Hi, I would be curious if there is any sentiment about potentially using projects, not tasks, to represent website features. My team builds websites on a common platform. We have "components" in a typical Mid-tier level that are shared across the websites we have, so for example a component to search the contents of each of the sites is the same.
I assumed it would be best to use tasks to represent individual features of each of the webpages on the front end of our sites. Not tasks for the webpages, but for the features. Each webpage, for example the homepage of site x, is a folder. On that home page I have some "features" - the aforementioned search functionality, an email sign-up box (which needs to interact with the mid-tier because that is where the Emails are generated), a "suggested content" box that will update and deliver links to the user, depending on whether she/he is logged in or not. These are features.
I had thought initially that I'd represent the features as tasks, and that I'd set up a "closed" status that would say something like "in production" or another permanent-sounding term, as these tasks should not fall away as in essence I am using tasks here as something permanent, kind of like when tasks are clients if Wrike is used as a CRM.
However I am stuck on one element of this set-up: In some cases I have multiple versions of the same webpage. This may be because the visitor comes from a different source, or is logged in and the page changes. Each page "version" has a slightly different set of features displayed. So I initially was thinking the fact that I can nest subtasks to multiple parents would be useful, as I could create the versions and then just add the common features under each, and the one feature different would be only included in the particular page on which it was different. So say three versions:
- one with 5 features, the default
- one with 4 the same, the 5th changed
- one with features 1 - 3 same, 4th changed, 5th the same.
I would represent this by having three tasks, one for each version, and the common features would each nest under these three tasks as subtasks.
What I'm wondering about is whether there is any reason to go "big" and actually use projects for these features. This would leave me a ton of projects across Wrike, but is that a bad thing? Projects are so lightweight, one of the main pluses of Wrike I've found, that they in a lot of ways function as just bigger tasks. The big thing here I thought I'd accomplish is the ability to create folders under the projects, to better group things like these three versions. With the folders, I can keep the main folder of the webpage a bit cleaner, for example if in the future I needed to add feature requests to the page and want to list them separately.
Many thanks for any tips here!
Iniciar sesión para dejar un comentario.