I’m curious about the approach taken when an extra acceptance criterion is discovered while a user story is still in progress. Typically, I would create a new ticket if the story is already completed and closed, but what do you do when the work is ongoing and not yet ready for testing? Please share your strategies and experiences with this scenario.
In my experience, if an extra acceptance criterion comes up during active development, it’s crucial to evaluate its impact on the current scope. I tend to add it to the existing ticket if the change is minor and doesn’t significantly alter the workflow. However, if it introduces considerable complexity or a shift in functionality, discussing it with the team and potentially creating a separate follow-up task is more appropriate. This approach ensures that the work remains manageable and the documentation accurately reflects the evolving requirements.
From my personal experience, the decision depends largely on the size and impact of the added criterion. In many instances, especially when the change is relatively minor and doesn’t affect the rest of the user story’s scope dramatically, I update the current ticket. This means using the existing environment to document all alterations in requirements, which aids in traceability. However, if the new criterion introduces complexities that could affect integration or testing deeply, I lean towards creating a sub-task or related ticket. This method maintains clarity regarding what has been changed and why, keeping both the development workflow and team communications highly efficient.
i usually update the current ticket if it’s just a small tweak, so all context stays together. but if the change feels like a whole new requirement, i talk with the team and probably open a new one. comms is key, ya know?
Based on my experience, I prefer updating the current ticket when a new acceptance criterion comes up during active work, provided the scope remains fairly consistent. Keeping everything within the same ticket helps maintain a clear record of what was considered at the time of development. However, in cases where the additional criterion represents a significant shift or requires its own set of design discussions, it might be more appropriate to create a supplementary ticket. Clear communication with the team can help ensure that any changes are thoroughly reviewed and documented.
In my experience, when an additional acceptance criterion is discovered during ongoing development, I lean towards updating the current ticket. This method helps maintain the continuity of the work and ensures that the evolution of requirements is documented in one place. However, if the new criterion appears to significantly extend the scope or introduce complex changes, I prefer to split it into a separate task to avoid confusion during testing and integration. This approach has proven efficient in my projects, balancing clarity and flexibility in managing evolving requirements.