1,107
edits
Support/PlatformEngineering: Difference between revisions
→Evaluation
m (→Evaluation) |
|||
| Line 13: | Line 13: | ||
= Evaluation = | = Evaluation = | ||
During the upstreaming process, we have developed some concern about the viability of building on top of Tiki 5.1. We will hence re-evaluate our options once the upstreaming is finished, before we actively port our production instance. | During the upstreaming process, we have developed some concern about the viability of building on top of Tiki 5.1, as the upstreaming and initial testing has not gone as smoothly as planned. We will hence re-evaluate our options once the upstreaming is finished, before we actively port our production instance. | ||
We had originally intended porting our production instance to 5.1, running through a couple of release cycles, and then evaluating. However, we can reduce time to evaluate and possible investment by performing this evaluation earlier. Finishing upstreaming gets us to the point of having paid our ethical debt to TikiWiki by giving back our changes and improvements to the community, so this was important to complete. | We had originally intended porting our production instance to 5.1, running through a couple of release cycles, and then evaluating. However, we can reduce time to evaluate and possible investment by performing this evaluation earlier. Finishing upstreaming gets us to the point of having paid our ethical debt to TikiWiki by giving back our changes and improvements to the community, so this was important to complete. | ||
| Line 19: | Line 19: | ||
The evaluation criteria are as follows: | The evaluation criteria are as follows: | ||
* TikiWiki 5.1 Codebase: This can be evaluated by looking at the code and running tests against tiki-trunk.mozilla.com. | * TikiWiki 5.1 Codebase: This can be evaluated by looking at the code and running tests against tiki-trunk.mozilla.com. | ||
** Is the new codebase easier to understand and develop further than the old one? That is, will it be easier/more enjoyable for our webdevs to do their jobs? | ** Is the new codebase easier to understand and develop further than the old one? That is, will it be easier/more enjoyable for our webdevs to do their jobs? [all devs, subjective] | ||
** Will we be able to get more done in a release cycle? | ** Will we be able to get more done in a release cycle? [all devs, subjective] | ||
** Is the new codebase more robust? | ** Is the new codebase more robust? [all devs, subjective] | ||
** Is the new codebase at least as performant as the old one? | ** Is the new codebase at least as performant as the old one? [?, objective: run perf tests] | ||
** Is the new codebase actively good on each of these criteria, as opposed to just better than before? | ** Is the new codebase actively good on each of these criteria, as opposed to just better than before? [all devs] | ||
** How does the current codebase perform versus our litmus tests? [WebQA, objective: litmus tests] (We will not be able to run Selenium tests without porting themes as it depends on the DOM.) | |||
* Our implementation | * Our implementation | ||
** How would we implement our build process in order to keep our TikiWiki up to date? | ** How would we implement our build process in order to keep our TikiWiki up to date? [laura, [[https://wiki.mozilla.org/Support/BuildProcessTiki51 Draft Build Process]] | ||
** How will we separate out our local changes that are not going to be upstreamed to TikiWiki? | ** How will we separate out our local changes that are not going to be upstreamed to TikiWiki? [laura, [[https://wiki.mozilla.org/Support/BuildProcessTiki51 Draft Build Process]] | ||
** What is the scope of these local changes? | ** What is the scope of these local changes? | ||
** What is the complexity and time required to create and maintain a local codebase consisting of templates, modules, and overridden files? | ** What is the complexity and time required to create and maintain a local codebase consisting of templates, modules, and overridden files? | ||