Read the VisualEditor process review

List overview All Threads
Download

newer

older

Using "," as decimal separator in...

Is non-SSL request still allowed?

Neil P. Quinn

5 Jun 2015 5 Jun '15

11:56 p.m.

Hello everybody! For the past couple months, Joel Aufrecht and I have been working on a project to document and improve the VisualEditor team's processes; we just published a draft of our report <https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/VisualEditor/2015_Process_Review> on mediawiki.org. If you're interested, please read it over and, of course, shout at us on the talk page if we wrote anything stupid. In addition to the team's significant strengths, we identified three major challenges we'd like to work on: - Consulting stakeholders like Analytics and Design Research often have trouble engaging with VE’s development. - The process for early-stage requirements and design decision-making is informal and incomplete. - The team has a high reporting load which may no longer be justified. Next week, we'll start to expand the report with some proposed solutions (suggestions welcome!) Have a good weekend! ————— Neil P. Quinn <https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Neil_P._Quinn-WMF>, product analyst Wikimedia Foundation +1 (202) 656 3457

Show replies by date

Greg Grossmeier

6 Jun 6 Jun

10:34 p.m.

New subject: [editing-department] Read the VisualEditor process review

...

Neil et al, this is great! Thanks for the very informative read, even as someone who works closely with the VE team on a semi-daily basis (at least!). I think it is great that the time and energy was devoted to developing this report. The plan at [0] suggests that this is a one-time process with a conclusion (which is good), thus it isn't tied in, explicitly, with the quarterly goal planning process, correct? Best, Greg [0] <https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/VisualEditor/2015_Team_Process_Review#Plans> -- | Greg Grossmeier GPG: B2FA 27B1 F7EB D327 6B8E | | identi.ca: @greg A18D 1138 8E47 FAC8 1C7D |

Neil P. Quinn

7 Jun 7 Jun

4:09 a.m.

New subject: [editing-department] Read the VisualEditor process review

Hey Greg! Yes, this is meant to be a one-time process. We've been spending a significant proportion of our time on it ever since we joined in mid-April (I'd say about 30% for me, and probably more for Joel)—too much to make it a regular thing. And hopefully, if we manage to address these problems, we won't find them replaced by new ones the very next quarter :) Thanks for the question—it feels great to know that someone is out there reading our child of the mind! ————— Neil P. Quinn <https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Neil_P._Quinn-WMF>, product analyst Wikimedia Foundation +1 (202) 656 3457 On Sat, Jun 6, 2015 at 3:34 PM, Greg Grossmeier <greg(a)wikimedia.org> wrote:

...

Neil et al, this is great! Thanks for the very informative read, even as someone who works closely with the VE team on a semi-daily basis (at least!). I think it is great that the time and energy was devoted to developing this report. The plan at [0] suggests that this is a one-time process with a conclusion (which is good), thus it isn't tied in, explicitly, with the quarterly goal planning process, correct? Best, Greg [0] < https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/VisualEditor/2015_Team_Process_Review#Plans

-- | Greg Grossmeier GPG: B2FA 27B1 F7EB D327 6B8E | | identi.ca: @greg A18D 1138 8E47 FAC8 1C7D |

Risker

4:18 a.m.

New subject: [editing-department] Read the VisualEditor process review

As a non-technical volunteer, I've drifted in and out of the VE discussion, and have participated at wildly variable levels over the past few years. I found this to be a very interesting and informative read - especially as it came from people new to the entire history. It's good to have fresh eyes on a situation. Thank you for your work on this, it was quite enlightening. Risker/Anne On 7 June 2015 at 00:09, Neil P. Quinn <nquinn(a)wikimedia.org> wrote:

...

https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/VisualEditor/2015_Team_Process_Review#Plans

-- | Greg Grossmeier GPG: B2FA 27B1 F7EB D327 6B8E | | identi.ca: @greg A18D 1138 8E47 FAC8 1C7D |

_______________________________________________ Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l

Dan Garry

8 Jun 8 Jun

2:47 p.m.

New subject: [editing-department] Read the VisualEditor process review

And, as a person that is not involved in the development of VisualEditor in any way but knows many of the VisualEditor Team quite well, I also found this very interesting. Thanks for putting it together! Dan On 6 June 2015 at 21:18, Risker <risker.wp(a)gmail.com> wrote:

...

