Subscribe to rss feed

How do we feel about scheduling highly-targetted "bursts" of work? | Project management | Forum

 
You must be logged in to post user permissions login Login register Register


Register? | Lost Your Password?

Search Forums:


searchicon 






Minimum search word length is 3 characters – Maximum search word length is 84 characters
Wildcard Usage:
*  matches any number of characters    %  matches exactly one character

topic

How do we feel about scheduling highly-targetted "bursts" of work?

print
small tagNo Tags
UserPost

6:05 am
November 22, 2009


Luke Maurits

Adelaide, Australia

Admin

posts 1483

offline
link
print
1
0
ratedowngrey
rateupgrey

There are a few crucial design decisions which we still do not seem to have reached a definite conclusion and and which are really holding us back by virtue of our not being able to make other decisions until these first ones are taken care of.  Some obvious ones include whether or not the engines in our modular boosters will be solid, liquid or hybrid fuelled and exactly how our various systems and supplies are going to be distributed between the service module and command module.

In order to knock these decisions out, how do people feel about scheduling highly-targetted "bursts" of work?  Say, we decide that a particular weekend is going to be dedicated to the booster fuel decision problem.  We give one or two weeks advance notice so that everybody interested can read up on the relevant subjects and come up with some ideas.  On that weekend we all get together on IRC or Skype or something and discuss nothing but the one targetted issue for that weekend's "burst".  If this works well maybe we can make it a regular thing and have bursts every month or so?

What do people think about this approach?  The biggest problem with this that I can forsee is probably the potential for timezone issues.  If we could find a way to minimise those, would people be interested in this sort of thing?

Main CLLARE workgroups: Mission Planning, Navigation and Guidance. I do maths, physics, C, Python and Java.

9:26 am
November 22, 2009


Rocket-To-The-Moon

Altus, Oklahoma, USA

Member

posts 685

offline
link
print
2
+1
ratedowngrey
rateupgrey

I think this is a really good idea. Having real time communication will really help to speed things up. I sort of like using Wave for the realtime chat because then we have a hard copy of what was discussed (Here is an example of a wave that we did in realtime…I'm not sure if this link will work).

With Wave we could have multiple waves going on at the same time and the people could jump between them.

Just for planning purposes lets set 28 November @ 2100Z, this seems like a time that should allow most of our current members to be awake. This time isn't necessarily for Wave, but for whatever system we decide to use.

Thoughts?

Main Workgroups: Propulsion & Spacecraft Engineering

10:38 am
November 22, 2009


Luke Maurits

Adelaide, Australia

Admin

posts 1483

offline
link
print
3
0
ratedowngrey
rateupgrey

That Wave link doesn't work for me. :(

2100Z is 0630 for me, and is 0230 for Zvan in Mumbai.  These aren't very ideal times, but I'm not sure we can do an awful lot better.  1300Z would be 2230 for me, 0800 in New York and 1830 in Mumbai.  This is perhaps a little better but might be too early for a lot of our US members.

I'm glad you approve of the overall idea, though.

Main CLLARE workgroups: Mission Planning, Navigation and Guidance. I do maths, physics, C, Python and Java.

11:28 am
November 22, 2009


gerbal

North Carolina

Member

posts 12

offline
link
print
4
0
ratedowngrey
rateupgrey

For reference, All google waves are by default private. In order to view a wave a member has to be invited to parcipate. A wave can be made public by adding public@a.googlewave.com as a participant.

1:29 am
November 23, 2009


Rizwan

Admin

posts 170

offline
link
print
5
0
ratedowngrey
rateupgrey

An IRC room would be great for this. And we should cache all the chat sessions, does any one know any bot for this?

