| • Jonas | |
| Mar 15 2017, 1:40 PM |
| F6592339: pasted_file | |
| Mar 15 2017, 1:40 PM |
We would like to have a section called 'Forms' above the Statement section of every Lexeme page,
so we can better differentiate between Statements of a Lexeme and Forms of a Lexeme.
This Form section header should have the exact styling as sections on a Item page for Identifiers and Statements.
Acceptance criteria ( Cucumber ):
When I am on a Lexeme page Then Forms Section Header should be there
| Status | Subtype | Assigned | Task | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Open | None | T194253 Configure the CI job that runs WikibaseLexeme's browser tests against test wikidata | |||
| Resolved | Addshore | T168260 Deploy WikibaseLexeme extension on Wikimedia cluster | |||
| Resolved | Addshore | T191457 Deploy WikibaseLexeme on www.wikidata.org | |||
| Resolved | Addshore | T191458 Deploy WikibaseLexeme on test.wikidata.org | |||
| Resolved | Lydia_Pintscher | T168263 WikibaseLexeme functional baseline | |||
| Resolved | Lydia_Pintscher | T159703 [Tracking] Support for Forms and Senses | |||
| Resolved | Lydia_Pintscher | T150178 Wikidata 2017 Q2 goals | |||
| Resolved | Lydia_Pintscher | T169708 Wikidata 2017 Q3 goals | |||
| Resolved | Lydia_Pintscher | T160052 [Epic] Support for Forms | |||
| Resolved | daniel | T160521 [Epic] Forms of a Lexeme (UI) | |||
| Resolved | None | T160520 [Story] Section header for Forms | |||
| Resolved | thiemowmde | T161092 Create LexemeFormsView and use it in LexemeView | |||
| Resolved | None | T161093 Create browser tests for section header for forms | |||
| Resolved | • Jonas | T161201 Run browser tests in CI |
Change 343911 had a related patch set uploaded (by Thiemo Mättig (WMDE)):
[mediawiki/extensions/WikibaseLexeme] Add and start using LexemeFormsView to output a "Forms" headline
Change 343918 had a related patch set uploaded (by Thiemo Mättig (WMDE)):
[mediawiki/extensions/WikibaseLexeme] Make "Forms" headline localizable
Per what https://gerrit.wikimedia.org/r/#/c/343911/ says:
Note that T160520 is not fully resolved with this because localization is missing, as well as a basic browser test.
and not seeing all mentioned components having a dedicated patch ready for review, I think it is incorrect to have this ticket in the Review column. Therefore I am moving it back to Backlog (one could argue Doing would be more appropriate - quite possible!).
Also title of the ticket says it is a "Story". I think it is arguable that one can claim a "Story" is "in doing" or "in review". Or isn't it?
There are patches to review, so this clearly belongs to the review column. Can (and actually should!) be moved back when there is nothing left to review (all linked patches are either merged or have a -1), but the task is not resolved yet.
@thiemowmde thank you for working on that, but I must say I am not happy with adding patches to this ticket.
In my mind we should do a task breakdown and only add patches to that tasks that then go through review and are closed when done.
This ticket should stay in doing till every sub task is closed and then be moved to done where the PO should close it after all acceptance criteria are proofed.
@Jonas you think we need a task breakdown for adding a header? At some point, the management overhead will reach critical mass, forming a black hole...
Lines written on this ticket already exceed lines needed for the implementation. Time spend talking about this ticket already exceeds time needed to implement the feature (including tests).
I believe in tracking stories and tasks separately. I think task breakdown is important. But granularity is a balance, and management and communication overhead are real. You have to stop somewhere, otherwise it's turtles all the way down...
@daniel I think you are wrong and this ticket is not the right place to discuss this.
@Jonas All the other comments here are meta-discussion. I'm just adding my 2¢ to that.