On Tuesday, May 03, 2016 08:14:18 PM Ian Clarke wrote: > I agree that we can't be too granular with these tasks, if there are too > many then people will have trouble allocating intelligently between them. > However, I don't agree that if a task is less than a week's work that we > should automatically do it, we might have $25k worth of tasks like that! > Part of the solution is to have a “catch-all” for small “technical debt” > tasks, where they might not individually have a user-visible benefit, but > where the benefit is that they accelerate our development process over > time, in part by reducing the likelihood of bugs. > We could then have a fixed resource allocation for these, I've seen people > use 25% in the past.
You're right with especially the "catch-all" part of continuously improving invisible things. What you called "technical debt" is what I categorized as "Code quality" in the WoT bugtracker. This includes things such as unit tests, documentation, refactoring. I usually tried to fix a few of those issues in every release, even if not immediately needed, to guarantee that the codebase improves. This also is good for developer morale, satisfies the basic human desire for creating order. And it ensures there always is a "Changes for developers" section in the changelog, which could possibly attract new developers. It might also be OK to have this be less than 25% until we have satisfied our users with major new features being released. -- hopstolive (keyword for Ians spam filter)
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
_______________________________________________ Devl mailing list [email protected] https://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devl
