[OOTB-addons] Documenting / organising acceptance criteria

[Martin Cosgrave]

I like the wiki entries. The inclusion checklist is kind of scary but 
the descriptive text looks good to me.

I will probably pick a few from the candidates list and implement them 
in the distro build and see how I get on.

Martin

On 13/11/2014 13:07, Axel Faust wrote:
>
> Hello Angel, @all,
>
> did you get a chance to review/consider the structure / contents? 
> There have been no wiki edits / issues or new mailing list replies so far.
>
>
> Regards
>
> Axel
>
> *Von:*OOTB-addons [mailto:ootb-addons-bounces at xtreamlab.net] *Im 
> Auftrag von *Axel Faust
> *Gesendet:* Freitag, 31. Oktober 2014 11:05
> *An:* Ángel Borroy
> *Cc:* ootb-addons at xtreamlab.net
> *Betreff:* Re: [OOTB-addons] Documenting / organising acceptance criteria
>
> Hi Angel,
>
> hmm -- the wiki does not appear to have a decent comment / discussion 
> support. Also, there are issues to consider regarding "frozen 
> state/version" of acceptance criteria and working on content for a new 
> iteration.
>
> The wiki being a Git repo could theoretically help in some cases, but 
> unfortunately the tooling is not that great -- no ability to browse 
> branches/tags in the wiki repo, no pull-requests ...
>
> For the moment, I would say:
>
> -Comments about the "how" / "why" of documenting / organizing our 
> criteria belong in this discussion, e.g. anything about general 
> structure, depth / detail and intent
>
> -Comments / discussion about specific contents in the wiki should have 
> a separate "forum"
>
> oOption a) Spin off a new discussion on the mailing list
>
> oOption b) Create an issue with proposed change(s) and apply changes 
> if in agreement (or no opposition after certain time)
>
> oOption c) Apply changes directly and
>
> §c1) use either option a) or b) to sort out conflicts with other 
> people's edits, or
>
> §c2) create "Talk"-pages (like in Wikipedia)
>
> Use your own discretion about which option to choose based on the type 
> of comment / issue you have with a piece of content.
>
> Regards
>
> Axel
>
> *Von:*Ángel Borroy [mailto:angel.borroy at keensoft.es]
> *Gesendet:* Freitag, 31. Oktober 2014 05:48
> *An:* Axel Faust
> *Cc:* ootb-addons at xtreamlab.net <mailto:ootb-addons at xtreamlab.net>
> *Betreff:* Re: [OOTB-addons] Documenting / organising acceptance criteria
>
> Amazing job! I've been rewieving the content for a while, but I'll 
> need further study in order to get all this map clear. However, I just 
> have some comments on it. Should we use this mail list to discuss 
> about it? Or is there any review mechanism on the wiki?
>
> Best regards,
>
> Angel
>
> El domingo, 26 de octubre de 2014, Axel Faust <axel.faust at prodyna.com 
> <mailto:axel.faust at prodyna.com>> escribió:
>
> Hello all,
>
> in the two weeks since Summit I have "played around" in our wiki 
> (https://github.com/OrderOfTheBee/addons/wiki) trying out ways to 
> document and organize any acceptance criteria we have for addons that 
> we want to include in the collection. Currently, I have created a page 
> for a "quick overview" of all criteria 
> (https://github.com/OrderOfTheBee/addons/wiki/Inclusion-criteria-overview) 
> and a couple of "sub-pages" that feature more detail in the 
> description of requirements -- and could potentially include examples 
> of accepted vs. unaccepted constellations / behaviour in the future. 
> These sub-pages are 
> https://github.com/OrderOfTheBee/addons/wiki/Non-technical-inclusion-criteria 
> and 
> https://github.com/OrderOfTheBee/addons/wiki/Technical-inclusion-criteria 
> for the moment, but may be further sub-divided when more content is 
> included.
>
> The overview should be easier to use as a checklist when we review any 
> addons since you don't have to interpret and mince with too much 
> textual description. But I think we won't get by without having a more 
> detailed, descriptive version of the criteria catalog either as simple 
> clarification or an argumentative basis when we discuss reviews with 
> addon developers. If -- in the long run -- we engage with the 
> Community in educating developers about aspects we consider "best 
> practice", this should allow us to easily expand a detailed 
> description of a single rule / criterion into a dedicated HowTo / blog 
> post.
>
> The current content of these pages in regards to acceptance criteria 
> reflects what I could think of to get started. Wherever possible I 
> tried to keep the various comments from previous discussions in mind, 
> but in the end, those contents are primarily intended as a plastic 
> example.
>
> Please take the time to review and share your thoughts.
>
> As several people discussed at Summit, we need to keep the momentum of 
> the Order in general going. I would like it if this meant we'll have a 
> first accepted draft of a criteria catalog sometime next month and 
> start doing the first "prototype reviews" before Christmas holidays 
> (and preparations) have everyone distracted for the rest of the year. 
> Defining the "how" of criteria documentation is the first step...
>
> Regards
>
> Axel
>
>
>
> -- 
> Angel Borroy
> keensoft
> 655 47 47 55
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> OOTB-addons mailing list
> OOTB-addons at xtreamlab.net
> http://www.xtreamlab.net/mailman/listinfo/ootb-addons

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://www.xtreamlab.net/pipermail/ootb-addons/attachments/20141113/497d19b2/attachment-0001.html>