[00:11:50] meeple27: ggellerman dstrine jaufrecht_ thanks for the feedback on the stakeholder doc so far! I'm going to address what I can and get ready to send it out. [00:13:42] cool. I think it's looking good. And it's a WIP draft, so good is good [00:25:41] meeple27: one question... do you think changing "TPG incorporated into..." to "Incorporate TPG into..." conveys the right sense? [00:26:09] nope [00:26:12] TPG wouldn't exist [00:26:22] kristenlans ^ [00:26:36] hee hee I see your point here.... [00:26:42] meeple27: ^ [00:27:04] TPG staff incorporated into... [00:27:14] the artists formerly known as TPG... [00:29:41] :) [00:32:58] ggellerman: I feel like many of the new bullets in "Highlights" in slide 11 kind of get to the same general point...better cross- teaam, dependencty, or vertical coordination. Any way we can tighten that up a bit? [00:36:23] kristenlans: process question: Should all the possibilities have tests defined prior to IRL? [00:38:19] meeple27: it would be great if they were at least eyeballed to see if we have the slides in order (e.g. correct barriers in the titles) and maybe some seeds of test ideas. [00:38:49] We'll have some time to noodle on the tests themselves at IRL, but the more we can't in pecan advance the better [00:40:19] "can't in pecan advance " <- @ @ [00:40:23] "several" possibilities have NO tests yet [00:41:31] it sounds like you're ok with that. I was imagining that all the possibilities would have tests, and IRL would be refining and picking from them [00:43:28] meeple27: the instructions were "* Review and update the strategy cascade slides (3-7) and reverse engineering and barrier slides (9-10) based on your duo or group conversations. [00:43:28] * Add any important comments or updates to test slides (generally slide 12-ish onward). We will have time to work on these slides at TPG IRL, but please do what you can to take at least an initial pass over the tests and get them in a draft shape (e.g. correct barrier to test is on the appropriate slide, there is a main draft idea for each test)" [00:43:44] meeple27: it may be worth reiterating that? [00:44:58] yup. that was kind of my understanding, but I think it was a bit buried...that only appeared at the bottom of the etherpad, right? [00:45:34] kristenlans: working on lang now....gonna try to find Strine to help [00:45:47] also, "maybe some seeds of test ideas" is different from "there is a main draft idea for each test" [00:46:51] ggellerman: thx for that. Remember, it's just quick exec summary type highlights so concise wins the day [00:47:12] meeple27: which do you think is better :D [00:48:01] better for the process = have tests, better for less work now = maybe have tests :) [00:51:12] kristenlans: at some point will we put 6,7,8 to the same prune test that 1-5 went through? [00:51:43] kristenlans: also, who is responsible for the tests? the anchor? the skeptic? or the amorphous "whoever feels like pitching in" ? [00:52:41] ggellerman: we could, though I am challenged to see how we might fit that in between now and IRL [00:53:08] meeple27: I see it as a collab effort. [00:53:47] kristenlans: should we spend time developing options that won't withstand the prune criteria? [00:54:18] ggellerman: what do you think? [00:55:15] kristenlans: I don't that new possibilities should be privileged by timing ;) [00:55:35] kristenlans: that said, we could see what happens in stakeholder feedback [00:57:28] ggellerman: I think that's wise. I also don't really think we should cut status quo because....status quo... [00:58:08] kristenlans: let's hope that they don't love something we wouldn't like ;) [01:02:41] mbinder: sorry I had to fly through your feedback, I'm on a tight deadline :-) I appreciate the comments [01:03:44] kristenlans: no worries! Do with them what you will [01:04:22] mbinder: there were some useful "icing on the cake" tweaks + stuff I want to use later down the road :-) [01:20:18] stakeholder feedback request has been shipped! [19:25:35] jaufrecht_: https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/project/profile/1454/ [19:33:15] 6Team-Practices, 7Epic, 15User-JAufrecht: [EPIC] Pilot Milestone-Based Burnup usage within TPG - https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T119473#1853072 (10Aklapper) [19:47:14] kristenlans: Could you take a look at the frogs I added to p2 and p8, and provide feedback? [19:47:34] meeple27: would be happy to! [19:47:36] sorry...p1 and p8 [20:54:37] jaufrecht: I took a first skeptical pass through p3. It has half a frog on the title page, but a full frog "slide 2" context/overview would be helpful for me. If possible, it would be great to address how this approach could be palatable/compatible with existing culture, as a way of transitioning to a higher maturity level [20:54:43] jaufrecht_ ^ [21:06:24] jaufrecht: Lost you [21:45:59] what did we decide to do for tea time? [21:46:22] meeple27: can you add those points as comments so I'll see them when I look at it? I'll make a note to look at it this afternoon. [21:56:08] jaufrecht_: not sure re: tea time :D [21:56:20] I think we might have to check in when we get there jaufrecht_ [21:57:51] jaufrecht: Yes, I'll comment regarding the frog [22:02:04] jaufrecht_: mbinder meeple27 are you guys joining? [22:02:36] kristenlans: yes [22:02:55] jaufrecht_: tea time? [23:02:33] 6Team-Practices: Document cost/benefit of Phlogiston and Phragile - https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T120271#1854289 (10Awjrichards) p:5Triage>3Normal [23:25:21] awjr: pisco sours are awesome. I'm jealous [23:28:05] :D [23:28:14] bd808: word! but it's no fiji [23:28:35] or tahiti? where is it you vacation again? [23:28:46] fiki, but only for 10 days at a time [23:28:51] fiji [23:29:01] damn off by one errors [23:29:17] lulz [23:29:34] you can definitely drink more pisco sours in two months than in 10 days [23:30:02] I've only had pisco sours in SF. I'm sure the real thing is much better