Content
View differences
Updated by Jens Ulferts over 1 year ago
**As** a project portfolio manager
**I want to** have stages and gates adjust automatically based on changes to preceding/succeeding stages and gates
**so that** administration is simpler and less error prone.
**Acceptance criteria**
* \[open\] Are gaps allowed?
* \[open\] When decreasing a date, will the successor's dates be decreased as well?
* \[open\] Do we want to show all the changes in the modal before the user commits?
* \[open\] Do we want to introduce modification by durations?
* If so, can a duration be set independently (without start and end date set)?
* \[open\] Empty successors
Scenarios:
* Scenarios where there is a stage/gate with a succeeeding stage/gate:
* Predecessor is moved into the future. Both have dates without any gap between them.
* Expected result: The succeeding stage/gate is moved by the same number of days (start and end date)
* Predecessor is moved into the past. Both have dates without any gap between them.
* Expected result: The succeeding stage/gate is moved by the same number of days (start and end date)
* Predecessor is moved into the future. Both have dates with enough gap to include the moved amount of days.
* Expected result: The gap is eaten up. The successor is not moved. There is now a smaller gap between the two.
* Predecessor is moved into the future. Both have dates. There is a gap between the two stages/gates but not enough to completely take in the changed dates of the predecessor.
* Expected result: The gap is eaten up. The successor is moved by the delta of the changed predecessor's end date and the previous gap. There is no gap in the end.
* Predecessor is moved into the past. Both have dates. There is a gap between the two stages/gates.
* Expected result: The succeeding stage/gate is moved by the same number of days (start and end date). The gap continues to exist with the same number of days between predecessor and successor.
* Predecessor is moved into the future. The successor does not have any date set.
* Expected result:
* Predecessor gets it's dates set. The successor does not have any date set.
* Expected result:
* Successor is moved into the future.
* Expected result: A gap is added between predecessor and successor. The predecessor is not moved.
* Successor is moved into the past. There is no gap.
* Expected result: The successor cannot be moved as that would conflict with the predecessor. An error is displayed.
* Successor is moved into the past. There is a gap.
* Expected result: The successor can be moved as long as the change is smaller than the gap. The gap gets eaten up.
* Predecessor has no dates set. Successor is moved into the past.
* Expected result: The successor can be moved. The predecessor does not receive any dates.
**I want to** have stages and gates adjust automatically based on changes to preceding/succeeding stages and gates
**so that** administration is simpler and less error prone.
**Acceptance criteria**
* \[open\] Are gaps allowed?
* \[open\] When decreasing a date, will the successor's dates be decreased as well?
* \[open\] Do we want to show all the changes in the modal before the user commits?
* \[open\] Do we want to introduce modification by durations?
* If so, can a duration be set independently (without start and end date set)?
* \[open\] Empty successors
Scenarios:
* Scenarios where there is a stage/gate with a succeeeding stage/gate:
* Predecessor is moved into the future. Both have dates without any gap between them.
* Expected result: The succeeding stage/gate is moved by the same number of days (start and end date)
* Predecessor is moved into the past. Both have dates without any gap between them.
* Expected result: The succeeding stage/gate is moved by the same number of days (start and end date)
* Predecessor is moved into the future. Both have dates with enough gap to include the moved amount of days.
* Expected result: The gap is eaten up. The successor is not moved. There is now a smaller gap between the two.
* Predecessor is moved into the future. Both have dates. There is a gap between the two stages/gates but not enough to completely take in the changed dates of the predecessor.
* Expected result: The gap is eaten up. The successor is moved by the delta of the changed predecessor's end date and the previous gap. There is no gap in the end.
* Predecessor is moved into the past. Both have dates. There is a gap between the two stages/gates.
* Expected result: The succeeding stage/gate is moved by the same number of days (start and end date). The gap continues to exist with the same number of days between predecessor and successor.
* Predecessor is moved into the future. The successor does not have any date set.
* Expected result:
* Predecessor gets it's dates set. The successor does not have any date set.
* Expected result:
* Successor is moved into the future.
* Expected result: A gap is added between predecessor and successor. The predecessor is not moved.
* Successor is moved into the past. There is no gap.
* Expected result: The successor cannot be moved as that would conflict with the predecessor. An error is displayed.
* Successor is moved into the past. There is a gap.
* Expected result: The successor can be moved as long as the change is smaller than the gap. The gap gets eaten up.
* Predecessor has no dates set. Successor is moved into the past.
* Expected result: The successor can be moved. The predecessor does not receive any dates.