Page History

...

• Overview of our Triage process:
  1. Initial Analysis:  Tim Donohue will do a quick analysis of all issue tickets coming into our Backlog Board (this is where newly reported issues will automatically appear).
  2. Prioritization/Assignment: If the ticket should be considered for this release, Tim Donohue will categorize/label it (high/medium/low priority) and immediately assign to a developer to further analysis. Assignment will be based on who worked on that feature in the past.
     1. "high priority" label = A feature is badly broken or missing/not working. These tickets must be implemented first, as ideally they should be resolved in the next release.  (Keep in mind however that priorities may change as the release date approaches. So, it is possible that a "high priority" ticket may be rescheduled if it is a new feature that cannot fit into release timelines.)
     2. "medium priority" label = A feature is difficult to use, but mostly works.. These tickets might be resolved prior to the next release (but the release will not be delayed to fix these issues).
     3. "low priority" label = A feature has usability issues or other smaller inconveniences or a non-required feature is not working as expected.  These tickets are simply "nice to have" in the next release.  We'll attempt to fix them as time allows, but no guarantees are made.
  3. Detailed Analysis: Developers should immediately analyze assigned tickets and respond back within 1-2 days. The developer is expected to respond to Tim Donohue with the following:
     1. Is the bug reproducible?  (If the developer did not understand the bug report they may respond saying they need more information to proceed.)
     2. Does the developer agree with the initial prioritization (high/medium/low), or do they recommend another priority?
     3. Does the bug appear to be on the frontend/UI or backend/REST API?
     4. Does the developer have an idea of how difficult it would be to fix? Either a rough estimate, or feel free to create an immediate PR (if the bug is tiny & you have time to do so).
     5. Are you (or your team) interested in being assigned this work?
  4. Final Analysis: Tim Donohue will look at the feedback from the developer, fix ticket labels & move it to the appropriate work Board.  If it is moved to the Project Board, then the ticket may be immediately assigned back to the developer (if they expressed an interest) to begin working on it.
     1. If the ticket needs more info, Tim Donohue will send it back to the reporter and/or attempt to reproduce the bug himself.  Once more info is provided, it may be sent back to the developer for a new "Detailed Analysis".

Notes

• Workshops were a huge success.  Hoping to have more of these in the future as they were the largest (attendance wise) in the history of DSpace (over 400 live attendees per workshop).  May want to try to have similar workshops around once per year?
• UI Optimization. A new ticket on the board: https://github.com/DSpace/dspace-angular/pull/1975
• Duplicate Self-registration tickets:  All these tickets were assigned to Ben as he's already got folks working on the issue. 
• Migrating demo sites to LYRASIS. All had positive feedback. Tim will let everyone know when this is formally scheduled...not likely till Jan or Feb though.
• OR2023 participation.  Atmire & 4Science will likely have staff there.  LYRASIS will likely have at least one person.  But, Dev team feels the decision on the ideal "DSpace presence" at OR2023 should come from DSpace Steering.  Atmire will send whatever staff is necessary based on what Steering would like to see.
  • All generally agreed though that a Workshop at OR2023 may not be possible, unless it's less technical.  Technical workshops at OR don't have a broad of an appeal as the online workshops we've been running & they are harder to organize.
  • All generally agreed DSpace should have some  presence at OR2023, but the type should be decided by Steering.