Re: Organizing projects in project.webplatform.org

It makes a lot of sense to start with just 2-3 projects or subs max,
to learn how to best bend the tool to our needs, before investing
heavily in project setup.  Learn in action what works before making
decisions like the best way to handle future iterations.  Minimizes
rework.

DougM

On 3/21/13, Julee <julee@adobe.com> wrote:
> Hi, Garbee:
>
> This all sounds reasonable to me. If you want, I do have time now to create
> a demo using sub-projects.
>
> Regards.
>
> Julee
> ----------------------------
> julee@adobe.com
> @adobejulee
>
> From:  Jonathan Garbee <jonathan@garbee.me>
> Date:  Thursday, March 21, 2013 12:28 PM
> To:  "public-webplatform@w3.org" <public-webplatform@w3.org>
> Subject:  Re: Organizing projects in project.webplatform.org
>
> As I have time (once the import is done and a few basic docs on usage are
> up) I will create a demo using sub-projects. Using that we can have a look
> at how navigation works and issue submission. Doing one master project with
> sub-projects allows us to go into single-project mode, which dumps people
> at
> the main dashboard right away vs the project listing. However, I have only
> done rudimentary testing with this so far and haven't done a detailed UX
> look. That is the main thing with sub-project usage, making sure people can
> understand what to do. If someone can't figure out how to navigate the
> system, it is no better than Bugzilla. Documentation can be flawless, but
> people should still be able to navigate and submit issues without reading
> it
> (for the most part.)
>
> No matter what though, doing a deferred project is confusing. People won't
> know where to submit issues and it just adds to cruft in the system (and
> extra work on all accounts.) When an item is assigned to a milestone, it
> counts to that milestone. Otherwise it is simply ignored for it. It is
> technically in a "scrum" area iirc which simply means it is unassigned. So,
> there is no interference except adding to what is shown in the open issue
> list, which we can easily create filter rules for to get quick links to cut
> those out.
>
> Really the only two valid options are:
> 1) Sticking with the current multi-project (perhaps with subprojects) mode
> and keep things neat.
> 2) Create a single master project with sub-projects and then turn on
> single-project mode so people are taken directly to the master project
> dashboard.
>
> Any other method(s) will create a UX barrier that we don't want or need.
>
>
> On Thu, Mar 21, 2013 at 2:28 PM, Julee <julee@adobe.com> wrote:
>> Hi, Garbee:
>>
>> I agree if the system handles deferred items properly, we wouldn't need
>> to
>> have a "deferred" bucket. The only reason to have it is so that data
>> doesn't
>> skew the current project milestone status.
>>
>> As far as keeping separated projects, it essentially requires us to go in
>> to
>> each project to see status, issues, etc., and to update milestones.
>> Giving
>> that TBG allows for sub projects, I'm not sure what UX issues would arise
>> by
>> having a master project. But that's why I thought we should meet to
>> discuss
>> and test this proposed organization.
>>
>>  So, is there a time you and I can meet to set up a test of the master
>> project
>> idea? Or should we proceed another way?
>>
>> Julee
>>
>> ----------------------------
>> julee@adobe.com
>> @adobejulee
>>
>> From:  Jonathan Garbee <jonathan@garbee.me>
>> Date:  Thursday, March 21, 2013 11:20 AM
>> To:  "public-webplatform@w3.org" <public-webplatform@w3.org>
>>
>> Subject:  Re: Organizing projects in project.webplatform.org
>> <http://project.webplatform.org>
>>
>> This "deferred" system seems illogical. We can assign the issues to a
>> milestone, or leave them unassigned which can be the "deferred" status.
