During the last @TAB call, there was agreement to start with GitHub Projects since it's lighter weight than other options discussed and issues are already tracked within GitHub.
I started https://github.com/opendatakit/roadmap/projects/1 as a quick demo of how this could work. I like where it's going but notes seem too lightweight, especially since they can't be tagged. I propose we create a organization-level board so that we can include issues from all of the various repositories. All @TAB members should be able to modify it.
For higher-level feature ideas that need to be specified, we could create issues in the roadmap project linking out to forum posts and other resources. We would choose a combination of columns and tags to track progress (e.g. "needs champion", "needs wireframes", etc)
Here are a few projects that use GitHub projects for roadmapping:
Cards move from left to right and we can just drop whatever issues we want into the various columns. For epics (e.g., performance improvements), we can use checklists in issues filed against the roadmap repo and it becomes pretty easy to see.
Does this setup seem reasonable? I'm new to GitHub projects and I'm particularly interested in hearing from folks who've used it before.
I think we may need a section for whether an idea may have been assigned to someone or a team though it may not be actively under development. Or does doing include stuff that are still in discussion or specification phase?
@yanokwa kwa Is the org project or private? I get a 404 on the link you shared.
I've invited all TSC members to the ODK organization as a first step. I've also found a workaround that will take that data and publish it. I'm hoping to have that live in a few hours.
The workaround was more complex than I thought and still didn't work.
Given that organizational boards won't work, I think we should revert to @LN's initial idea of a project in a roadmap repo. All @TAB members have access to the project and I've confirmed that those are public (see https://github.com/opendatakit/roadmap/projects/1) and we can use tags!
Per @Ukang_a_Dickson's feedback, I've also adjusted the roadmap into four columns: Needs proposal, needs developers, doing, and done. I'm hoping this this contribution-oriented naming is more welcoming.
I've put the high-level features we are working on in the Done column. For future reference, just copying and pasting the URL from an ODK project will embed the repo-specific card.
To get us started, I've also put the features that TSC members showed interest in during our call as Needs proposal. I think anyone can file an issue, but it's the TSC that will decide what goes into each column.
The proposal discussion can take place where ever (e.g., forum post for more user-facing features, a GH issue for more technical discussions). Once we something actionable, the proposal can be filed as a single issue on the relevant repo or if it spans multiple tools, then an issue on the roadmap repo will be the best option.
Then we can move the proposal to Needs developers. At this stage, it's a matter of resourcing and adding a timeline (I'm hoping tags like Q2-2018) will be sufficient here.
