I thought we had come to a different conclusion: that we would continue
with the existing system for a sprint cycle for you to see how the system
works before you change it. Maybe I am misunderstanding.
I said *considering adopting* and no dates, which is compatible with what
we talked about đ.
If I'm not misunderstanding, please remember
Kristen is a stakeholder on
this and it impacts how she does her job, so any changes really do need her
buy-in.
I've contacted KL and asked her for further thoughts, so that we can keep
the conversation rolling. She's always on my mind đ
---
Seriously though, there aren't any super-radical changes or anything crazy.
Just clearly stablishing the workflow and trying to do our jobs the best we
can.
The biggest philosophical change would be having mobile's product backlog
on mobile frontend and gather's product backlog on Gather, which we've
already done in the past and worked fine.
On Tue, Jun 30, 2015 at 10:49 PM, Jon Robson <jdlrobson(a)gmail.com> wrote:
Hi Joaquin
I'm still not 100% sure how the query will work for us but I'm all for
trying this out.
A few caveats to be aware of:
* Anyone can edit the priority field. I don't know of any cases of
someone switching from some kind of priority to 'needs triage' ever
happens though so this shouldn't be a problem.
* Some tasks may get lost when they are not filed against an extension.
eg. Adding a card in a sprint but not with the associated extension
https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/maniphest/query/gdeZ0Re2Ekmh/#R
OR Tasks in reading web but not in the extension pages
https://phabricator.wikimedia.org/maniphest/query/BuWVMgcwb1kM/#R
(but I think we can train ourselves to avoid that)
I certainly do the former a lot, since I spend most of my time in the
sprint board. Setting up herald rules [1] for each sprint board seems
rather expensive and a pain but is one solution.
In terms of epics, on the reading web board, I'd love to see us use
though's more often and use only the 'must have', 'could have',
'should have' for those tasks. Any subtasks I'd love to file them in a
'Sub task' column on the basis that it makes the board less noisy and
keeps us focused. Any bugs should either be put in a sprint project or
left on the extension (we can triage them separately there using the
MobileFrontend workboard)
[1]
https://www.mediawiki.org/wiki/Topic:Sh94hyx5vqslwf8n
On Tue, Jun 30, 2015 at 1:00 PM, Bahodir Mansurov
<bmansurov(a)wikimedia.org> wrote:
It looks good to me. Thanks for the hard work,
Joaquin.
On Jun 30, 2015, at 2:56 PM, Joaquin Oltra Hernandez
<jhernandez(a)wikimedia.org> wrote:
Any feedback folks?
I've been talking to the tech lead and we're considering adopting this
and
adapting as we go along for improvements we could
make.
Cheers
On Mon, Jun 29, 2015 at 8:14 PM, Bahodir Mansurov <
bmansurov(a)wikimedia.org>
wrote:
On Jun 29, 2015, at 8:34 AM, Joaquin Oltra Hernandez
<jhernandez(a)wikimedia.org> wrote:
I've mapped the proposed workflow:
https://i.imgur.com/Wu7crcB.png
TLDR ^
_______________________________________________
Mobile-l mailing list
Mobile-l(a)lists.wikimedia.org
https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/mobile-l
--
Jon Robson
*
http://jonrobson.me.uk
*
https://www.facebook.com/jonrobson
* @rakugojon