and where we feel we can improve.   Like self-evaluations in college sports, if our self-evaluation is accurate and balances, the external reviewers will just agree with it.
> 
> Work with the ED to come up with a diverse list of "external reviewers" and formally request a set of reviews from that group.
> 
> Those reviews go into Confluence.
> 
> Any member of the community is welcomed to add their commentary/discussion as they like.
> 
> Keep as much f the discussion in confluence as possible.
> 
> The ED and TCC executives draft some kind of final/summary of the process...
> 
> And off we go.
> 
> /Chuck
> 
> On Sep 7, 2010, at 3:55 PM, Noah Botimer wrote:
> 
>> I think we should have a look at the state of affairs upon code freeze. At said point, it should be possible to observe and annotate where we think the TCC impacted the status of 2.x, and whether those impacts match what we (TCC and others) perceive to be the needs of the community.
>> 
>> I think that we can start the checklist and rubric in advance, but should hold off on the analysis phase until a marked point in our timeline (code freeze). I would be glad to help in thinking about how to evaluate our performance but would need a fellow volunteer or two to move things along.
>> 
>> Thanks,
>> -Noah
> 
> _______________________________________________
> sakai2-tcc mailing list
> sakai2-tcc at collab.sakaiproject.org
> http://collab.sakaiproject.org/mailman/listinfo/sakai2-tcc
> 
> 

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/pkcs7-signature
Size: 3829 bytes
Desc: not available
Url : http://collab.sakaiproject.org/pipermail/sakai2-tcc/attachments/20100908/46415a74/attachment.bin