I'm ok with this, as it also helps us with backlog grooming:

1. move from global to twitter
2. prioritise subset of 'twitter' tickets

I assume that if it is labeled both 'twitter' and 'mesosphere' it will show
up on both boards?


Does this actually solve the issue though? The sprints are still
per-project, not per-board, so we still won't be able to have multiple
sprints active, right? Or is there some voodoo I'm not aware of that means
a filtered board gets its own sprints?

On Mon, Oct 20, 2014 at 10:27 PM, Chris Lambert <[email protected]>
wrote:

> Having the velocity chart combine all participants is a big loss, imo, and
> effectively a deal breaker if you're looking at Scrum.
>
> Given the options that have been sent out, I propose we use the workaround
> that subdivides the tickets between sub-boards using assignee and/or
> label.  The workflow would be something along the lines of...
>
>    1. Review tickets on a master board
>    <
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/RapidBoard.jspa?rapidView=63&quickFilter=359
> >;
>    add them to a sub-board by assigning them to a member of a group, or by
>    adding a label for your group.
>    2. Each sub-board would then just add assignee in ([group]) or labels =
>    group to make that backlog separate.
>    3. Profit.
>
> Note, Ben had already started labeling tickets in this way to help clarify
> who planned to work on what, so this is an extension of that work.  Of
> course, it's not ideal so everyone should up vote GHS-5410.  :)
>
> There are a couple more details that would need to be ironed out, but what
> are your thoughts on the direction?
>
> Chris
>
>
> On Mon, Oct 20, 2014 at 1:58 PM, Dominic Hamon <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
> >
> >
> https://confluence.atlassian.com/display/AGILE/GreenHopper+6.0.3+Release+Notes#GreenHopper6.0.3ReleaseNotes-Parallelsprints
> >
> > Having the velocity chart not respect the team split is frustrating. The
> > alternative approach of having a TEAM component doesn't scale at all. I
> > guess the parallel sprints is the lesser of two evils.
> >
> > On Mon, Oct 20, 2014 at 1:56 PM, Benjamin Hindman <
> [email protected]>
> > wrote:
> >
> > > I'm trying to chase down how to do this in JIRA:
> > > https://jira.atlassian.com/browse/GHS-5410
> > >
> > > Anybody out there know JIRA and can save me the time!?
> > >
> > >
> > > On Mon, Oct 20, 2014 at 1:49 PM, Dominic Hamon <
> [email protected]>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > Hi Ben
> > > >
> > > > Oh wow, sorry, I didn't even think to check that.
> > > >
> > > > One active sprint per project would be a reasonable assumption for
> JIRA
> > > to
> > > > make, but is going to make it very hard for us to work with sprints.
> > Ie,
> > > > when you close your sprint you'll see your unfinished tickets fall
> into
> > > the
> > > > Twitter sprint, and vice versa.
> > > >
> > > > I don't know who to ask about this apparent limitation.
> > > >
> > > > - dominic
> > > >
> > > > On Mon, Oct 20, 2014 at 1:41 PM, Benjamin Hindman <
> > > [email protected]>
> > > > wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > Hey Dominic,
> > > > >
> > > > > I think we might be running into JIRA limitations. The Mesosphere
> > scrum
> > > > > board was created independently of the Twitter scrum board (as in,
> it
> > > was
> > > > > not a copy), and yet the Twitter sprint showed up on the Mesosphere
> > > > board,
> > > > > and vice versa. If you go to the Apache Mesos Mesosphere Scrum
> board
> > > > you'll
> > > > > see that this is an independent board with it's own filters, but
> both
> > > > > sprints.
> > > > >
> > > > > Is it possible that all sprints for a project show up on all scrum
> > > boards
> > > > > for that project? Is there a way to separate these? Help us JIRA
> > > masters,
> > > > > you're our only hope!
> > > > >
> > > > > Ben.
> > > > >
> > > > > On Mon, Oct 20, 2014 at 11:45 AM, Dominic Hamon <
> > > [email protected]
> > > > >
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > Hi all
> > > > > >
> > > > > > As others (Mesosphere) start sprints, we have noticed a couple of
> > > > issues
> > > > > > with JIRA. The first is that incomplete issues will bubble down
> to
> > > the
> > > > > next
> > > > > > sprint, regardless of who owns it. Ie, I closed out our (Twitter)
> > > > sprint
> > > > > > and the issues went into Mesosphere's sprint.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Similarly, I am unable to start a new sprint because there can
> only
> > > be
> > > > > one
> > > > > > active and Mesosphere is next up.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > My proposed solution: Mesosphere, and any other company that want
> > to
> > > > use
> > > > > > sprints, should copy the scrum board we are using and set up
> > sprints
> > > > > there.
> > > > > > The backlog will still be shared, and in fact the ordering of the
> > > > backlog
> > > > > > will be global between them, but the filters and everything else
> > will
> > > > be
> > > > > > customisable per board.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Ie, please leave the Apache Mesos Twitter Scrum board for
> Twitter's
> > > use
> > > > > and
> > > > > > set up your own board for your own use.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Thanks!
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > --
> > > > > > Dominic Hamon | @mrdo | Twitter
> > > > > > *There are no bad ideas; only good ideas that go horribly wrong.*
> > > > > >
> > > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > > Dominic Hamon | @mrdo | Twitter
> > > > *There are no bad ideas; only good ideas that go horribly wrong.*
> > > >
> > >
> >
> >
> >
> > --
> > Dominic Hamon | @mrdo | Twitter
> > *There are no bad ideas; only good ideas that go horribly wrong.*
> >
>



-- 
Dominic Hamon | @mrdo | Twitter
*There are no bad ideas; only good ideas that go horribly wrong.*

Reply via email to