...
From my perspective there has been little interaction to date between the PC and other work groups such as QA, release management, the maintenance team, the kernel team and the Security WG. Attempts to solicit guidance from the PC on a number of questions relating to the product during the (still ongoing) release phase of Sakai 2.7.0 have generally been turned aside by the Sakai Product Manager as issues outside the purview of the PC. This response, never challenged by PC members, is at odds with the "coaching and guidance" role the PC was expected to play in the day-to-day activities required to produce the next production-worthy release of Sakai as is outlined in the Sakai Development Process. As a result, beyond the initial gate-keeping function provided rather belatedly between Nov/Dec 2009, the PC has not operated as a force for good as regards Sakai 2.x and, as far as shaping the product in its finer details, is largely (and regrettably) irrelevant.
I am also of the view that Product Council should play no oversight role with respect to QA, release management, the maintenance team, the kernel team, the i18n or accessibility teams and the Nakamura/Sakai 3 teams. The PC as currently constituted is neither sufficiently engaged in the production process nor sufficiently agile to respond quickly and authoritatively to the day-to-day challenges of Sakai software development.
E. Which of those functions are missing from current activity or processes?
...
I appreciated the PC's work in helping define the 2.7 feature set. The exercise performed by Max, Noah, Eli et al bears repeating, and not just on new capabilities._ See: http://confluence.sakaiproject.org/display/MGT/2.7+Exercise_.
C. What are the disappointments?
...