New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Add docs on our roadmap process #4469

Merged
merged 2 commits into from Oct 2, 2018

Conversation

Projects
None yet
3 participants
@agjohnson
Contributor

agjohnson commented Aug 3, 2018

This formalized publicly some of our discussions around roadmap and issue
priority.

Fixes #4233

Add docs on our roadmap process
This formalized publicly some of our discussions around roadmap and issue
priority.

Fixes #4233

@agjohnson agjohnson requested a review from rtfd/core Aug 3, 2018

@agjohnson agjohnson added this to the Documentation milestone Aug 3, 2018

@agjohnson

This comment has been minimized.

Show comment
Hide comment
@agjohnson

agjohnson Aug 3, 2018

Contributor

cc @RichardLitt

You might have some input here, let me know if this clears up all your questions or if I missed anything.

Contributor

agjohnson commented Aug 3, 2018

cc @RichardLitt

You might have some input here, let me know if this clears up all your questions or if I missed anything.

@agjohnson agjohnson requested a review from RichardLitt Aug 3, 2018

@RichardLitt

Looks pretty good to me! I suggest some small changes, but overall this is very useful.

@humitos

Looks good.

I'm concern about the usage of the group milestone, though. I'm not sure that it's right. If so, I've been adding some issues to those milestones that maybe are incorrect.

I personally prefer to use those group milestones without considering that they have priority. To me, they have to be in an Accepted label and under a release milestone to be considered as the upcoming amount of work.

We maintain two types of milestones: point release milestones for our upcoming
releases, and group milestones, for blocks of work that have priority in the
future.

This comment has been minimized.

@humitos

humitos Aug 15, 2018

Member

Do you think that group milestones are good for future priority?

I think it's good to use them as a way to group related amount of work. The priority will be given by the Accepted label or when the issue is moved from a group milestone to a point release milestone.

@humitos

humitos Aug 15, 2018

Member

Do you think that group milestones are good for future priority?

I think it's good to use them as a way to group related amount of work. The priority will be given by the Accepted label or when the issue is moved from a group milestone to a point release milestone.

This comment has been minimized.

@agjohnson

agjohnson Aug 15, 2018

Contributor

But we have certain planned features and groups of features that have a priority. For instance in the beginning of the year, this was build stability and admin ux -- and still is. This implies that work in these milestones will be first to be added to our releases, instead of randomly applying issues into our point releases.

@agjohnson

agjohnson Aug 15, 2018

Contributor

But we have certain planned features and groups of features that have a priority. For instance in the beginning of the year, this was build stability and admin ux -- and still is. This implies that work in these milestones will be first to be added to our releases, instead of randomly applying issues into our point releases.

This comment has been minimized.

@humitos

humitos Aug 16, 2018

Member

Yeah, that makes sense to me. I was wondering about when to add to any of this milestones. I suppose that we should add them if just "the topic matches" without considering any kind of priority.

@humitos

humitos Aug 16, 2018

Member

Yeah, that makes sense to me. I was wondering about when to add to any of this milestones. I suppose that we should add them if just "the topic matches" without considering any kind of priority.

This comment has been minimized.

@agjohnson

agjohnson Oct 2, 2018

Contributor

With some of our work shifting, and with point releases thinning out a little bit, we'll be leaking more issues into point releases now. It's been heavily leaning toward bug fixes for a while.

@agjohnson

agjohnson Oct 2, 2018

Contributor

With some of our work shifting, and with point releases thinning out a little bit, we'll be leaking more issues into point releases now. It's been heavily leaning toward bug fixes for a while.

@agjohnson agjohnson merged commit 232cf50 into master Oct 2, 2018

1 check passed

continuous-integration/travis-ci/pr The Travis CI build passed
Details

@agjohnson agjohnson deleted the agj/docs-roadmap branch Oct 2, 2018

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment