From e42d094310a63ab634d6e5e011ce66b1a3efa034 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: skshetry <18718008+skshetry@users.noreply.github.com> Date: Sat, 17 Aug 2024 09:40:57 +0545 Subject: [PATCH] remove epic template (#10530) --- .github/ISSUE_TEMPLATE/epic_story.md | 60 ---------------------------- 1 file changed, 60 deletions(-) delete mode 100644 .github/ISSUE_TEMPLATE/epic_story.md diff --git a/.github/ISSUE_TEMPLATE/epic_story.md b/.github/ISSUE_TEMPLATE/epic_story.md deleted file mode 100644 index 4411cc9c6d..0000000000 --- a/.github/ISSUE_TEMPLATE/epic_story.md +++ /dev/null @@ -1,60 +0,0 @@ ---- -name: Epic/Story Issue Template -about: Template for "top" level issues - Epics (>2 weeks) / Stories (<2 weeks) -title: 'Epic: New Feature' -labels: epic -assignees: - ---- - -## Summary / Background -What do you want to achieve, why? business context -... - -## Scope - -What will be impacted and what won't be? -What needs implementation and what is invariant? -e.g. -- user should be able to run workflow X from UI -- enable workflow Y, Z from CLI - -## Assumptions -Product / UX assumptions as well as technical assumptions / limitations -e.g. -* Support only Python Runtime -* Focus on DVC experiments only -* Deployment environments don't change often and can be picked up from shared configuration - -## Open Questions -e.g. -- How should access control work for shared artifacts (workflow X) -- Python runtime assumption - is it really valid? in light of <...> - -## Blockers / Dependencies -List issues or other conditions / blockers - -## General Approach -Invocation example: -```shell -$ mapper-run task.tar.gz --ray-cluster : -``` - -## Steps - -### Must have (p1) -- [ ] subissue2 -- [ ] step 2 - - info - - info - -### Optional / followup (p2) -- [ ] ⌛ step 3 wip -- [ ] step 4 - -## Timelines - -Put your estimations here. Update once certainty changes -- end of week (Feb 3) for prototype with workflows X, Y -- Feb 15 - MVP in production -- Low priority followups can be done later