nav[aria-label="Primary Navigation"] { padding: 0; & ul { list-style: none; width: 100%; display: flex; flex-direction: row; justify-content: start; align-items: start; gap: 30px; padding: 0; & li { margin: 0; } & ul li { list-style: none; } } }

How to Implement a 1 Team Member Works on 1 User Story Policy in Portfolio?

Anton Maleev

Hi,

I am doing my first test plan (improved interface):

I have 3 epics x 2 issues each, all with 2d estimation.
I have a team with 2 members each with 40 hours per week capacity equaling 5 days per week.

Portfolio squeezes all issues to just one day implementation, implicating (I guess) that both team members work together on all issues and thus are able to finish them off in just one day.

Is there any configuration magic to avoid this? Especially in software development it is completely unrealistic to put two developers on the same task.

Thanks and regards,

Anton

Comments

Thomas Deiler_db00h3

Dear @Anton Maleev

Especially in software development it is completely unrealistic to put two developers on the same task.

This is not the whole truth: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pair_programming

So long

Thomas

Anton Maleev

Thanks @Thomas Deiler ,

good point, I take the "completely unrealistic" back

Follow up:

https://confluence.atlassian.com/jiraportfolioserver/auto-scheduling-issues-967895245.html

(quote - table transposed)

Technical details: Maximum people assigned per story
Live plans (versions 2.0 to 2.27): You can configure how many people can be assigned to a story.
Plans with the improved interface: Only one (1) person can be assigned to a story.

Puzzling, because I was working with an "improved" plan. Anyway, I switched several times between "live" and "improved" and it suddenly started working as I expected. Worrying that I didn't understand why, though.

Suggestion to Atlassian:
Could be a good idea to expose as much as possible of the governing parameters as configuration options. It would even help to see read-only stuff, just in order to know, how the engine takes its decisions.

Best regards,
Anton

Anton Maleev

Second Follow-up:

I just found out that the configuration for "live" plans is much more verbose than that of the "improved" plans.

It appears to me the "improved" plans are still "work in progress". I am also missing completely the "capacity" information on the plan there.

We will stick to the "live" plans until the "improved" ones are ... improved

We are running 3.6.1 and will keep updating.

Welcome!

It looks like you're new here. Sign in or register to get started.

Quick Links

Find more posts tagged with

advanced-roadmaps