Tech Dev Prioritisation Process
Core OppiaMobile development takes place as a 2-week sprint per month, so the issues addressed need to be prioritised for the upcoming sprint.
Any developments, fixes, features etc must first be entered as issues in the relevant GitHub issue list. Issues entered should be tagged at least with a high/medium/low priority and whether it is a bug or enhancement. Any issues submitted will be reviewed for the tags to ensure the tags are correct and appropriate.
For a given sprint the open issues will be prioritised on the following basis (highest priority to lowest):
High priority bugs
Outstanding automated tests that need to be added for recent code updates
Code updates to ensure the code base passes the SonarCloud analysis
Outstanding documentation for any recent code updates
Other open issues
Item 1 is clearly the most important, since high priority bugs will be those that directly affect the running and implementation of OppiaMobile.
Items 2, 3 and 4 should eventually be addressed as part and parcel of any feature/code updates - i.e. when code is updated (whether it is a new feature, or an improvement/bug fix on an existing feature), the automated tests and documentation should be included as part of the code update.
Item 5 is the area of prioritisation this document mainly focuses on.
Once items 1-4 have been scheduled and time estimated in the upcoming sprint, we will then know the remaining developer time available for item 5.
Note that these sprints are for the core Digital Campus OppiaMobile developer team, other teams/developers may wish to work on specific features developments that are relevant to them.
For each sprint, the tasks will be added in the ‘queued for development’ column in the general development Github project. The core OppiaMobile developer team will make an initial suggestion on the tasks that will be included for item 5, based on discussions and information from the developer and community governance boards.
The suggested tasks for the sprint will then be shared with the developer governance board for their input, feedback and approval. In the interests of time, board members who do not provide input/feedback within the given timeframe, will be assumed to approve suggested task list.
Should the time estimate be incorrect (eg the scheduled tasks take shorter/longer time than expected)….
For a monthly sprint process:
Week 1 - input/feedback/approval from the developer governance board
Weeks 2 & 3 - code sprint takes place
Week 4 - review and integration of the code developed, next suggested sprint tasks are added, and the monthly cycle restarts.