[OPEN-ILS-DOCUMENTATION] documented developmnt

[Lori Bowen Ayre]

Great discusssion....I'll just jump in here and say that it makes no sense
to me that DIG would be the arbiter of what development goes into a release.
 I think DIG should be the arbiter of what is considered acceptable
documentation, and I agree that there should be a well-defined standard (or
more likely several standards).

But I do think we should separate those things.  Maybe we could focus on
defining documentation standards so that as we move forward, we can be
assured that all developers have something to work with.  That would be an
excellent next step.  DIG folks, is that something you'd be game to work on?


As to the rest of this discussion, I'd like to encourage us to continue on
this path of defining a process for all phases of development and to
encourage us to start even earlier than you are (so far).

I believe the development process begins at the point when a question mark
pops up over a user's head with "I wonder if anyone is working on
fixing/enhancing/developing ThisThing yet...???"  So, the earlier we can get
development projects (or potential development projects) out to the
community in an established format and location the better off everyone will
be.  People need to know
a) feature set of the current release
b) what features will be added to the next release(s)
c) what is actively being worked on (by all developers), and
d) what are some features or enhancements that users have an interest in
seeing developed (and how critical are they and who shares that interest and
who has money to pay for their development).  The web team has been calling
this one the "wish list."

Items a) and b) may be knowable now (although I personally don't know how to
find those answers) and what the web team would like to do is ensure that
these things do all become knowable.  So establishing a process that
everyone follows is an important first step.

Lori



On Wed, Feb 9, 2011 at 9:56 AM, Grace Dunbar <gdunbar at esilibrary.com> wrote:

>  I think if the community agrees that DIG should be the arbiter of what
> development goes into a release based on documentation we should at least
> agree on a basic well-defined standard.
>



-- 

=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-==-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
Lori Bowen Ayre // Library Technology Consultant
The Galecia Group // www.galecia.com
(707) 763-6869 // Lori.Ayre at galecia.com

<Lori.Ayre at galecia.com>Specializing in open source ILS solutions, RFID,
filtering,
workflow optimization, and materials handling
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://list.georgialibraries.org/pipermail/open-ils-documentation/attachments/20110209/aed12cb2/attachment.htm