Dear martin, On 25/03/2017 13:42, martin f krafft wrote: > Dear Mehdi, > > in personal discussions and in your platform(s), you've been very > fond of the "S.M.A.R.T. way" aka. management by objectives. > I do not remember myself talking about S.M.A.R.T criteria in personal discussions to be honest :-) or if it ever happened, maybe it was because it was mentioned in my platform and elsewhere. In fact, S.M.A.R.T was used for Release Goals [1] and it has been also mentioned by previous DPLs as well (although, I failed to find a reference for that, for now). [1] https://wiki.debian.org/ReleaseGoals/ But anyways... I am not particularly fond of S.M.A.R.T criteria but I do recognize their value when it comes to defining goals and finding ways to measure their progress. It is good a tool that helps us to evaluate a goal by forcing us to think about five specific and simple points. > Can you identify a few objectives you've seen through in your last > term, and specifically illustrate how you measured progress? What > about projects still on-going? > In general, I have followed the same methodology for all subjects I've worked on during my DPL term: I have installed a kanboard [2] instance on my server ; created a project (let's call it DPL) and created tasks for every subject. Depending on the nature of subject, I added sub-tasks sometimes. Comments were also used to track the progress of the task. [2] https://kanboard.net/ -- Mehdi
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: OpenPGP digital signature