Hey Greg! Yes, this is meant to be a one-time process. We've been spending a significant proportion of our time on it ever since we joined in

mid-April

(I'd say about 30% for me, and probably more for Joel)—too much to make

a regular thing. And hopefully, if we manage to address these problems,

won't find them replaced by new ones the very next quarter :) Thanks for the question—it feels great to know that someone is out there reading our child of the mind! ————— Neil P. Quinn <https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Neil_P._Quinn-WMF>, product analyst Wikimedia Foundation +1 (202) 656 3457 On Sat, Jun 6, 2015 at 3:34 PM, Greg Grossmeier <greg(a)wikimedia.org> wrote: > <quote name="Neil P. Quinn" date="2015-06-05" time="16:56:07 -0700"> > > Hello everybody! > > > > For the past couple months, Joel Aufrecht and I have been working on

> > project to document and improve the VisualEditor team's processes; we > > just published a draft of our report > > <https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/VisualEditor/2015_Process_Review> on > > mediawiki.org. If you're interested, please read it over and, of > > course, shout at us on the talk page if we wrote anything stupid. > > > Neil et al, this is great! Thanks for the very informative read, even

someone who works closely with the VE team on a semi-daily basis (at least!). I think it is great that the time and energy was devoted to developing this report. The plan at [0] suggests that this is a one-time process with a conclusion (which is good), thus it isn't tied in, explicitly, with the quarterly goal planning process, correct? Best, Greg [0] <

https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/VisualEditor/2015_Team_Process_Review#Plans

-- | Greg Grossmeier GPG: B2FA 27B1 F7EB D327 6B8E | | identi.ca: @greg A18D 1138 8E47 FAC8 1C7D |

_______________________________________________ Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l

-- Dan Garry Product Manager, Search and Discovery Wikimedia Foundation

Joel Aufrecht

9:28 p.m.

New subject: [editing-department] Read the VisualEditor process review

Hi Greg, The process improvement effort is not explicitly tied in with quarterly goals. If we come up with specific recommendations that require enough effort to register on a quarterly scale, or that influence the output of the team that much, they could be inputs to goal-setting. Team Practices Group also does the quarterly Team Health Check survey, which is also not part of quarterly goals. I think that process improvement in general is probably better handled separately from goals, to avoid creating any incentives to bias measurement stats, consciously or unconsciously. Joel *Joel Aufrecht* Team Practices Group Wikimedia Foundation On Sat, Jun 6, 2015 at 3:34 PM, Greg Grossmeier <greg(a)wikimedia.org> wrote:

...

Neil et al, this is great! Thanks for the very informative read, even as someone who works closely with the VE team on a semi-daily basis (at least!). I think it is great that the time and energy was devoted to developing this report. The plan at [0] suggests that this is a one-time process with a conclusion (which is good), thus it isn't tied in, explicitly, with the quarterly goal planning process, correct? Best, Greg [0] < https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/VisualEditor/2015_Team_Process_Review#Plans

-- | Greg Grossmeier GPG: B2FA 27B1 F7EB D327 6B8E | | identi.ca: @greg A18D 1138 8E47 FAC8 1C7D |

Pine W

9 Jun 9 Jun

8:18 a.m.

New subject: [editing-department] Read the VisualEditor process review

Just to make sure that this has been said: thank you VE team, we appreciate your work that will benefit Wikipedia for years to come. Pine

Arthur Richards

8 Jun 8 Jun

5:21 p.m.

x-posting to teampractices list On Fri, Jun 5, 2015 at 4:56 PM, Neil P. Quinn <nquinn(a)wikimedia.org> wrote:

...

-- Arthur Richards Team Practices Manager [[User:Awjrichards]] IRC: awjr +1-415-839-6885 x6687

Scott MacLeod

13 Jun 13 Jun

2:10 p.m.

Thanks, Greg, Joel and All, Best, Scott Best, Scott Hello everybody! For the past couple months, Joel Aufrecht and I have been working on a project to document and improve the VisualEditor team's processes; we just published a draft of our report <https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/VisualEditor/2015_Process_Review> on mediawiki.org. If you're interested, please read it over and, of course, shout at us on the talk page if we wrote anything stupid. In addition to the team's significant strengths, we identified three major challenges we'd like to work on: - Consulting stakeholders like Analytics and Design Research often have trouble engaging with VE’s development. - The process for early-stage requirements and design decision-making is informal and incomplete. - The team has a high reporting load which may no longer be justified. Next week, we'll start to expand the report with some proposed solutions (suggestions welcome!) Have a good weekend! ————— Neil P. Quinn <https://meta.wikimedia.org/wiki/User:Neil_P._Quinn-WMF>, product analyst Wikimedia Foundation +1 (202) 656 3457 _______________________________________________ Wikitech-l mailing list Wikitech-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/wikitech-l

3263

days inactive

3271

days old

wikitech-l@lists.wikimedia.org

Manage subscription

8 comments

8 participants

tags (0)

participants (8)

Arthur Richards
Dan Garry
Greg Grossmeier
Joel Aufrecht
Neil P. Quinn
Pine W
Risker
Scott MacLeod