mirror of
https://github.com/github/semantic.git
synced 2024-12-19 21:01:35 +03:00
51 lines
2.6 KiB
Markdown
51 lines
2.6 KiB
Markdown
# May 16th, 2016
|
||
|
||
## What we were even doing here
|
||
|
||
This was our inaugural weekly.
|
||
|
||
We’re sort of looking at this meeting as a retrospective on the previous week. We’re very aiming very roughly at ~10min, but since we’ve never done this before, and since Rick is starting new this week, we’ll see how it goes.
|
||
|
||
We went in first name alphabetical order, and shared three things from the last week:
|
||
|
||
1. What went well.
|
||
2. What went less well.
|
||
3. What we learned.
|
||
|
||
|
||
## Retrospective
|
||
|
||
@joshvera:
|
||
|
||
- Diff summaries! We now have a functional way of mapping diffs to their summaries. Tricky path to get to it, but pretty simple completed.
|
||
- Also worked on alignment stuff. Tricky stuff, possibly undecidable stuff.
|
||
- We’ve been learning about recursion schemes, and different ways to tear down and build up finite & infinite data structures in versatile & structured ways.
|
||
|
||
|
||
@rewinfrey (on his first week with us! :tada:):
|
||
|
||
- Last week was wrapping up some work on a tenant scoping problem. Handed that off to @bryanaknight.
|
||
- Ran through `semantic-diff` setup, and `stack test` is all green.
|
||
- Also spending some time configuring Atom for Haskell &c.
|
||
- Excited to be here! :tada: (**Ed:** And we’re excited to have you! :heart:)
|
||
|
||
@robrix:
|
||
|
||
- Diff summaries went well.
|
||
- Working on alignment also went well, thanks to :pear:ing w/ @joshvera.
|
||
- I was reminded that at its best, :pear:ing is a “greater than the sum of its parts” sort of thing.
|
||
- Forgot to note that syncing up w/ @jbarnette on the meta-discussion around alignment was incredibly valuable. I spent a lot of time Writing Things Down last week, and I’m very glad I did.
|
||
|
||
The above took us 8min. Nice!
|
||
|
||
|
||
## Metaretrospective
|
||
|
||
Since this was our inaugural weekly chat, we also did a retrospective on the retrospective:
|
||
|
||
- @joshvera observed that even if he’s not working closely with @rewinfrey & @robrix, he’ll have some idea of what we were working on, but less of an idea of what we learned; it’s both more interesting & harder to discover.
|
||
- @rewinfrey pointed out that this can help us discover unknown unknowns; “I learned x” gives others a chance to say “have you heard of y, which supersedes x?”
|
||
- @rewinfrey further noted that this is sort of a “what would be worth learning?” question, which sets us up nicely for this week. It’s a good chance to confirm that goals for the week are useful!
|
||
- @robrix was very glad to get the above feedback; this metaretrospective was super valuable.
|
||
- @robrix later realized he forgot to set down what the goals of this meeting are (in his opinion), which would be worth talking about.
|