timarney
commented
4 years ago Default answer - "It depends"
I think this and our process for this is going to evolve and I think that will happen quickly.
I do think it should include a part about what user research. That said it will depend on the type of feature being proposed i.e. I want to add a X prop onto the route (or some more code based thing) might look different vs a UI / UX type of feature.
I also like the idea of stages but we'll need to take time on how these things get implemented. At this point in time, I personally am interested in standalone plugin like things vs having everything as a dependancy of the app. That said some patterns i.e. a confirm page as you mentioned seems like a generic need for the most part.
Would be a fan of A/B testing etc... hence I like the idea routes being as standalone as possible so we can experiment.
If you would like to add a section for user research now go for it or we can merge as is an iterate.
@timarney Do you think it would be useful to incorporate a part about what user research the commit is linked to?
This would allow us to know if this is more of a prototype or if it's something that we've "proven" is applicable in multiple context. Another thing that just popped to mind. Do we want to have 2 "stages" of inclusion?
I'll give an example based on a fictitious feature. The Art of the Possible project has a "confirmation" page. I suspect this is a common pattern. But what we did, has not been user tested at all. And so while it might be useful for other teams to start with it. If we were to include it in the repo, I would worry that there would be an assumption that it's a best practice.
Having a "experimental" stream would allow us to have maybe even multiple versions of a confirmation page as WIP and then when a team uses it and incorporates user research we could "graduate" it into the main branch.
Again all of that presupposes that our plan for the starter app is to eventually move towards suggested defaults vs many options