Retrospective notes 2023.01.04

Chair	Timekeeper	Note Taker
Jack Harper	Hannah Cawley	Nikola Roev

Items from last retrospective:

Windows 11 builds:

Perhaps just test squish and system tests on win11 with a win10 built client

• FA: correction - we should rather have a win11 built client talking to win 10 build server

• Contact Facilities IT and ask for their Windows 11 migration plans. After which discussions about this topic can proceed with more relevant information.

Should we push back on overly complicated requirements that spiral in scope?

• Example: RIKEN requesting very specific GUI behaviours that add a lot of complexity
• There is only so much pushing back we can do, otherwise it will discourage migration to IBEX.
• Pushing back should be done at the point of gathering requirements. This can look like:
  • Offering a simplified version of the functionality that is being asked for. Try to get to the heart of what problem we are trying to solve
  • Ask for precise answers of what is needed now & what will be needed later so we can prioritize more effectively
  • Kathryn: If you feel uncomfortable pushing back, put me in the loop - this is my job

• Previous talking points were reinforced. General consensus was maybe trying to simplify requirements.

Is "Previously Running" Column on instrument overview useful?

• Posted something on technical to discuss this but people who could answer were not around at the time
• Discuss this offline, just give the post on technical a bump

• An easily accessible web page on a public wiki is convenient for people doing support off-site as well as scientists.
• The information on the page might not always be correct as it needs to be updated manually when an instrument changes versions.
• Having the previous version adds clutter to the Home page.
• A proposed solution was adding a link to an auto-generated web page that will hold the version history of each instrument.

General encouragement to pick up reflectometry tickets:

• Thomas L: I have ended up giving reflectometry tickets to Nikola since they were suitable and no one had picked them up late into the sprint. This is ok but not ideal from a perspective of passing on / retaining specific knowledge
• People may be busy with other things that demand attention which is absolutely fine
• If you are a bit intimidated by reflectometry and that is a factor, always feel free to talk to Thomas to pair up. These tickets have been selected for being well scoped and not too nasty as an introduction!

• Discuss again when Thomas L. is present.

Items from this retrospective:

Is point allocation for support appropriate:

• A little bit on the low side but generally accurate.

Migrating to new GitHub projects system and separating issues:

• Separating issues to their own repositories will make them less searchable and easier to be overlooked.
• New system has convenient features and will probably be used in the future.

Coffee:

• Regular coffee meetings should continue.
• Organising a meeting with Mantid might be challenging as they have a lot of remote members.
• Accelerator meeting is more doable, should discuss again after follow up for more details.