Skip to content
This repository has been archived by the owner on Feb 8, 2023. It is now read-only.

Sprint O #21

Closed
19 of 37 tasks
jbenet opened this issue Jul 8, 2015 · 9 comments
Closed
19 of 37 tasks

Sprint O #21

jbenet opened this issue Jul 8, 2015 · 9 comments

Comments

@jbenet
Copy link
Member

jbenet commented Jul 8, 2015

Sprint Goals

Sprint Discussions

See https://github.com/ipfs/pm#sprint-discussion-schedule

Sprint Deliverables

  • Add yourself below, that way we only have people listed who are really in the sprint
  • Add links to issues down here. Only add things you can finish this sprint.

@jbenet

@whyrusleeping

  • extra logs for bitswap dashboard
  • implement basic bitswap dashboard
  • land GC
  • land batching (go-datastore)
  • land batching (go-ipfs)
  • field test dev0.4.0
  • fix too many open files issue with bitswap/flatfs respect open fd limit kubo#1456
  • add lazy negotiation to go-multistream

@lgierth

@krl

  • ipfs-app-tool
    that can add unixfs directories
  • ipfs-app
  • webui -> ipfs-app(s):

@diasdavid

@jbenet
Copy link
Member Author

jbenet commented Jul 8, 2015

@whyrusleeping @Heems @rht @wking @cryptix @chriscool and anyone else, post stuff below and i'll add it to the top.

@rht
Copy link

rht commented Jul 11, 2015

Also I have had the confusion of the man-hour/week/month tracker that there is no 1-to-1 mapping between:

  1. waffle.io board (planning, in progress, done) labels
  2. this pm weekly issue (planning and done) + daily sprint sync (in progress). This is supposedly a strict subset of 1, but not many items are stated in an issue explicitly (although they will eventually turned into PR's). Just wondering if things need to be more semantic.
  3. github per-repo milestone (opposite of icebox, or monthly-scale backlog). https://github.com/ipfs/pm/milestones

@chriscool
Copy link
Contributor

Improve ipfs-paste: jbenet/ipfs-paste#2

@whyrusleeping
Copy link
Member

next sprint etherpad: https://etherpad.mozilla.org/biFo0CDpCp

@jbenet
Copy link
Member Author

jbenet commented Jul 14, 2015

Also I have had the confusion of the man-hour/week/month tracker that there is no 1-to-1 mapping between:

  1. waffle.io board (planning, in progress, done) labels
  2. this pm weekly issue (planning and done) + daily sprint sync (in progress). This is supposedly a strict subset of 1, but not many items are stated in an issue explicitly (although they will eventually turned into PR's). Just wondering if things need to be more semantic.

yeah, unfortunately we aren't using waffle as much. do we want to really commit to it? (i find it a bit tedious to organize, but if someone helps me with that, i'm down to commit to labeling all the things well). the labels will certainly help people asynchronously know what's going on. i'm no expert in agile/kanban, so if someone with better PM experience wants to take this on, lmk! whatever makes us more effective = really useful.

i still want the etherpad / sprint issue to be the canonical repr of what someone's definitely taking care of that week.

  1. github per-repo milestone (opposite of icebox, or monthly-scale backlog). https://github.com/ipfs/pm/milestones

per-repo milestones are usually just groupings of related issues. @whyrusleeping and i hoped to move the milestones to be releases (like 0.4.0 for go-ipfs).

@rht
Copy link

rht commented Jul 14, 2015

This should have been sprint O.

@rht
Copy link

rht commented Jul 14, 2015

I am in for an AI/bot pm overlord.

@rht
Copy link

rht commented Jul 14, 2015

per-repo milestones are usually just groupings of related issues. @whyrusleeping and i hoped to move the milestones to be releases (like 0.4.0 for go-ipfs).

Where labels should have been used for groupings instead.

Yet the waffle labels for issues are clearly still in the use.

If manual checkmarks can be removed https://github.com/blog/1506-closing-issues-via-pull-requests

@jbenet jbenet changed the title Sprint M Sprint O Jul 14, 2015
@whyrusleeping
Copy link
Member

@rht the waffle stuff is kinda done automatically. we have wanted to use it, but its a little difficult to get it integrated into (at least my) workflow. Unless you really like it, i wouldnt worry about it

@jbenet jbenet closed this as completed Jul 16, 2015
Sign up for free to subscribe to this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in.
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

4 participants