| leslieg | @rkoller Last week you mentioned that task #4 on the document needed work. Chris thought it worked well and I agree. Are you ok to ship that out now? |
| rkoller | i’ve copied the sentence from the discussion with chris in the document as point 4 at the end of the document. i’ve only left the following comment in last weeks thread about a potential adjustment: https://drupal.slack.com/archives/C01UHB4QG12/p1672851215044909?thread_t... (adding some sort of threshold that not every small details is voiced but only the significant worries). but i am fine with the current state or if it is decided to slightly modify the sentence like suggested - probably better just to “ship” it). |
| leslieg | Maybe add the threshold - that would prevent folks from understanding or using the new categorization? @rkoller (edited) |
| rkoller | hm by adding that kind of threshold we would shift the perspective. in the first three questions we wanted to understand the maintainers perspective and how they perceive and understand and are able to deal with the categories and scope notes. we try to see how what impression someone with their expertise and knowledge has in regards of the new categories and scope notes and also how they are able to sort their own modules into those new categories. how that works out. by asking their opinion how they think what would prevent someone else from understanding and or using the new categories. i would suggest staying with their perspective. (if i understood your suggestion correctly)maybe change the current draft fromIs there anything that came to your mind or that even bothered you while going through the exercises that you haven't voiced yet?to something likeIs there anything significant and noteworthy that came to your mind or that even bothered you while going through the exercises that you haven't voiced yet?( so that not every tiny detail is added but only the significant and noteworthy points - saves time for the maintainer, keeps the questionnaire focused and at the same time saves time analyzing the results) |
| leslieg | That sounds good. I think we can go with that. |
| leslieg | Once you make that change are we ready to send the document to all the maintainers we selected? Better to do that through their contact record on d.o or as pings in the maintainers channel? Thinking the former so only they are notified. |
| rkoller | hmm slight adjustment. cuz the sentence is quite long and nested (…quite german :D). would the following be more concise and to the point?Is there anything significant and noteworthy that bothered you while going through the exercises that you haven't voiced yet?and there is one comment by @bsnodgrass (he/him) in regards of highlighting. is that covered by colorizing or was it just meant to make the sentence bold and the coloring is by the comment? |
| rkoller | but if those two points are decided it is ready to be sent out. how does the contacting via the contact record on d.o work? is that by email? i have the feeling it would be the better choice to address the maintainers on the list more personally instead of simply ping them in the maintainers channel. |
| leslieg | There is a contact link on the user record That sends an email without revealing their email address |
| rkoller | ahhh i think that would be definitely the better way. if you or chris write one or two introductory lines plus a link to the issue with the link to the google doc. that way it is a bit more personal and shows some importance compared to just add someone to a ping list. with a contact mail and some introduction it communicates that this is an important step to validate the initial rounds and to get in some long time drupal users expertise? |
| leslieg | Agree. We'll do that. Thanks so much for your help with all of this. Much appreciated @rkoller |
| bsnodgrass (he/him) | It’s been a crazy week! (FYI I still have the Needs Review Items reminding me, but I keep snoozing it) |
| James Shields | I've been trying to work through some of the short descriptions, and have made suggestions to a few. Not a lot else to add at the moment, but will keep reviewing the descriptions in "needs review". |
| leslieg | Thanks for the help reviewing @bsnodgrass (he/him) and @James Shields |
Participants:
bsnodgrass, lostcarpark, rkoller
Comments
Comment #5
leslieg commented