Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Add engineering project retro process #403

Merged
merged 8 commits into from
May 1, 2023
Merged

Add engineering project retro process #403

merged 8 commits into from
May 1, 2023

Conversation

cjohnhanson
Copy link
Contributor

No description provided.

@netlify
Copy link

netlify bot commented Apr 12, 2023

Deploy Preview for meltano-handbook ready!

Name Link
🔨 Latest commit 7c9a380
🔍 Latest deploy log https://app.netlify.com/sites/meltano-handbook/deploys/645014d83908810008285bf0
😎 Deploy Preview https://deploy-preview-403--meltano-handbook.netlify.app/engineering/team-practices/project-retrospectives
📱 Preview on mobile
Toggle QR Code...

QR Code

Use your smartphone camera to open QR code link.

To edit notification comments on pull requests, go to your Netlify site settings.

@aaronsteers
Copy link
Contributor

@cjohnhanson This is awesome. Thanks for creating! What do you think of discussing amongst the team this coming Tuesday, with goal of merging next week?

- Every retrospective will have a _leader_ who is responsible for faciliting scheduling, setting up the Miro board for the async portion, encouraging participation, and documenting the follow-up work that needs to be done.
- Ideally, retros should be conducted within a month of the completion of the relevant project so that the project is fresh in everyone's minds.

### Phase 1 (Async)
Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

If initial feedback is shared openly and non-anonymously among the team (e.g. posting moods), then a team member (particularly one who has perceived authority or is otherwise being looked up to) could bias what others report merely by sharing their own opinion. To avoid this bias, maybe some amount of this process should be done privately, and then after every interested party has provided their initial feedback it's revealed all at once.

Copy link
Member

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Maybe Google forms could be useful for this.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

That's a really good idea. Lattice may also have some functionality that could help here. I'll look into it.

Copy link
Contributor Author

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

@WillDaSilva -- in the interest of "progress over perfection", I'd like to push this forward even without establishing a solid channel for providing anonymous feedback.

I've added a note that this process is not meant to take the place of other feedback mechanisms and that anonymous or 1:1 feedback is always encouraged in Slack or Lattice.

I'd like to revisit making the initial async feedback round anonymous in the future, but I think it's okay to omit in this first iteration.

Copy link
Contributor

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

I've used https://www.smileagile.io/ to track mood sprint-over-sprint, but perhaps we can still find it useful for our use case. It's definitely anonymous.

src/_engineering/index.md Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
src/_engineering/index.md Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
src/_engineering/index.md Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved
@cjohnhanson
Copy link
Contributor Author

@cjohnhanson This is awesome. Thanks for creating! What do you think of discussing amongst the team this coming Tuesday, with goal of merging next week?

@aaronsteers sure thing, I was also hoping to give this a test run with a project retro for the private beta launch in the next ~2 weeks.

@cjohnhanson cjohnhanson requested a review from a team April 21, 2023 16:31
@cjohnhanson cjohnhanson marked this pull request as ready for review April 21, 2023 16:31
Copy link
Member

@WillDaSilva WillDaSilva left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

Looks good to me, and I'm looking forward to participating in the Private Beta project retro.

I'd appreciate if one other member of @meltano/engineering could review and leave their thoughts before we merge this, since I presume that whatever we merge here will be what is used for the first formal project retro.

@cjohnhanson cjohnhanson requested review from a team and seth-meltano and removed request for seth-meltano April 21, 2023 17:20
Copy link
Contributor

@kgpayne kgpayne left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.

LGTM 👍 Now that we have subcategories, what do you think about creating a new page under Team Practices for Project Retrospectives? Its quite a large content addition to the main engineering team index.md, which we may want to reserve for overview and navigational/quick-links content (I know it is currently a mix of the two 😅).

Screenshot 2023-04-25 at 12 17 28

@cjohnhanson cjohnhanson requested a review from kgpayne May 1, 2023 19:35
@cjohnhanson cjohnhanson dismissed kgpayne’s stale review May 1, 2023 19:39

Resolved requested changes

@cjohnhanson cjohnhanson merged commit c4ee4aa into main May 1, 2023
@cjohnhanson cjohnhanson deleted the project-retro branch May 1, 2023 19:39
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

5 participants