Cleanup in JIRA

Data Management
#1

Hello,

I’d like us to do some cleanup in jira. Specifically:

I am hoping T/CAMs (@frossie, @KSK, @jdswinbank, @mgelman2, @xiuqin) will deal with the stories that correspond to their teams.

I think it the longer run it’d be good to automate catching this sort of issues. Frossie, could you take a lead on that and create a story so that we don’t forget?

Thanks,
Jacek

#2

Actually unclosed epics from past cycles(?).

Several of these are KPM measurements corresponding to the v11 release which are waiting for sign-off from @mjuric. Given that release is long shipped and the KPMs published, I think it’s appropriate to simply mark them as done unless Mario objects.

It can be unclear whether a particular story relating to the Science Pipelines is an AP or a DRP problem. In that case, we often end up with a ticket labelled “Science Pipelines” but not assigned to a particular team; see e.g. DM-5087. Stories thus labelled end up on the Science Pipelines backlog, so the first team to have some spare resources can pick them up.

As of May 2015 (has it been changed since? I don’t have a record of it), Kevin would import stories with 0 SPs into PMCS and given them a weight of zero; stories with null SPs would not be imported at all. In other words, there is some semantic difference here. In practice, I’m not sure that difference is worth preserving, but this is no simply a matter of JIRA preference.

I’d personally be against making it compulsory to set the SP estimate on a story, because I think recording issues should be as frictionless as possible and I worry that making people write down SP values for work outside their area of expertise will put them off. I’m also not sure that it’s worth T/CAM time coming up with SPs for stories that we’re not imminently planning to work on.

#3

Actually unclosed epics from past cycles(?).

Yes, thank you!

we often end up with a ticket labelled “Science Pipelines” but not assigned to a particular team

Ok, I’d be fine to look at the label for such stories. However, 53 out of these 61 do NOT have any label set.

I’d personally be against making it compulsory to set the SP estimate on a story, because I think recording issues should be as frictionless as possible

I agree, and I see the confusion, I should have emphasize it better, I was only talking about active stories, that is, stories that are being worked on (in progress / in review etc).

#4

Yes, absolutely. Some of those are Science Pipelines stories I haven’t yet tracked down and labelled. Some are somebody else’s problem!

In that case, +1.

#5

Regarding this:

It can be unclear whether a particular story relating to the Science Pipelines is an AP or a DRP problem. In that case, we often end up with a ticket labelled “Science Pipelines” but not assigned to a particular team; see e.g. DM-5087.

I guess it is because two teams work closely on one component, “afw”, right?. If that is the main reason it is unclear who to assign a story, I’d propose we use the default owner of the involved component (looks like “Lead:John Swinbank” for afw), and then as it was said in RFC-145, we’d reassign when/as it makes sense. Would anyone have a problem with that?

#6

I clicked on all the links. I am happy to say none belongs to me.

1 Like