How can I ensure ranking of parent work items is accounted for, when Child work items are managed in a seperate plan?
Scenario:
A project has 10 Features
Each Feature has 5 child Stories
The Features are ranked in a plan
1 of the 5 Stories for Feature1 will be worked and released
3 of the 5 Stories for Feature2 will be worked and released
2 of the 5 Stories for Feature3 will be worked and released
The remaining stories for Features 1-3, and all Stories for Feature 4-10 will remain in a backlog.
Question:
Can I create a view in RTC (or JRS?), to ensure that the Stories are ranked taking into account the ranking of the Feature, so that I don't end up with something similar to that below, or end up with a Story from Feature 4 ranked as #1?
|
3 answers
Some calculations are required. Too complex for JRS, I guess.
It should be possible to implement using BIRT, but paying attention to performance, because of the parent / child relationships.
|
Geoffrey Clemm (30.1k●3●30●35)
| answered Jan 21 '17, 11:17 p.m.
FORUM ADMINISTRATOR / FORUM MODERATOR / JAZZ DEVELOPER In recent versions of RTC, in a hierarchical planning view (such as the Work Breakdown view), if you invoke the "Apply Rank" operation, the items will be ranked in a way to respects the parent ranking. In particular, the parent items will be ranked 1, 2, 3, etc., and the child items will be given a hierarchical ranking. For example, the child items of the item ranked 2 will be given ranks 2.1, 2.2, 2.3, etc.
|
|
Thanks both for your responses. The issue is a little more complex than that stated, with multiple teams involved in delivery of the Stories, so I was trying to quickly determine if there were other means out there.
The hierarchical planning view doesn't account for Stories from different Features being sequentially important. For example, where a business wants 10 Features, however for a first release, only wants those features as a minimally viable product.
|
Your answer
Dashboards and work items are no longer publicly available, so some links may be invalid. We now provide similar information through other means. Learn more here.