On Wed, May 4, 2016 at 8:35 PM, Pine W wiki.pine@gmail.com wrote:
Hi Bryan,
Thanks for the report. With this information in hand, what follow up is planned?
The primary purpose of the study was to set a baseline of qualitative ("how are we doing") responses. These will be used to gauge increase/decrease in satisfaction in comparison to future surveys. Tool Labs staff get regular feedback from people who are either extremely happy or extremely unhappy with services, but a broad survey like this is helpful to determine the general satisfaction of those who are not motivated to provide feedback by a single incident. No specific timetable has been set yet, but I expect to see another survey run between October and December of this year.
Data from this survey, especially the free form comments, has already been shaping the quarterly planning for the Labs techops team and my more recent Tool Labs support initiative. I would say that a focus on making Tool Labs easier to use, especially by individuals who are not experts in the Unix command-line, is a general theme that is being pursued as we also seek to replace aging services like Sun Grid Engine and increase overall stability of the platform.
One of the things that stood out the most for me personally in the feedback was a general need for tutorials and other task focused technical documentation. This is an area that I would like to encourage the existing Tool Labs developers to help with. There are some ideas of things to write in Phabricator [0][1]. Generally we are lacking on "big picture" documentation. We have a lot of documentation on solving particular problems but even those documents can be difficult to find and understand as they are mostly written with an assumption of familiarity with the services and terminology used in Tool Labs.
[0]: https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T101659 [1]: https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/T123425
Bryan