Re:How We Write Github Issues
by skidding on Thursday January 09, 2014 @06:02AM
(#7029787)
Couldn't agree more. Within a max num of characters previously established, a title shouldn't be minimal, but say as many things as possible, if they are explicit and clear.
> People's attention is hard to capture, even your colleagues.
True, that's why communicating as much as possible from the title is important, because you don't always expect them to click and "zoom in"
---
Github issues are also essential where I work. We're trying to make them BDD stories, emphasizing most on the customer need and the WHY, followed by what (deliverables) and how (solution)
We went the extra step to have a template that we apply before starting any new issue. I even wrote a Chrome extension a while back, that reads that issue template from an open source repo and applies it in the textarea when you open the /issues/new page on Github. https://github.com/skidding/github-issue-template
Re:How We Write Github Issues
by kibwen on Wednesday January 08, 2014 @01:51PM
(#7025585)
Came here to echo this sentiment. I find that Github's issue search is so painful that long and overly-descriptive titles are essential for finding anything relevant, especially in a project that uses issues extensively.
Re:How We Write Github Issues
by beaumartinez on Wednesday January 08, 2014 @08:37AM
(#7023338)
Say you revisit that issue in three month's time. Would you know what the cause of the "performance tool in development environment" issue was? Probably not. "Fixing the performances after the rollout of the last Express.js" tells you straight away though.
Admittedly it's a minor issue, but overzealously enforcing "keep titles short" will make titles less descriptive.
Re:How We Write Github Issues
by dikunlun on Wednesday January 08, 2014 @08:50AM
(#7023407)
It is a good point. However by keeping most of the issues in a milestone and making sure those issues are based on actual deliveries help to keep things in context without a need of a fully verbatim title. This will be the subject of another post.
Re:How We Write Github Issues
by julianlam on Wednesday January 08, 2014 @08:26AM
(#7023298)
Definitely good advice, but bad issues will always be present, no matter how many articles are written about it. I fully expect in 10 years to still have to deal with people pasting entire stack traces in github titles ;)
Re:How We Write Github Issues
by hunvreus on Wednesday January 08, 2014 @08:32AM
(#7023324)
I think it's a matter of peer pressure. You can't necessarily guarantee this on a OSS project, but between colleagues you should be able to set expectations; "I'm taking the time to properly explain what I'm working on, and so should you. Especially if you want me to help".
Doing so is also drastically reducing the amount of misunderstandings and the length of your Scrum meetings.
Re:How We Write Github Issues
by ianbicking on Wednesday January 08, 2014 @11:56AM
(#7024665)
Does "/cc @johndoe" do something that I'm missing? (The "/cc" part is irrelevant of course, but specifically tagging someone.) I have yet to figure out what it accomplishes in terms of notifications or queries, seemingly very little. But for all I know there might be something I'm missing, or a setting that could be adjusted?
(Edit: maybe it seems superfluous because I typically want notifications for everything in the repositories that I have greatest interest in)
Re:How We Write Github Issues
by bbsss on Wednesday January 08, 2014 @09:30AM
(#7023629)
Good article, I really agree on an issue being like a log that you can see the thoughts develop over time. Invaluable for getting people up to speed that are new to an issue.
"Fixing the performances after the rollout of the last Express.js" is much more descriptive than "performance tool in development environment".
Descriptiveness counts—scanning through a list of issues I'd know immediately what the first one entails. I wouldn't with the second.
> Keep titles short and descriptive.
Yes to descriptive, no to short if you're compromising on descriptiveness.
> People's attention is hard to capture, even your colleagues.
True, that's why communicating as much as possible from the title is important, because you don't always expect them to click and "zoom in"
---
Github issues are also essential where I work. We're trying to make them BDD stories, emphasizing most on the customer need and the WHY, followed by what (deliverables) and how (solution)
We went the extra step to have a template that we apply before starting any new issue. I even wrote a Chrome extension a while back, that reads that issue template from an open source repo and applies it in the textarea when you open the /issues/new page on Github. https://github.com/skidding/github-issue-template
Admittedly it's a minor issue, but overzealously enforcing "keep titles short" will make titles less descriptive.
Doing so is also drastically reducing the amount of misunderstandings and the length of your Scrum meetings.
(Edit: maybe it seems superfluous because I typically want notifications for everything in the repositories that I have greatest interest in)
What's your take on using labels?
I also followed this up a bit by solidifying our CONTRIBUTING doc: https://github.com/BroadleafCommerce/BroadleafCommerce/blob/...