Update: maybe it is most useful to maintain http://pad.p2pu.org/priorities
1. Right now
2. Future stuff <-- this is the key "roadmap" section
3. Outstanding Issues
4. Requirements moving forward
How can I get involved with P2PU?
(Note: this *could* be used as the design for a "homepage" of sorts. This list should be maintained so that it stays up to date.)
- By asking some questions (link/feed RSS from OSQA)
- By starting some courses (link/feed bla bla)
- Participate in some courses ...
- Write some code ...
- Do some translations...
- Do some research ...
- try to do something around governance? (to grow the organization)
- mailing lists
- community calls
- wiki pages about organisational practices (link/feed recent changes page(s))
- ... Roadmap <<< this is where we need to get some more clarity, so we're working on it on this page! (Eventually I could see this having its own RSS feed, e.g. as items are being crossed off or added into the roadmap)... UPDATE: it is possible to get a feed that mixes P2PU and Lernata issues, https://www.pivotaltracker.com/user_activities/367d7a2e82191506e0bb99a5fd183539 (mis-titled "Recent Activity Feed for Joe Corneli" - it includes all activities from members of these two projects. Simple enough to create a feed with a better title!)
:: P2PU "Future Features"-->Specify Lernata? (in part, yes)
Note: a more technical view on "current affairs" is available at: http://pad.p2pu.org/tasks-and-tools.
This is the key section for this document: high-level "roadmap" style issues should be entered here!
With outstanding questions flagged up in color:
- org side:
- incorporation as a US-based 501(c)3 nonprofit
(how might this change things, what will it change?)
- dev side:
- switch from current platform to Lernata
(when is this going to happen?)
(what new features will Lernata support?) -- what new features should Lernanta support?
- possible partnerships side:
- (what about the idea of creating a P2PU "namespace" on Wikiversity?)
Note, these are mostly focusing on development side:
But these resources don't necessarily say what the major "features" (or bugs) are. Without that it seems hard to do "feature-driven development"!
Information from the wiki, taking a broader view:
Likely requirements moving forward with the roadmap-creating and maintaining process:
1. We need some sense of the priority of the issues.
- Perhaps the prioritisation could come in part from looking at OSQA/UserVoice. Is P2PU getting a list of "feature requests"?
- Of course, there will be development-side priorities that users will not generally be aware of. It's good if users can become aware of major points, but can't ask them to know about everything.
2. We need some sense of the outcomes in terms of "features" (see above bullet list).
- for example, one of my current annoyances is the P2PU wiki (which I feel is not easy to use), and similarly the rich text editor that is used on the site for courses isn't much good, and the plain text version just supports HTML markup. All of that could stand to be improved and might be "important" as a feature request
- HOWEVER, it doesn't necessarily get at more major issues about "direction" -- like, it's not really a "new feature". Which could be OK.
3. We need good questions and we need to know who to ask them to.
4. We need to find a suitable format to extract "legacy" planning formats into...
- is it a guiding document or a tracker? A feature request list? A statement about who is working on what?
- it can be a combination of all of these things, so let's not "bikeshed" the format - let's get to work on the issues instead...!
Example(s) of places that seem to be doing pretty well with roadmap type stuff: