On Wed, 24 Feb 2016 11:07:11 -0500 (EST) Kamil Paral <kpa...@redhat.com> wrote:
> > After talking about the workboards in phabricator during the meeting > > earlier today, I mentioned trying to figure out a way to have > > workboards for more than just a single project. > > > > I've been futzing around with qadevel-stg today and have a proposal > > to make. > > > > * Keep the existing projects > > * Remove workboards from at least the Taskotron related projects > > (libtaskotron, resultsdb, taskotron-trigger etc.) > > * Create a new project named "QA Devel" which has the same > > workboard columns as the libtaskotron workboard currently does. > > Would "Planning" project/tag name be more self-explanatory than "QA > Devel"? IIUIC, this will be a meta-project just for planning purposes. That works for me - I'm not really attached to "QA Devel" for this, it was just the first thing that came to mind. > > > > The "process" for getting tasks proposed and worked on would then > > be: > > > > 1. add the "QA Devel" tag to the task, putting it on the "backlog" > > for that project > > So, which tasks should go to the backlog column, those which are > likely candidates for next work? Those which I personally like to > work on? Something else? I'd like to keep that not too specific. Something along the lines of "if you think it should be on the short-to-mid-term planning radar". We're a small enough team that I'd prefer to keep rules and bureaucracy to a minimum. Do you think that more guidelines around this would make things clear enough to justify being more formal-ish about it? > > 2. If the task has enough detail to move forward, it can move to > > "groomed" > > Is there a better word for "groomed"? I'm always imagining horses. > "Triaged" is not much better, but at least it's something we're used > to from bug reports. But I'd like to have something more obvious. Any > ideas? "Ready"? So you're saying that you don't want more pony imagery in our processes? How can you possibly vote against ponies? In all seriousness, I'm not attached to any of the column labels so long as the purpose is preserved. > > 3. Immediate priorities are in the "On Deck" column, in priority > > order from top to bottom > > Could be "up for grabs", "available", "unclaimed". But "on deck" is > also fine. > > Is there a good reason to distinguish between "groomed" and "on > deck", or would it be simpler to just join them? I could go both ways on this. From one POV, it helps separate the stuff that we're relatively committed to in the short/mid term from the stuff that is the highest priority at the moment. The advantages I see here is that there are fewer tasks which need to be sorted in priority order and there are fewer things that contributors need to consider when finding something to work on. On the other hand, combining the columns would reduce the amount of horizontal movement along the workboard and with that, could reduce the process complexity as tasks move through the workboard. Tim > > 4. In progress and "ready for completion" are pretty self > > explanatory > > > > > > I'd also like to start a 2 week cadence again. It may go away again > > as we get closer to F24 final but I think it will help organize > > things a bit better. > > > > Thoughts? > > > > Tim > _______________________________________________ > qa-devel mailing list > qa-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org > http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/qa-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
pgpqkhR89G1nj.pgp
Description: OpenPGP digital signature
_______________________________________________ qa-devel mailing list qa-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org http://lists.fedoraproject.org/admin/lists/qa-devel@lists.fedoraproject.org
