[teampractices] Phabricator's "Epic" tag...why?

Mon Jun 1 19:35:00 UTC 2015

On Mon, Jun 1, 2015 at 12:26 PM, Bryan Davis <bd808 at wikimedia.org> wrote:

> We used them for quarterly planning and other roadmapping activities.
> This was a replacement for our prior process of maintaining a wiki
> page to track the things that the team was interested in working on
> (or that other teams were asking us to work on in the future).
>

Ok. I'm still trying to understand this. Were *all* issues part of an Epic,
or were there a mix of Epics (with subtasks) and standalone non-epics? For
me, the line between epic and non-epic is very fuzzy, so viewing everything
on one side of the fuzzy line doesn't seem very helpful. I'm genuinely
curious here.

Would the Goal project type be more appropriate for roadmapping?

> I have no personal desire to force a team or project into a particular
> workflow. I'd rather not have my team's workflow changed so that you
> don't get nagged by some undisclosed Phabricator user however.
>

That makes total sense to me. If there is one right answer that fits
everyone, great. But if not, then let's not force either team to work
inefficiently.

Thanks,

Kevin
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.wikimedia.org/pipermail/teampractices/attachments/20150601/a49e45d4/attachment.html>