Make Forecast reflect current information on the planning spreadsheet

ots22 commented 5 years ago

Check that past and currently-active projects are entered correctly (this should be the case already)
Enter people/project assigments (start/end date for each project) for upcoming projects (starting end Mar 2019 or later), from the planning spreadsheet here

The second point will involve deciding how to use placeholders to represent some of the information on the spreadsheet (e.g. can't resource).

jack89roberts commented 5 years ago

Project names:

Evelina and Miguel are currently calculated to be overallocated because there are entries for both "Fitbit classification" and "Biobank algorithm". These refer to the same project so one of them should be removed.

jack89roberts commented 5 years ago

Placeholders:

Currently have Resource Required 1, 2 and 3: can we consolidate to only having a single "Resource Required" placeholder, which can be assigned to an arbitrary number of projects for an arbitrary amount of time? Is it necessary to distinguish that e.g. a resource required of 6.4 hours will likely be distributed across 2 people?

Similarly: Birmingham 01, Edinburgh 01, Leeds 01, Newcastle 01 implies a similar plan for the Universities. I would rename them just "Birmingham" etc. Again, each uni placeholder then being assigned to multiple projects for whatever amount of time is appropriate. Downside is placeholders don't have a weekly capacity - could add them as full users (if we keep Forecast)?

jack89roberts commented 5 years ago

Time per day:

Commit to either 6.4 hours or 8 hours as the default project working day (means changing both project requirements and people capacities).

In my opinion, 6.4 hours should make comparisons with Harvest easier (but still not perfect), and makes it easier to include Hut 23/22 days projects in time planning in the future should we want to.

Edit: To be clear, I would have people's weekly capacities (e.g. in Harvest) as 40 hours, but keep projects in Forecast as nominally 32 hours per week (6.4 hours per day). In other words, I'd do whatever's closest to reality.

jack89roberts commented 5 years ago

Resource required:

Many projects indicated as resource required in Martin's spreadsheet don't have a resource required placeholder assigned to them in Forecast.

ots22 commented 5 years ago

Project names:

Evelina and Miguel are currently calculated to be overallocated because there are entries for both "Fitbit classification" and "Biobank algorithm". These refer to the same project so one of them should be removed.

I deleted the duplicate (#15)

ots22 commented 5 years ago

Time per day:

Commit to either 6.4 hours or 8 hours as the default project working day (means changing both project requirements and people capacities).

In my opinion, 6.4 hours should make comparisons with Harvest easier (but still not perfect), and makes it easier to include Hut 23/22 days projects in time planning in the future should we want to.

Edit: To be clear, I would have people's weekly capacities (e.g. in Harvest) as 40 hours, but keep projects in Forecast as nominally 32 hours per week (6.4 hours per day). In other words, I'd do whatever's closest to reality.

Suggest we go with 8 hours per "Forecast day", since otherwise it messes with capacities in Harvest (which will get updated). It is also slightly easier to see what's going on and enter data from the Forecast interface (8/4/2 hours vs 6.4/3.2/1.6 hours), and 6.4 results in incorrect projections of hours worked (due to holiday/sickness etc) anyway. As long as we are consistent across the team then our visualizations/projections will work.

ots22 commented 5 years ago

alan-turing-institute / WimbledonPlanner

Make Forecast reflect current information on the planning spreadsheet #2