Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Review existing processes and determine what needs to be written up next #36

Open
iteles opened this issue Jul 28, 2017 · 2 comments
Open

Comments

@iteles
Copy link
Member

iteles commented Jul 28, 2017

As a dwyler,
I want to ensure that all processes are captured in a clear and replicable way, with checklists of the things that need to be done in a step-by-step fashion where possible
So that if those who have carried them out before are unavailable, the processes can still be carried out and in future we can automate these in order to free up time for other productive tasks!

  1. Review what is in this repo
  2. Review and update issues in this repo
  3. Create a list of the various tasks that are performed yet to be captured here
  4. Open issues for each of these tasks in this repo
  5. Link each as a checklist in this main comment
  6. Follow our contributing process (including time estimations and time tracking) to complete these (I'm happy to be the reviewer)
@Cleop
Copy link
Member

Cleop commented Jan 5, 2018

I'm currently working on checkpoint 1. I've come a cross a number of issues which are discussing various topics and I presume that these are the beginnings of 'processes' to be recorded. So I'm going to add the links to the various issues here to start working on checkpoint 3. I've structured my lists into general, non technical and Product Owner categories to try to break things down a little. If approved I think the PO issues should be moved to their own repo...

#69 - Update the structure of the readme of this repo so the scrum stuff is a separate md file.

#24 - Kanban - I've asked a question here as to whether Kanban and scrum are co-compatible because if we aren't going to use Kanban maybe this issue should be closed...
#72 - Where to capture your learning when working on a dwyl project
#68 - Improving sprints - very vague and covers a range of points for different people
#65 - procedure for time estimating bugs
#44 - Project Management - Scrum, Client Management - has this already been done?
#56 - A Scrum Master is not a Project Manager
#48 Scrum Master Questions asked of them
#50 - Adding more detail about how to do a good retrospective

Non Technical Processes
#19 - pulling people up on things in the right way
#45 - Sales, #47 appears to be a sub-issue of this, #81 proposal template
#70 - How to use AutoCrat
#38 Finance - #83 sub-issue, #64 sub issue
#51 - Staff taking holiday procedure
#49 - Avoiding institutional memory loss when key employees leave
#43 - dwyl summer and dwylmpics - can this issue be closed as the readme on that repo should detail any procedures for events?
#42 Marketing
#41 Company Admin
#40 Legals
#39 HR
#71 - How to sign a doc electronically

PO Repo - should these issues be moved to the other repo?
#54 Why POs should create issues not Scrum Masters
#1, #61 - What is an ideal issue, how do you create an ideal issue? (1 and 61 are duplicates, I recommend #1 is closed.)
#76 Issue prioritisation
#10 - User Testing - best practices etc.
#18 - Staging areas - would this one be as useful in the product owner repo @iteles? Who is this being written for primarily?

@iteles - please can you let me know if you think the PO issues are appropriate to be moved?

@iteles
Copy link
Member Author

iteles commented Jan 8, 2018

@Cleop Thanks for this!

#10 should go into https://github.com/dwyl/learn-user-experience-testing but all the other PO repo issues are definitely appropriate to be moved (I've made comment on the first 3 individual issues)

@iteles iteles removed their assignment Jan 8, 2018
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants