As we are going forward, do we want to change the structure or format of the product committee meetings?
Simon Dean (Unlicensed) - I'm currently ok with content. Would like to know more about the development process and prioritization process. Having insight into that would be useful.
Sebastian Brudziński - easier to see and set priorities going forward. It is challenging to do this, but it would be really useful. Could limit the options. Could involve more people. Make it easier to decide on what is next.
Dercio Duvane - I do look how we set up the meetings and content. Unfortunately we do not have the attendance we would like to have. Is there a plan to have a smaller group specific to geographies? It is hard time for their team to join.
Ryan Freeland (Deactivated) - observed that asking for input is challenging, but it would be useful to have more input from the countries. Perhaps cold calling are finding ways for more engagement because we need to hear from them. When issues are presented, it is useful to call out which country, users, context in framing the discussion and understanding what is going on.
Wesley Brown - one challenge is this committee falls in between the governance and technical committees. we cannot rely on PC to give consistent direction in a timely manner. Possible change would be to refocus this on implementers and their needs. Give another way to give feedback on the product itself. Would like to get more feedback from other individuals.
Mary Jo Kochendorfer (Deactivated) People do want transparency in the development process but the sheer number of details makes it difficult to understand within the context of this meeting. However, people do gain value from hearing about what we're doing and giving feedback on priorities. Hope that we could find a process/feedback mechanism which this community buys into. Regarding the software development process, we could do a better job of being transparent about what we're doing and how the overall process is doing. Need to figure out how to break up the information so that it is more digestible. Other communities have had success with having a specific person (or group?) champion specific features.
Key takeaway: try to create a clear evaluation framework for prioritization so folks can contribute and weigh in consistently.