Skip to main content
Jump to: navigation, search



Attending: Kathy, Oliver, Chris, Paul, Eugene

  • Ernest on vacation in Orlando

Any objections to last weeks summary

  • No Discussion

  • Kathy notes that M4B is posted to consumers and we will get feedback soon

4.6.2 Discussion

We are toward end of a development iteration and are entering a test pass next week.

  • The current schedule has a week of smoke and two weeks of full test pass
  • Kathy suggests that instead of doing the big test pass now, just do lighter test now
    • Motivation because the number of defects fixed is not big enough to justify the larger pass
  • Kathy has updated the schedule to reflect this.

Iteration 1 recap

  • 31 bugs fixed.
  • A number of these were backported to 4.5 where they have been tested by IBM already
  • Oliver asks if 31 bugs in 5 weeks is expected thruput
    • Kathy thinks that thruput is as expected
    • Kathy said that on her side people were splitting time during this part of the project. Expecting more over time.
    • Paul noted on test he is doing most of his part at end of cycle. Jerome was working on one big defect
    • Paul thinks thruput is as good as expected

Oliver asks what investment was over this period

  • Test project has ~.75 resource
  • Platform project IBM has ~2.5 (including build/etc)
  • Platform project Intel has ~1.5 engineering plus part of person to assist with build

Paul asks if we should start putting crude estimate of time worked on defects.

  • Test project does this pretty regularly
  • Kathy notes that there is time spent going into reproducing defects as well as fixing them.
  • Chris asked about some non-bugfix related items (knowledge transfer underway was one example)
    • Team noted that knowledge transfer does have a bugzilla associated with it.
    • Chengrui has a wiki page under development for sharing between IBM and Intel
    • He can fill in in the time field (updating the previous value)

The part that might not be accounted quite right are test, build/release engineering

  • Mailing/new list traffic is low right now so that should not be a big invest.

Kathy asks if there are intelligent queries to turn some of this into trendlines

  • Paul notes that there can be a running tally from week to week.

Oliver says that this metric could be useful as we ask for resources next year

  • He does not want to add unnecessary tracking tax so it should be lightweight
  • Paul would like to see us using the resources we have efficiently
  • Kathy asks if this should be forward or should we go back to "all" 4.6.2 defects.
    • General agreement to have it going forward
    • Oliver says don't go backwards but to start at iteration 2.

Team discussed some project that are even more rigorous and have a model of "if it is not tracked in bugzilla, you did not do it."

Chris notes that field wont really work as a personal timesheet because different people work on the same bugzillas (reviewing, etc).

  • We reiterated that we're really tracking the project forward progress rather than individual contribution.
  • We will never see 100% of engineers time tracked
  • It might however be useful for helping get gut feel for whether a 10% or 20% resource is effective or not.


Do we need to meet next week.

  • Yes

Itanium bulid system update

  • IBM got their unpacking authorization and are getting it set up.
  • Expect about a month to get them all set up and allow decommissioning Intel side builds.

We discussed vacation schedule for the upcoming holiday seasons.

Back to the top