2018-06-21 Meeting notes

Governance mechanism review and alignment

Current proposed scope:

1. Review Roadmap Burn down and Team velocity
2. Identify and mitigate risks
3. Oversee travel budget and allocations. Includes approving travel for:
   • OpenLMIS conference attendance
   • In-person meetings
   • Trips for team members 
4. Monitor opportunities for funding more "gap" features

• Everyone agrees with this scope.

Travel Budget Discussion

Given that the team decided not to do a big kick off, I suggest we redo the budget estimates to mirror the plan of doing more frequent trips.  I encourage us to begin planning trips soon as we should get going on the cross team pollination.

First slice of funding: Effectiveness of teams

The assumption is that colocation is the most beneficial during requirements gathering and development.

Second slice of funding: Community funds and conferences.

Option: Amend the contracts to have more money for software development if we don't feel the need for colocation or community funds.

Matt: Colocation for discussions around integration between for reporting. 

Potential in person meeting around report definition metrics/indicators

• Ashraf, Edward, Matt, Craig agree with this idea

Integration and interoperability is another important topic for alignment.

OpenHIE Community Meeting and Connect-A-Thon OpenLMIS representation

• who can go? Interested?

• Craig as applied for sponsorship. He will let OpenLMIS know if he is accepted or needs support.
• Potentially Elias could represent OpenLMIS

Update: Brandon will attend.

Matt: We would like to go faster. We will have more folks joining the team so hopefully our velocity will pick up.

Edward: Things are going along pretty well and getting used to the process. 

Sam: First sprints are about ramping up the team and writing tickets. We hope the velocity picks up.

Question: How comfortable are we with sharing costs?

Edward: Okay with the larger project. Concerned about sharing by team. Focus should be on if we are achieving what we said we were. Let's make sure we aren't going down a rabbit hole.

• Ashraf: perhaps take a look within the teams.

Matt: I'm comfortable sharing the aggregate numbers in terms of burn. Not sure a comparison around cost would be useful.

Sam: would like to understand and put context around what those numbers mean.

Summary

• Community: share burn
• Project team: Will be done one on one and only bubble up if there is a key concern
• Path: will have the final numbers

Each member will report out based on what their Team Leads have told them.

• Edward Wilson will report out what Ashraf has shared.
• Matt Berg (Unlicensed) will report on what Craig Appl (Unlicensed) has shared.
• Brandon Bowersox-Johnson will report on what Sam Im (Deactivated) as shared. 

How does the manual testing and qa get reflected in the velocity?

• Manual testing should be included in the story points.

Sam: will have this discussion with team leads.

Gap Project Roadmap

• Review the status of the roadmap