>> Having
>> a separate project structure just for that is wasteful and confusing
>> imho.
>> Either we go with a master project (assuming sub-projects actually have a
>> good
>> UX) or we keep separated projects, as Bugzilla had components, and tweak
>> from
>> there as we need. That keeps thing simple and straightforward.
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Mar 20, 2013 at 6:30 PM, Scott Rowe <scottrowe@google.com> wrote:
>>> Thanks, yes. Let's just keep it as WPD:Proposals then. Also, yes,
>>> sitemap/treasure hunt should be, um, interesting! :/
>>> +Scott
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Wed, Mar 20, 2013 at 2:41 PM, Julee <julee@adobe.com> wrote:
>>>> Hi, Scott:
>>>>
>>>> Yes, I will resolve the Beta_Requirements
>>>> <http://docs.webplatform.org/wiki/WPD:Proposals/Beta_Requirements>
>>>> /WPD:Project_Status
>>>> <http://docs.webplatform.org/wiki/WPD:Project_Status>
>>>> issue. I'm not sure we'll need a beta requirements page on docs.* going
>>>> forward, because it'll be fully outlined with great visualization on
>>>> project.*.
>>>>
>>>> As far as renaming WPD:Proposals to WPD:Projects: The original purpose
>>>> of
>>>> WPD:Proposals was to allow anyone to post a proposal within our
>>>> namespace,
>>>> and not have to go to github or google docs or wherever. It's like a
>>>> sketching area. I don't think we'll need a WPD:Projects area, because
>>>> as
>>>> soon as a proposal is accepted, it, and all of it's related issues, can
>>>> move
>>>> to project.*
>>>>
>>>> Regarding bundling these meta pages: I agree. I will be working on the
>>>> site
>>>> map, so it'll be interesting to discover more pages!
>>>>
>>>> Makes sense?
>>>>
>>>> J
>>>> ----------------------------
>>>> julee@adobe.com
>>>> @adobejulee
>>>>
>>>> From:  Scott Rowe <scottrowe@google.com>
>>>> Date:  Wednesday, March 20, 2013 2:21 PM
>>>> To:  julee <julee@adobe.com>
>>>> Cc:  "public-webplatform@w3.org" <public-webplatform@w3.org>
>>>> Subject:  Re: Organizing projects in project.webplatform.org
>>>> <http://project.webplatform.org>
>>>>
>>>> Hi Julee,
>>>>
>>>> There are two documents that relate to the overall status of the
>>>> project:
>>>>
>>>> http://docs.webplatform.org/wiki/WPD:Proposals/Beta_Requirements
>>>> http://docs.webplatform.org/wiki/WPD:Project_Status
>>>>
>>>> Could you resolve the differences between these and make one document?
>>>>
>>>> Also, I've been gathering various WPD: pages under either WPD:Community
>>>> or
>>>> WPD:Proposals in an attempt to put some sanity into the organization of
>>>> these "meta pages." With a lack of navigation and search, it's awfully
>>>> hard
>>>> to keep track of these if they are just created anywhere.
>>>>
>>>> Could you put the "Project_Status/Beta_Requirements" page under
>>>> WPD:Proposals?
>>>>
>>>> I was thinking of renaming WPD:Proposals to WPD:Projects; do you think
>>>> that's a good idea, too?
>>>>
>>>> +Scott
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Wed, Mar 20, 2013 at 1:02 PM, Julee <julee@adobe.com> wrote:
>>>>> Hi, everyone:
>>>>>
>>>>> To help get project.webplatform.org <http://project.webplatform.org>
>>>>> finished and to get our beta work fully integrated[1], I've created a
>>>>> proposal for how we might set up projects:
>>>>>
>>>>> http://docs.webplatform.org/wiki/WPD:Proposals/Organizing_projects
>>>>>
>>>>> I'll work with Garbee to see what we can actually do with The Bug
>>>>> Genie.
>>>>>
>>>>> Please let us know what you think.
>>>>>
>>>>> Regards.
>>>>>
>>>>> Julee
>>>>>
>>>>> [1] http://docs.webplatform.org/wiki/WPD:Project_Status
>>>>>
>>>>> ----------------------------
>>>>> julee@adobe.com
>>>>> @adobejulee
>>>>
>>>
>>
>
>
>
>

Received on Thursday, 21 March 2013 22:20:37 UTC