Too many parallel targets

[oesteban]

AFAICT, we have a lot of hands, but scattered on many objectives:

• @tsalo is working on several fronts: CLI, mixing model, docstrings/refactors, etc.
• @vinferrer is working on the plotting
• @eurunuela and @CesarCaballeroGaudes are more involved in the coordination and bigger picture.

Should we define some list of priorities? Maybe using the project's milestones or a "Project" with the kanban columns?

It feels like we are trying to pin down too many targets. WDYT?

[tsalo]

I've created a couple of projects for organizing issues- one for BrainHack Donostia and one for fMRIPrep integration (with a particular eye toward the structure planned in nipreps/fmripost-aroma#10).

I've also added labels for high and low priority issues.

[eurunuela]

• @eurunuela and @CesarCaballeroGaudes are more involved in the coordination and bigger picture.

I wanted to be more involved but Brainhack duties have not let me so far. I'll try to catch up and contribute.

Should we define some list of priorities? Maybe using the project's milestones or a "Project" with the kanban columns?

Thank you @tsalo for created the projects! That will be super helpful.

It feels like we are trying to pin down too many targets. WDYT?

I agree @oesteban . The main objective was to get native-space data support for ICA-AROMA. From that main goal, we have found many tasks, so a better-defined path/timeline is necessary.