[Fiware-miwi] Epic naming. Splitting up Epics?

["Lasse Öörni"]

Hi,
from a pure functionality point of view the LudoCraft GE's could be split
up as follows:

FIWARE.Epic.MiWi.Synchronization.RealTimeProtocol
FIWARE.Epic.MiWi.Synchronization.SceneAPI (this page already exists)
FIWARE.Epic.MiWi.VirtualCharacters.CharacterDescription
FIWARE.Epic.MiWi.VirtualCharacters.Animation

However this would practically involve rewriting the epic descriptions,
during which the original "Open Call 2" epic texts would be at least
partially lost. If this is not a problem then it's fine by me.

> I am worried!
> Is there a danger that the suggested change in epic naming cascades to
> all documents, backlog items, materializing items etc. (features, user
> stories, and work items) due to *inconsistencies that will be
> subsequently found by "C4 - Valid and Consistent Hierarchy" checks*?
> What is the estimated amount of work before everything is settled?
> What risks correcting these 11 identifiers introduces to the real goals
> of the project?
>
> BR
> Ari
>
>
> On 2014-06-26 12:26, Marti Christof (mach) wrote:
>> Dear WP13 GEi owners
>>
>> The problem with the naming of the epics is, that we need to add an
>> EpicId.
>> Schema: FIWARE.Epic.Chapter.Enabler[.EpicId]*.EpicId
>>
>> At the moment many WP13-epics are only named after the GE itself. e.g.
>> - FIWARE.Epic.MiWi.2D-UI
>> So we either need to add a generic EpicId (see below) or split up the
>> Epics in multiple meaningful peaces.
>> - FIWARE.Epic.MiWi.2D-UI.FunctionalityX
>> - FIWARE.Epic.MiWi.2D-UI.FunctionalityY
>> Because some of the Epic Description are also to long (see report "All
>> issues") and need to be shortened, this might be a good possiblity  to
>> fix these issues too.


-- 
Lasse Öörni
Game Programmer
LudoCraft Ltd.