Add Cloud Migration Team values post WoW meeting
Files
2
Generally in the guidebook we a) include justification and b) add explanation of terms of art.
By "use Google to communicate with each other", do we mean Google Chat, Google Mail, Google Talk or Google Docs? Perhaps we should add some explicit content here? Similarly if it is Google Chat, which chat rooms are used?
As a point of style, parenthetical comments generally work better as statements.
Do you not agree to have, e.g., Google Chat open?
So should the first point be something like:
* Use [the Cloud Migration Google Chat channel](https://mail.google.com/chat/u/0/#chat/space/AAAAMunHKWs) for real-time communication between ourselves as it is our preference. * Use [Microsoft Teams](https://teams.microsoft.com/) for real-time communication within the wider institution lacking knowledge of preferences to the contrary. * Use email for asynchronous communication or communications of record as it is persistent and searchable. * Keep the Microsoft Teams client or tab open. * Keep the Google Chat client or tab open."Retrospective Prime Directive" should either link to an external definition or, preferably, a section of the guidebook which describes what it is and sets out respective context.
It might also be sensible to define what an agenda for a meeting looks like? For example, I don't accept an agenda unless it contains a specific question to answer. An agenda of the form "chat about topic X" wouldn't fly for me, does it fly for the team?
Edited by Dr Rich Wareham
Can this page include an introduction describing its purpose and setting it in the wider context of the guidebook?
There's a lot that I would want this page to serve as, such as having a list of current team members and maybe even a sub-page with holiday calendars... certainly, there's value in laying out what the purpose of this (probably first of several) page is. I'll take the question to the team and see what we want to have as our introductory text as well as discuss what other elements we might want to use it for (thus informing the introductory text) - but I don't foresee that happening very soon, so can we let this 'through the gate' on the understanding that the intent is to iterate it and improve it (/ work out what it's scope) as we go?
Well, as noted on the front page "it is not intended as a prescriptive document but rather to be descriptive". So I suggest we just add an introduction describing what the page currently contains. The style points definitely need addressing though. The document as stands is just a bit too vague and doesn't link to anything it describes. See !115 (comment 299154) for specific points.
To be specific "this page sets out statements which members of the team agree with surrounding the way we work" works for me as an introduction. I think that's sufficiently descriptive, is it not?
Oh, and you definitely need to explain where the statements came from and how they can be changed. Otherwise there's not really any justification for them.
I think that question's been asked already by commenting on the MR? That's been our traditional workflow for reviewing work.
BTW, I'm not suggesting we change any of the content or the substance of any statement, just clarify ambiguities in the text and provide references where required. I think it's reasonable to fix style at this time.