Write up plan for ongoing work

[rosejbon]

What needs doing?

We need to write up a plan for how we work on the Neontribe website outside of agreed up sprints. Including how Github is managed and how we triage cards for people to be able to be worked on by anyone

Plan

• [ ] Agree on how we plan and manage the website outside of sprints
• [ ] Write up this agreement, perhaps in the Wiki
• [ ] Add paragraph warning that repeats the message from https://github.com/neontribe/www/issues/185.
• [ ] avoid name clashes on labels with common search term for open-source-contribitors
• [ ] talk about when to backlog shuffle
• [ ] How do we test? How do we know if something is risky!
• [ ] E/Vs added to issues as they are added to todo

Acceptance Criteria

• [x] Documentation exists on how Neontribers can work on the website
• [x] There is a documentation for how Neontribers can choose what to work on
• [x] There is a documentation for how Neontribers can choose what to work on
• [x] The documentation is easy to find
• [ ] The documentation is consistent with other documentation points
• [ ] The documentation contains messaging from https://github.com/neontribe/www/issues/185#issuecomment-507297666 e.g. a link to it
• [ ] Documentation exists on how to validate AC and to check them off

[katjam]

I think there are some notes about this somewhere. They should be added to this card so that anyone can create the contributors docs.

[katjam]

We should include a process for preparing issues to be worked on. Sometimes new features will require a discussion. I propose they can't make it on to the project board until such discussion has been had. The issues on the board should be ready to be worked on by anyone in Neontribe with the appropriate skill set.

For issues that we want to prioritise that require discussion, we could add them to the weekly catch-up issue.

There may already be some thinking around this by other people. Please add here.

[katjam]

Also could be useful to agree whether consensus of 3 people (or another number) is enough to promote to board or close as a won't fix. Or a system like that but with the caveat that one person can also veto the groups decision (obviously only if providing an explanation)

I would assume nothing gets promoted or closed without an explanation.

[Nikomus]

This board shows the overlap between the different sets of documentation as of early February 2020: https://miro.com/app/board/o9J_kv_Rw6Y=/

[robpre]

I've merged a contributing doc which ticks off plenty of this card. It has some todos and is not complete, I'm putting this card back in ready to do if we get some impetus to move it forward