Skip to end of metadata
Go to start of metadata
Participants
Retro Points
Some things to think about:
- What did we do well, that if we don’t discuss we might forget?
- What did we learn?
- What should we do differently next time?
- What still puzzles us?
- Which tools or techniques proved to be useful? Which not?
- What is our biggest impediment?
- If we could change 1 thing, what would it be?
- What caused the problems that we had recently?
- Which things went smoothly? Which didn’t?
| # | Subject | What went well 
| What didn't go well 
| What can be Improved 
| Puzzle/Blocker 
|
|---|
| 1 | Reviews/tasks/docs | - Improved review process speed/turn-over
- Code review process (Code Quality)
- Documentation has improved
- Work Item owners work well
| - Implementation proposal pages could better organised
| - become clearer about who is assigned to a Jira using reviewers in gerrit
- is everyone participating equally in reviews
- earlier sharing of reviews
- Code review comments need more description
- Lower number patchsets would be good
- Replies to code review comments could be more timely
|
|
| 2 | Responsibilities | - Sharing work
- Team collaboration is working together as a group on a project, process, or concept to achieve a better
|
|
|
|
| 3 | Performance/Env | - performance bugs slow
- just one person working on these
| - Performance environment
- We don't see performance issues as architecture issues
| - share with others
- report of performance issues, progress
|
|
| 4 | Staffing | - too many people leaving :-( Bell opted out
- BT starting to participate
- Luke will be participating with new team
- Miklos and Andras coming over in Spt ?
| - attendance during Tuesday in office, maybe better after summer
- Aditya no longer full time on CPS :-(
- Team members left
- Losing information and historical information as people leave
| - Inquire if communication with Wipro can be improved
- Have some "Guardian" (WIO) for work item (technical/managerial)
- Are there courses for WIO and the team in general to develop soft skills
- Aditya would like to be more involved in CPS
|
|
| 5 | Software/Bugs |
| - Bugs coming up are not that descriptive and missing files, steps, etc.
| - Fault slip analysis (FSA) should be done for major bugs
- .KT OOM (Kubectl)
| - lliquibase changes, is it the best approach?
|
| 6 | Meetings/WoW | - Early scrum meeting(Better planning for the day)
- Team meeting every 2 week
- Team working towards common goal
- Pair programming working well
- Wiki pages for the team are owned by the team and are useful
| - Backlog grooming (More questions need to be asked)
| - Better grooming sessions and more of them
- No US points
- Because of refactoring scope creep can occur
- More detailed descriptions for tickets (and keep them up to date)
- Create more sub tasks if ttey are needed
- More wikis for the team and by the team should be created
- Retros can be more focused on the team
- Dave to add Aditya to biweekly meeting
- Extend coffee break (Tuesday onsite)
|
|
| 7 | Learning | - Lots to learn
- Miklos good PP sessions with Andras
|
|
|
|
Actions
| # | Action | Notes | Assignee |
|---|
| 1 | Implementation proposal pages could better organised |
| |
| 2 | KT OOM (Kubectl) | To contact Gareth for help | |
| 3 | FSA |
| |
| 4 | Team add correct reviewers to reviews | WIO & 2 others | ALL |
| 5 | Discuss with team for performance testing | Invite Dave Donnelly and Aditya | |