Open Stack

On 17 May 2016 at 09:56, Thierry Carrez <thierry at openstack.org> wrote:
> John Garbutt wrote:
>>
>> [...]
>> Agreed that with a shared language, the ML is more effective.
>> [...]
>> I think some IRC meeting work, in a standup like way, for those with a
>> previously established shared context.
>
>
> Actually shared context / shared understanding / common culture is a
> prerequisite for any form of communication. The ML discussions are more
> effective, the IRC meetings can be effective, the reviews are more effective
> etc.

+1

> This shared understanding was simpler to generate in the early days of
> OpenStack where developers were a smaller group. We assumed that most of
> this shared understanding would naturally transmit to newcomers, so we
> overlooked documenting it and did not actively rebuild it as we went. We
> diluted the Design Summit into the gigantic Summit event, further preventing
> this cross-project culture to emerge in our group.
>
> Over the past cycle(s) we worked on the project team guide to document the
> shared culture. But it's not finished, and that's not enough. We also need
> time (as a cultural group) to discuss and reach this common culture, without
> distractions and without people external to the group disrupting the
> discussion (yes you see where I'm going).

+1

A great example of tribal knowledge -> written down common language

>> [...]
>> Synchronous vs Asynchronous (and in-between), high vs low bandwidth
>> communication tools all have their place. None of those replace having
>> curated content for new/returning folks to gain the current shared
>> context
>
> +1000 -- this is not about choosing between MLs vs. face-to-face meetings.
> You can't have a global community and rely only on meetings without
> excluding someone. You can't build the shared understanding and make quick
> progress on specific issues using only MLs.
>
> Global and virtual communities face three challenges: confusion, isolation,
> and fragmentation. They need to make use of the full spectrum of
> synchronous/asynchronous and simple-collaboration/complex-collaboration
> communication tools to address those challenges and actively generate
> transparency (fighting confusion), engagement (fighting isolation) and
> cohesion (fighting fragmentation).

+1
Love that summary of the issues.

John