You are viewing an old version of this page. View the current version.

Compare with Current View Page History

Version 1 Current »

Three questions:

  • What went well this sprint?
  • What did not go well this sprint?
  • What do you want to see changed/improved in the next sprint?

No debating items during each person's feedback, we will talk about issues after everyone has given their feedback


Went well - 

  1. Had Jon W. consistently develop and make changes for multipage. Had the knowledge. Took ownership and aggressively completed the tasks. He used one way that worked; not necessarily the 'best' way.
  2. Had git and instructions for basic usage to manage the resources. Allowed for schedule page changes to dev/qa/prod per week.
  3. Automated testing with Geb and Spock was useful. Also tied this to Jenkins.

Did not go so well - 

  1. Paul's code and ideas were 'lost' in the development cycle.
  2. 1 meeting per week does not necessarily allow for multi-developer contributions.
  3. Could have had an improved/clear definition of single vs. multi-page design. Internal code design vs. display.
  4. Some changes were pushed through quickly without much review.

Improvements for next Sprint - 

  1. May incorporate some of Paul's developments that lend themselves to a cleaner design as well as a cleaner display.
  2. Sharing more code through git branches across developers. Have more team coordination across developers.
  3. Schedule code reviews between acceptance of changes.
  4. Try to set strict time constraints on some changes to move the sprint along.
  5. Provide a gap analysis during our meetings. What is missing or should be added. Could be part of construction and/or display.

A list of future action items has not yet been produced, but we will re-visit this next Monday and try again.

Attendees: Paul, Bob L., Thomas, Ken, Jim T., Tyler

Jim Drewniak

Lora L. Bates

Jim Turner

Ken Haduch

Ralph A. Navarro Jr.

Tyler Putnam 

  • No labels