I was just looking at our next release, which is dependent on three different projects. These are the tasks I need to track:
1. Project 1a: validation testing 2. Project 1b: validation testing 3. Projects 1a and 1b merged (they are different branches of the same codebase for development reasons), yielding Project 2 4. Project 2: validation testing 5. Project 3: validation testing 6. Project 4 (which makes remote calls to Projects 2 & 3): integration tested with 2 & 3. The point is, if someone finds a bug with, for example, Project 2, we need to remember to repeat steps 4 and 6. If we find a bug in Project 1b it would depend on when we found it; pre or post merge. I can visualize this in a directed graph, but I don't know the best way to generate it for others to see, or if it is even practical to generate/track in the wiki. Thoughts? -- Bobman On Fri, Jun 26, 2009 at 2:47 PM, <[email protected]> wrote: > Did you check out the workflow area of the wiki? You need to add some > code to it, but it may be a simple solution to your problem. > -Lou > > > > > Bob Paige <[email protected]> > 06/26/2009 02:38 PM > Please respond to > [email protected] > > > To > [email protected] > cc > > Subject > Tracking development process in the wiki? > > > > > > > All, > I'm looking for a solution for my workplace. I am the maintainer for our > v2.6.3 JSPWiki installation, so I'm hoping there is a solution that will > fit > into the wiki. > > The problem is this: I'll be working on a software task that has a number > of > steps (design, code, test, deploy, release-note, etc.) and get > side-tracked > by another issue which has its own sequence of steps. Eventually all this > needs to be wrapped up into a release. There are multiple developers > working > on multiple projects that have their own inter-dependencies. > > Are any of you tracking this type of flow in a wiki? If not, what are you > using to track it all? > > The obvious solution to me is scheduling software (i.e. MS Project) but > our > project managers have little understanding/interest in the level of detail > I'm talking about here, and they wouldn't let us add to their schedules > anyway. > > Ideas? > > -- > Bobman > >
