Thanks for working on this @MrChrisW@arihantar , very useful, and will be great to get you to do it Arihant since you've just gone through / are doing the training / onboarding.
Awesome, it would be great to have the checklist in place, so Service engineers can have an updated learning path and also stick to it till the end. I skipped a few during my on-boarding training and didn't return to others, the checklist will put in place a follow-up process. I will followup with @arihantar and provide some inputs.
Per conversations with De Wet and Drew, Drew will be helping De Wet through the onboarding / training process. Perhaps the two of you can get a jump start on this issue by taking items from the bootcamp and creating a checklist issue out of them for De Wet's first full week, second full week, etc.?
Under Implementation there are 3 items. Unless there are any objections I will be starting with item 2.
It might sound like more work but I would rather have a checklist to start with and then keep editing it and the template as we figure out where it needs to change.
@dewetblomerus Excellent plan, please do so, and indeed I think only by making the checklist and using it will we properly know where the gaps are.
@arihantar@abuango please make your checklists also, just as copy-paste from De Wet.
Related to all of this, I'd like to clarify from conversations and email chains that for the time being, the following pairing of trainee - trainer is what we should have in place:
The whole team is still available to help and answer questions, but my expectation is that the "paired persons" set up calls on a regular interval to make sure that progress is made on the training tasks and checklist, and to talk about tricky tickets as they arise. Not clear to me what frequency / duration of calls would be best. I can imagine initially daily for 30 mins, then slowing to every other day 30 minutes, to then perhaps twice a week for 45 minutes. I think this is something we'll learn as we go as well, and I welcome your input / experiences.
@dewetblomerus can you please propose the MR that removes the now outdated content from https://university.gitlab.com/support/ ? Perhaps just have it redirect to the new checklist. With that, we should be able to close this issue.
@ernstvn the only hesitation with deleting the page and letting it redirect to the new checklist, is that everything under "Advanced GitLab Topics" never made it onto the checklist.
I see two options here but I am sure there are more
Delete everything upto "Advanced GitLab Topics" and replace it with a link to the bootcamp checklist.
Delete the entire page and redirect to the bootcamp checklist. I might lean this way, because knowing which the relevant advanced GitLab topics are, are much better done by asking the Serivice Engineering team. I asked almost everyone when I joined, and they all had consistent answers, which I now experience to be true. But that list will keep changing. I think when we have someone coming in as a "Senior Service Engineer" we could probably just poll the team and ask something like: "Which three GitLab topics do you most often need to hand off to a more senior person?". At which point the learning path for advanced topics will be clear.
@dewetblomerus I think it may be viable to include these items on the new checklist as optional items. My only concern is they may quickly become outdated as new features are added.
+1 for @MrChrisW 's idea. Can you do that please @dewetblomerus ? It will require a MR for the handbook + an MR for the university project. In the university project, don't delete the page, instead make it blank and with a re-direct to the onboarding checklist.
Regarding Chris' concern about it becoming outdated... yep... but that's also the value in having it in a handbook that is a constant WIP :-)