Create HOW_TO_CREATE_A_PLAN#7456
Conversation
|
Vit, I'm new to this... I wasn't able to view a preview so I'm not sure the formatting is perfect. Also.. not sure if other aspects are 'right' either, I'm wanting the file visible here https://github.com/Expensify/App with the title HOW_TO_CREATE_A_PLAN.md |
mountiny
left a comment
mountiny
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
@mallenexpensify No worries! I have fixed it! The file was correctly at the root dictionary, but you also need to include the .md suffix to indicate this is Markdown file.
No wit should be good and I have included some sugegstions. Nice guidelines!
| ## Step 4: Propose it | ||
| Once you have a well-defined problem and solution, post your problem and solution as separate comments in #expensify-open-source in Slack and be prepared to answer questions and defend your choices. Also, be prepared to hear better solutions that may completely change your P/S statement. | ||
|
|
||
| Depending on the complexity of the P/S Statement, a Design Doc may be required. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I think we should also explain what is a Design doc or link to some explanation.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Contributors won't have the context of a design doc so I don't want to go into too much detail yet. What about updating to "an internal Design Doc may be required." to stress it's not something a contributor should be looking for?
link to some explanation
I think if add 'internal' we don't need more detail. But.. I initially read it as 'link to some examples'. Once we have a few good examples in #expensify-open-source we should add links to them. Or... create a new .md file with a handful of examples (since not everyone will be in #expensify-open-source)
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Agreed! You are right, it is internal, but it might be good to imply that they basically do not have to know what it is, kind of.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
What if we add (Expensify employees will take it from there) to make it clear that at that point it's out of the contributor's hands?
| - Does this affect the customer experience? How so? | ||
| - How many customers would be affected by this? | ||
| - Define why it is a problem | ||
| - Resist the temptation to reverse-engineer a Solution into a matching Problem. (ie. Problem: We don’t have a car. Solution: Buy a car) |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I am just wondering, the direction we should avoid is Solution -> Problem, should the bad example be something like:
Solution: I want a car.
Problem: We do not have a car.
But this is just coming to my mind given the order of the problem/solution issue. Let me know what you think.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
I think you're right cuz it's "reverse-engineer a Solution" which means you would start with the solution to get the problem.. right? If so, can you make that update?
Co-authored-by: Vit Horacek <36083550+mountiny@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-authored-by: Vit Horacek <36083550+mountiny@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-authored-by: Vit Horacek <36083550+mountiny@users.noreply.github.com>
|
Thanks for the quick review and feedback/suggestions @mountiny |
mountiny
left a comment
mountiny
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
One last change then and we can 
🎉
Beamanator
left a comment
Beamanator
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Lookin shnazzy! Just added a few little ideas
| - Does this affect the customer experience? How so? | ||
| - How many customers would be affected by this? | ||
| - Define why it is a problem | ||
| - Resist the temptation to reverse-engineer a Solution into a matching Problem. (ie. Problem: We don’t have a car. Solution: Buy a car) |
| ## Step 4: Propose it | ||
| Once you have a well-defined problem and solution, post your problem and solution as separate comments in #expensify-open-source in Slack and be prepared to answer questions and defend your choices. Also, be prepared to hear better solutions that may completely change your P/S statement. | ||
|
|
||
| Depending on the complexity of the P/S Statement, a Design Doc may be required. |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
What if we add (Expensify employees will take it from there) to make it clear that at that point it's out of the contributor's hands?
mountiny
left a comment
mountiny
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Added that one suggestion I forgot to suggest.
Co-authored-by: Vit Horacek <36083550+mountiny@users.noreply.github.com>
Co-authored-by: Alex Beaman <alexbeaman@expensify.com>
Co-authored-by: Alex Beaman <alexbeaman@expensify.com>
Co-authored-by: Alex Beaman <alexbeaman@expensify.com>
Co-authored-by: Vit Horacek <36083550+mountiny@users.noreply.github.com>
mountiny
left a comment
mountiny
left a comment
There was a problem hiding this comment.
LGTM after discussing in NewDot, I will merge and not wait for other review!
|
✋ This PR was not deployed to staging yet because QA is ongoing. It will be automatically deployed to staging after the next production release. |
|
Niiice way to get these changes in & merged y'all 💪 👍 |
|
🚀 Deployed to production by @sketchydroide in version: 1.1.34-0 🚀
|
4 participants
Details
Per this post in #contributor-management, we're going to be asking Contributors who post Feature Requests to use a simple template. To provide more context, we want to point them (bookmark/pin in #expensify-open-source, likely link added to CONTRIBUTING.md) to a simplified version of our 'how to create a plan' in our manifesto.
Fixed Issues
$ GH_LINK
Tests
QA Steps
Tested On
Screenshots
Web
Mobile Web
Desktop
iOS
Android
cc @roryabraham @Beamanator who were helping