[teampractices] Measuring core vs maintenance vs new work

Fri Aug 7 21:50:37 UTC 2015

On 7 August 2015 at 13:50, Greg Grossmeier <greg at wikimedia.org> wrote:

> Thanks Joel (and Terry) for that explanation.
>
> My next question is about measuring:
>
> <quote name="Joel Aufrecht" date="2015-08-07" time="11:00:33 -0700">
> > So I'm leaning toward a default recommendation of:
> > 1) Try to track the three buckets (core, maintenance, new functions), and
> > try to confirm that teams can actually differentiate between them cleanly
> > enough
> > 2) don't track bug vs feature
> > 3) don't track planned vs unplanned, but do be careful not to
> automatically
> > conflate unplanned with maintenance.
>
> How should a team that doesn't use story points quantify and give a
> ratio to the three buckets?
>
> Story points being, I assume, how teams in eg Discovery, Editing, and
> Readership will be measuring the size of their buckets.
>

My general advice is not to worry. In my experience, the number of
Phabricator tasks in aggregate approximates to the work required to
complete them. There are always tasks which are trivial and those which are
major, but it normally doesn't skew much, so don't worry about it as long
as you're not expecting perfect forecasting (and if you are, this is not
the biggest of your issues).

Yours,
-- 
James D. Forrester
Lead Product Manager, Editing
Wikimedia Foundation, Inc.

jforrester at wikimedia.org | @jdforrester
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/teampractices/attachments/20150807/c249fc78/attachment-0001.html>