To better ensure we are ready to start work on issues in the next iteration, the planning process works as part of a monthly cadence.
Engineering Managers and Product Managers complete a first pass of current+1 release. Initial questions, calling out known availability/vacation, rough scope identified.
workflow::schedulingstate and they are assigned for grooming.
Engineers groom assigned issues in next release. Authorized to ask questions and push back on PM if issues aren’t ready.
workflow::ready for devstate.
Issues are assigned to engineers to ensure we have eyes on the highest-priority issues, as determined by Product Management. This is not an assignment to work the issue, though there will be an effort made to make sure the engineer(s) who groom an issue will be the one(s) working upon it.
Scope of the next release is finalized by Engineering Managers and Product Managers.
Stretchlabels applied to issues for which we have capacity to achieve.
Backlog grooming is the most important step to ensure an issue is ready to move into development and that the issue will match everyone's expectations when the work is delivered.
The goal of the grooming process is to
~backendlabel. Otherwise, remove any backend label, assign any relevant labels and you are done. 2b. If a frontend engineer is required for the issue, ensure a
~frontendlabel. Otherwise, remove any frontend label, assign any relevant labels and you are done.
~workflow::ready for development
When you are done grooming, anyone should be able to read the issue description and should know what the issue is solving, how it is solving the problem, and the technical plan for implementing the issue.
In order for someone to understand the issue and its implementation, they should not have to read through all the comments. The important bits should be captured in the description as the single source of truth.
An issue should fail grooming if it can not be worked on without additional information or decisions to be made. To fail an issue:
Weights are used as a rough order of magnitude to help signal to the rest of the team how much work is involved. Weights should be considered an artifact of the grooming process, not the purpose of the grooming process.
It is perfectly acceptable if items take longer than the initial weight. We do not want to inflate weights, as velocity is more important than predictability and weight inflation over-emphasizes predictability.
We are using the Fibonacci sequence for issue weights.
The weighting system roughly aligns with other teams within GitLab. We deviate from the scales used by other teams to provide enough granularity in our planning process.
A list of the steps and the parts of the code that will need to get updated to implement this feature. The implementation plan should also call out any responsibilities for other team members or teams. An example: https://gitlab.com/gitlab-org/gitlab/issues/5656#execution
The goal of the implementation plan is to spur critical analysis of the issue and have the groomer think through what parts of the application will get touched. The implementation plan will also permit other engineers to review the issue and call out any areas of the application that might have dependencies or been overlooked.
Q: Should discovery issues be groomed?
A: Yes. Discovery issues should be groomed but some of the steps above may not be relevant. Use good judgement to apply the process above. The purpose of grooming a discovery issue is to make sure the scope of the discovery is clear, what the output will be and that the prerequisites for the discovery are known and completed. Discovery issues can have a habit of dragging out or not creating actionable steps, the grooming process should lock down what needs to be answered in the discovery process.
Q: If an issue has both frontend and backend work how should I weight it?
A: Issues that require both frontend and backend work can be broken into sub-issues as outlined in this document.