Skip to content
Projects
Groups
Snippets
Help
Loading...
Help
Support
Keyboard shortcuts
?
Submit feedback
Contribute to GitLab
Sign in / Register
Toggle navigation
G
gitlab-ce
Project overview
Project overview
Details
Activity
Releases
Repository
Repository
Files
Commits
Branches
Tags
Contributors
Graph
Compare
Issues
0
Issues
0
List
Boards
Labels
Milestones
Merge Requests
0
Merge Requests
0
Analytics
Analytics
Repository
Value Stream
Wiki
Wiki
Snippets
Snippets
Members
Members
Collapse sidebar
Close sidebar
Activity
Graph
Create a new issue
Commits
Issue Boards
Open sidebar
Léo-Paul Géneau
gitlab-ce
Commits
d5ef5597
Commit
d5ef5597
authored
Oct 16, 2018
by
Nick Thomas
Browse files
Options
Browse Files
Download
Email Patches
Plain Diff
When to create follow-up technical debt issues
parent
e657c9a9
Changes
1
Hide whitespace changes
Inline
Side-by-side
Showing
1 changed file
with
22 additions
and
0 deletions
+22
-0
doc/development/contributing/issue_workflow.md
doc/development/contributing/issue_workflow.md
+22
-0
No files found.
doc/development/contributing/issue_workflow.md
View file @
d5ef5597
...
@@ -315,6 +315,28 @@ for a release by the appropriate person.
...
@@ -315,6 +315,28 @@ for a release by the appropriate person.
Make sure to mention the merge request that the ~"technical debt" issue or
Make sure to mention the merge request that the ~"technical debt" issue or
~"UX debt" issue is associated with in the description of the issue.
~"UX debt" issue is associated with in the description of the issue.
## Technical debt in follow-up issues
It's common to discover technical debt during development of a new feature. In
the spirit of "minimum viable change", resolution is often deferred to a
follow-up issue. However, this has limited value unless a commitment to address
the debt is made. As technical debt reduces development velocity, it's important
to keep it under control.
Before accepting resolution of technical debt in a follow-up issue, maintainers
should check that that fix is not trivial, and that the contributor (or their
team) can commit to scheduling the issue within the next 3 releases.
Trivial fixes can - and should - be addressed within the same MR.
If a commitment to address the issue in the foreseeable future cannot be found,
the maintainer must make a value judgement on whether the problem deserves an
issue at all. If the commitment is lacking because the issue is neither trivial
nor valuable, then perhaps no issue needs to be made after all. If a commitment
is lacking because technical debt is being unfairly neglected, then maintainers
should generally insist on resolution of the issue upfront, to protect
development velocity.
## Stewardship
## Stewardship
For issues related to the open source stewardship of GitLab,
For issues related to the open source stewardship of GitLab,
...
...
Write
Preview
Markdown
is supported
0%
Try again
or
attach a new file
Attach a file
Cancel
You are about to add
0
people
to the discussion. Proceed with caution.
Finish editing this message first!
Cancel
Please
register
or
sign in
to comment