Defining our Agile Hierarchy & Issue Structure

[renman-ymd]

We are setting up our GitHub Project board and Issue Templates. Since we are a team of 6, we need a structure that keeps us organized without creating too much admin work.

We need to map the project requirements (Part 1 LISP , Part 2 Compiler/VM ) to Agile layers. Please vote on which depth we should use:

Option 1: The "GitHub Native" (3 Layers)

Recommended for reduced overhead.

• Structure: Epic -> Story (The Issue) -> Task (Markdown Check-boxes)
• How it works:
  • Epic: A broad component (e.g. Part1: Parser Implementation or Part2: Virutal Machine).
  • Story (The Issue): A deliverable feature (e.g. Implement S-Expression handling for Lists).
  • Tasks: Detailed technical steps inside the Issue description (e.g. - [] Handle open parenthesis, - [] Handle nested list).
• Pros: keeps the Kanban board clean (fewer cards to move); uses GitHub's "Tasklist" feature natively.
• Cons: Individual tasks don't have their own status/assignee (the whole Story is assigned to 1-2 people).

Option 2: The "Granular" Approach (3 Layers + Sub-issues)

Recommended for maximum parallelization.

• Structure: Epic -> Story -> Sub-Task (Separate Issues)
• How it works:
  • Epic: Same as Above.
  • Story: A feature request (e.g. Implement Arithmetic Built-ins).
  • Sub-Task: We create tiny issues for every small step and link them to the Story (e.g., Implement 'add' operator, Implement 'div' operator).
• Pros: We can assign 6 different people to e.g. 6 different math operators easily.
• Cons: The Board (GitHub Project) will have hundreds of cards; requires strict linking between issues.

Option 3: The "Full Hierarchy" (4 Layers)

Recommended if we want to separate Part 1 and Part 2 strictly.

• Structure: Initiative -> Epic -> Story -> Task
• How it works:
  • Initiative: Part 1 (Interpreter), Part 2 (Compiler).
  • Epic: Data Types, Process Management, Bonus Features.
  • Story: Implement Boolean Types.
  • Task: Define True/False symbols.
• Pros: extremely structured; good for generating reports.
• Cons: Likely too much administrative work for a 4-week deadline; Overkill for 6 people.