torrust-tracker
torrust-tracker copied to clipboard
ci: auto add issues to projects
Codecov Report
Merging #482 (35b107b) into develop (69f3327) will decrease coverage by
0.01%
. The diff coverage isn/a
.
@@ Coverage Diff @@
## develop #482 +/- ##
===========================================
- Coverage 84.55% 84.55% -0.01%
===========================================
Files 100 100
Lines 7117 7116 -1
===========================================
- Hits 6018 6017 -1
Misses 1099 1099
see 1 file with indirect coverage changes
:mega: We’re building smart automated test selection to slash your CI/CD build times. Learn more
@josecelano
I think that what you propose makes absolute sense.
You are recommending a structured approach where you start of High Level and work down one layer after another and also can have a public roadmap as to where we want to take the project which is an indicator for the long term projection of the project.
For example I think that the roadmap is key for attracting other contributors and building a community. As a matter of fact I would not spend my free time on a project where I see no projection. I would consider it a waste of my time. I think that the Roadmap should be a projection such as done by GitHub https://github.com/github/roadmap.
I would recommend that we follow your approach since I remember it worked well on other projects.
On the other hand regarding the proposed by @da2ce7 of having a project board the issues that impact a given actor you can generate it too at a lower level.
Also for your information you can have a board that reflects the issues from several repositories thus you can reflect the information any way you want. The project boards are very flexible.
Does this still make sense? We are using this project view https://github.com/orgs/torrust/projects/10/views/1
closing until I review the https://github.com/orgs/torrust/projects/10/views/1 project properly