Lori Bowen Ayre wrote: [...]
Here's what I (as someone thinking the new feature I might want to pursue) feel is missing (and I'm no usability expert). I a am suggesting these specifics in hopes of being helpful, not to complain:
- What does RFC means.
From Virtual Entity of Relevant Acronyms (Version 1.9, June 2002) [vera]:
RFC Request For Comments (Internet, RFC)
- Is there a template or an example of a good one.
http://wiki.koha-community.org/wiki/Template:RFC is a template. http://wiki.koha-community.org/wiki/Add_support_for_NORMARC is an example of a good one, but you can see many examples of bad ones (particularly those mangled by moving from the old wiki) which are still valid and worthwhile RFCs, so don't feel that you have to write a good one first time.
- How to post it (the instructions do say to "send a mail on the mailing list but again...saying what? attaching the RFC? including the RFC in the post? naming the Bugzilla numbers? feature names?)
I'd summarise the RFC in the post and probably give bugzilla numbers and feature names, but not attach the whole RFC. It's up to you and how you feel most comfortable trying to start a discussion, though. It sounds like a few people can give examples of how *not* to do it, from recent emails.
- Are there guidelines about how to name it and relate it back to a Bugzilla entry. Is it one Bugzilla entry per RFC or could there be multiple Bugzilla entries in an RFC?
There aren't really any naming guidelines yet and I think there could be multiple bugs per RFC in some cases, but should be at least one.
And back to the RFC Wrangler (RW?) idea, maybe the RM could select the RW who would serve with him or her throughout the release cycle?
Yes, the RM could do that. I think it's overcomplicating things, but each to their own.
Just a thought. I do think it would be useful to have someone monitor the enhancement request process and try to coordinate and track what people need to ensure it funnels into the RM and development team.
I think the RM will need some way to track, whether a RW or directly. Developers will also need to track things for their own interests and sponsors/commissioners probably should want to too. So, I feel that we need to improve trackability in general, whether that's for any specific person or not. Hope that helps, -- MJ Ray (slef), member of www.software.coop, a for-more-than-profit co-op. Past Koha Release Manager (2.0), LMS programmer, statistician, webmaster. In My Opinion Only: see http://mjr.towers.org.uk/email.html Available for hire for Koha work http://www.software.coop/products/koha