-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 46
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
release-schema: add planning.id #1335
Conversation
Signed-off-by: Yohanna Lisnichuk <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Yohanna Lisnichuk <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Yohanna Lisnichuk <[email protected]>
schema/release-schema.json
Outdated
@@ -122,6 +122,14 @@ | |||
"description": "Information from the planning phase of the contracting process. Note that many other fields can be filled in a planning release, in the appropriate fields in other schema sections; these would likely be estimates at this stage, e.g. value in tender.", | |||
"type": "object", | |||
"properties": { | |||
"id": { | |||
"title": "Planning ID", | |||
"description": "An identifier for this planning stage.", |
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Is there a particular reason to use 'stage' rather than 'process' (as in the previous commit)?
According to #866, in 1.2 the guidance will be that the planning
section should only appear in planning processes, which are defined separately from contracting processes.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Is there a particular reason to use 'stage' rather than 'process' (as in the previous commit)?
For consistency. Planning description uses "planning phase", Planning milestones "planning stage", but planning documents "planning process". But you are right, happy to change it back to process, and maybe update the other fields' descriptions to process as well?
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
Aha, I see. Yes, let's go with "planning process" here, since the three terms are used equally and interchangeably and "planning process" aligns better with 1.2. For changing the other descriptions, maybe you can open a new issue about ensuring that the terminology in the planning section makes sense for planning processes (similar to #1154) in case we need to make any other changes.
There was a problem hiding this comment.
Choose a reason for hiding this comment
The reason will be displayed to describe this comment to others. Learn more.
I've updated all the references "planning" in the release schema now
…24-planning-id Signed-off-by: Yohanna Lisnichuk <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Yohanna Lisnichuk <[email protected]>
…24-planning-id Signed-off-by: Yohanna Lisnichuk <[email protected]>
Signed-off-by: Yohanna Lisnichuk <[email protected]>
closes #924