Open Stack

----- Original Message -----
> From: "Shamail Tahir" <itzshamail at gmail.com>
> To: product-wg at lists.openstack.org
> 
> Hi everyone,
> 
> I had taken an action item (a couple of weeks ago) of updating our user
> story template to align it with our intended objective of providing a
> simple way to capture high-level feature/enhancement requests in the form
> of user stories.
> 
> Our intention is to share user stories with the project teams and the
> project teams (if they choose to move forward with a submitted user story),
> as always, will determine the technical implementation that best suits
> their service architecture.  The primary data being documented via the
> template is who, what, and why (not how).
> 
> The current template we were planning to use has the following sections:
> 
>    - Glossary
>    - Problem Description
>    - Affected By
>    - Requirements
>    - Related Use-Cases
>    - Gaps
>    - References
> 
> This template was developed by the Telco-WG and we chose to adopt it as
> well.  The template actually goes above and beyond what we would need to
> capture the necessary data for user stories (i.e. it includes sections to
> document implementation details). 

Hi Shamail,

Can you elaborate a little here? We made an explicit decision in the telco working group *not* to include implementation details in the template or the proposals that use it so I'm wondering which sections you see as representing this (particularly as all the major sections are repeated below albeit with different layering - e.g. in the telco template the user stories are part of the problem description [1])?

Thanks,

Steve

[1] http://git.openstack.org/cgit/stackforge/telcowg-usecases/tree/template.rst

> I would like to propose an alternate
> template that removes the extra items and replaces them with some of the
> meta-data that we will need for organizing user stories.  The end-goal
> being to keep it simple while being able to accommodate the necessary
> information.
> 
> Proposed template sections:
> 
>    - Theme (equivalent to an epic)
>    - Parent theme (would we allow multiple?) this user story is associated
>       with
>    - Interested Working Group(s)
>    - Working groups that support this user story as being important to
>       their market segment/area of focus (multiple groups can support the
>       same
>       user story to eliminate duplicates)
>    - User Story (in standard user story format of "as a <role/actor>, I
>    want to be able to <objective> so that <reason/benefit>")
>    - Standard user story formatted entry
>    - Problem Description
>    - Optional.  This section an be used to provide additional details about
>       the problem or why it needs to be resolved (e.g. enables a new workload
>       type to be supported, reduces barrier to entry, etc.)
>    - Gaps
>    - This section documents which services would be involved in completing
>       the user story (e.g. nova, cinder, etc.)
>    - Blueprints submitted to complete this user story
>    - This section is to be filled out later.  It would act as a centralized
>       tracker for all blueprints that were generated to complete this
> user story.
>    - References
>    - This section could include other documents that expand upon the user
>       story.  For example, Telco-WG could link their use case entry
> that would be
>       associated with this user story in this section.
> 
> 
> Please provide feedback and let's discuss if we should stick with the
> original template we were planning to use, move forward with the sections
> proposed in this message instead, or if you have a simpler way that we
> could organize the template while collecting the necessary information and
> metadata.