also sprach Mehdi Dogguy <mehdi@dogguy.org> [2017-03-30 02:13 +0200]: > 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. […] > But anyways... I am not particularly fond of S.M.A.R.T criteria > […] How do you reconcile these two statements? Why do you want your roadmap to consist of S.M.A.R.T. items? > 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. Would you see any value in having this publicly visible on official project resources? -- .''`. martin f. krafft <madduck@d.o> @martinkrafft : :' : proud Debian developer `. `'` http://people.debian.org/~madduck `- Debian - when you have better things to do than fixing systems when everything is coming your way, you're in the wrong lane.
Attachment:
digital_signature_gpg.asc
Description: Digital GPG signature (see http://martin-krafft.net/gpg/sig-policy/999bbcc4/current)