I am not great with IRC systems

1:41 am
November 23, 2009


Luke Maurits

Adelaide, Australia

Admin

posts 1483

offline
link
print
6
0
ratedowngrey
rateupgrey

I have a moderate preference for IRC over Wave for these sorts of things.  The invite-only nature of Wave makes it feel a little exclusionary.  Only people who have had invites can participate, and even when people have invites, Wave is new and mysterious to a lot of people.  It's also conceivable (though perhaps not likely) that Google will lose interest in it and development will slow down.  In contrast, IRC is completely open, very familiar, dead simple and is going to be around forever.  People can lurk in an IRC chat without contributing to the conversation without "wasting" our finite Wave invites.  The fact that Wave provides a hardcopy afterward is not a big deal because, as Rizwan has pointed out, it's really easy to just cache the contents of an IRC chat and make it available on the web.  The Freenode network people provide a free service to open source and non-profit orgs which would be perfect for us.

How does everybody feel about making our first "burst" focused on finally choosing a booster engine type (solid, liquid, hybrid)?  If people like this idea I may write up an announcement in the PW forum later tonight.

Main CLLARE workgroups: Mission Planning, Navigation and Guidance. I do maths, physics, C, Python and Java.

8:24 pm
November 23, 2009


Luke Maurits

Adelaide, Australia

Admin

posts 1483

offline
link
print
7
0
ratedowngrey
rateupgrey

By the way, if anybody can think of a cooler name than "work bursts" for these, feel free to yell it out.

I got the idea from the NetBSD project's "hackathons", where people get together on IRC for a weekend to close NetBSD bug reports or upgrade software in the package management repositories, etc.  "Engineerathon" doesn't really sound anywhere near as good, though.

The only other similar concept I am familiar with is the "sprint" from software development, which I suppose isn't too bad of a name.

As a slight aside: reading the Wikipedia article for sprinting has just made me reaslise that maybe we should look to the agile development movement for ideas on design principles.

Main CLLARE workgroups: Mission Planning, Navigation and Guidance. I do maths, physics, C, Python and Java.

9:35 pm
November 28, 2009


perpindicular

Member

posts 9

offline
link
print
8
0
ratedowngrey
rateupgrey

should we add each other for google wave as well? i have one and it looks like several others do as well. 

7:33 am
February 10, 2010


Rizwan

Admin

posts 170

offline
link
print
9
0
ratedowngrey
rateupgrey

Post edited 7:33 am – February 10, 2010 by Rizwan


Any one else think we should revive this now that we have an IRC Channel?

8:53 am
February 10, 2010


Rocket-To-The-Moon

Altus, Oklahoma, USA

Member

posts 685

offline
link
print
10
0
ratedowngrey
rateupgrey

This is probably something that can be done more easily in Wave since it allows full multimedia integration. It is a little bit slow and awkward to use, but has some definite advantages when it comes to real time collaboration. Perhaps IRC and Wave at the same time will work.

Main Workgroups: Propulsion & Spacecraft Engineering

9:22 am
February 10, 2010


Luke Maurits

Adelaide, Australia

Admin

posts 1483

offline
link
print
11
0
ratedowngrey
rateupgrey

I would love to see us pull of a burst or two.  I would prefer IRC for this over Wave, but not too strongly.  Using both could work well, using IRC as the default place to disscuss things and then jumping to Wave when multimedia capabilities are needed.

That said, I am not exactly sure what a profitable wave could be at the moment.  We pretty much have CLLARE sketched out  in as much detail as people with our level of knowledge can manage, I think.

Even aside from bursts, we should probably start hanging out in IRC more.  I've stopped by a few times to find the channel only containing Elleo.

Main CLLARE workgroups: Mission Planning, Navigation and Guidance. I do maths, physics, C, Python and Java.

10:08 am
February 10, 2010


Rizwan

Admin

posts 170

offline
link
print
12
0
ratedowngrey
rateupgrey

Agree we should hang out on the IRC more. Even though it lacks multimedia capabilities, I think we could use it for getting quick opinions from everyone on minor project details and such. Doing that on the forum is a little archaic and slow.

10:21 am
February 10, 2010


Rocket-To-The-Moon

Altus, Oklahoma, USA

Member

posts 685

offline
link
print
13
0
ratedowngrey
rateupgrey

I'm in the channel now.

Main Workgroups: Propulsion & Spacecraft Engineering

3:28 am
February 11, 2010


Rizwan

Admin

posts 170

offline
link
print
14
0
ratedowngrey
rateupgrey

Post edited 5:11 am – February 11, 2010 by Rizwan


To move things forward, I have setup an IRC Meet Up

You can feed in when you will be able to come online over here. http://whenisgood.net/cstart/irc/meet/up

3:39 am
February 11, 2010


Luke Maurits

Adelaide, Australia

Admin

posts 1483

offline
link
print
15
0
ratedowngrey
rateupgrey

Nice job!  I have responded.

We should also come up with a theme for the meeting so we can better focus our efforts.

Either an OHKLA-related "work burst" or a SpaceUp organisation session would probably be best for now.

Main CLLARE workgroups: Mission Planning, Navigation and Guidance. I do maths, physics, C, Python and Java.

5:20 am
February 11, 2010


Rizwan

Admin

posts 170

offline
link
print
16
0
ratedowngrey
rateupgrey

SpaceUp session should be good.

6:38 am
February 11, 2010


rpulkrabek

Member

posts 348

offline
link
print
17
0
ratedowngrey
rateupgrey

I may not be able to attend any time soon. The free time that I have is a bit difficult to guage and it's difficult to know if I have the energy to commit then. Perhaps it's best for you to choose the time based on your schedule and I will then join if I am available. Otherwise, a log of the chat would be good to read.

I hope this is alright.

6:52 am
February 11, 2010


Luke Maurits

Adelaide, Australia

Admin

posts 1483

offline
link
print
18
0
ratedowngrey
rateupgrey

Speaking of logs, Rizwan, what sort of access do you have to the server that cstart.org lives at?  Are you able to run programs on it, like an IRC logging bot with a web interface?

Main CLLARE workgroups: Mission Planning, Navigation and Guidance. I do maths, physics, C, Python and Java.

9:30 am
February 11, 2010


Rizwan

Admin

posts 170

offline
link
print
19
0
ratedowngrey
rateupgrey

Can't run any IRC chatrooms or scripts since it is a shared server and it is against the TOS.

But getting a log of particular sessions shouldn't be difficult, since almost all IRC clients have logging capabilities.

4:27 pm
February 11, 2010


Luke Maurits

Adelaide, Australia

Admin

posts 1483

offline
link
print
20
0
ratedowngrey
rateupgrey

Rizwan said:

But getting a log of particular sessions shouldn't be difficult, since almost all IRC clients have logging capabilities.


True, but this is very manual and inconvenient.  I have seen some channels which are automatically logged completely to a database, and there is a web front end to the database where you can search through the entire channel history by keywords, and post URLs that show only a particular set of lines of a chat.  This would be a very convenient way to "share" the IRC channel, it's a shame we cannot get something like this set up at the moment.

Main CLLARE workgroups: Mission Planning, Navigation and Guidance. I do maths, physics, C, Python and Java.

small tagNo Tags

About the CSTART – Collaborative Space Travel and Research Team Forum

Forum Timezone: UTC -6

Most Users Ever Online: 59

Currently Online:
13 Guests

Currently Browsing this Topic:
1 Guest

Forum Stats:

Groups: 4
Forums: 36
Topics: 512
Posts: 3809

Membership:

There are 1133 Members

There are 2 Admins

Top Posters:

Rocket-To-The-Moon – 685
brmj – 402
rpulkrabek – 348
DenisG – 69
antinode – 64
J. Simmons – 46

Recent New Members: jmwright, uhwuggawuh, seikialice88, bishvabis, alijayadv, harris

Administrators: Luke Maurits (1483 Posts), Rizwan (170 Posts)



 
share save 120 16