[Dev] Proposal for consistently formatting project pages

[Lisa Dusseault]

On Nov 23, 2004, at 11:07 AM, Ducky Sherwood wrote:

> Lisa Dusseault wrote:
>
>> We have started keeping task status in project pages, and we've got a 
>> long habit of putting the list people on a project up top.  Other 
>> than that, however, project pages haven't been entirely consistent 
>> with each other. In the 0.4 Debrief, we talked about being more 
>> consistent, so here's my proposal for a "template" for Chandler 
>> project pages:
>>
>> http://wiki.osafoundation.org/bin/view/Journal/LisaDusseault20041116
>
>
> + I like the template, but I would like to have a brief description of 
> the project right up top, first thing.

What's missing from the Overview that you'd like?  (or did you overlook 
it?  (and why do overview and overlook mean practically the opposite?))

>
> + You mention that there ought to be consistent naming of project 
> pages. I think that means we need guidelines for what a project is. Is 
> Queries a project, or is it some sub-element of Repository? Is Drag 
> and drop a project?  Is Sidebar a project? Is Wiki maintenance a 
> project? Is QA a project or a process? Is Product Management a project 
> or a group?

In my mind, anything where we manage a list of related (development?) 
tasks for the current release is a current project page.  QA and PM 
would be groups.  Queries, DnD and Sidebar might be projects if the 
owner views it that way.  Wiki maintenance would be up to you.

> + You seem to imply that all project pages should have a Page Info 
> box. Do you propose that as a policy item?

Yup.  But I don't mean to imply that all pages with the page info box 
saying "project" must have a task table -- there can be old projects, 
future projects or simply fuzzier projects that don't have well-defined 
tasks scheduled for completion in the current release.

Thanks for the input...