Ontology: The usage of the "in progress" category of projects is not clear

[akleinau]

Description of the issue

Its not very clear since which point an issue moves to "in progress". The name doesn't work with our open issue -> discuss -> implement -> review strategy.

Ideas of solution

Rename "in progress" to "in discussion"

to make clear that every issue that gets discussed right now is in this category. Than we have a nice movement from:

open - issue got created but isn't worked on
in discussion - issues that are getting discussed
review in progress - issues that got implemented and are now reviewed
reviewer approved - issues either waiting for further reviewers or to get merged
done - issues that are closed and done

Further advantages:

• people who want to help get issues where they can help ordered in the two categories "in discussion" and "in progress"
• issues where the discussion stopped for some reason for some time don't get forgotten (important because we often work on many issues at the same time)

Workflow checklist

• [x] I am aware of the
  workflow
  for this repository

[akleinau]

@Bachibouzouk what do you think?

[Bachibouzouk]

I think it is a good idea to add information about the PR status. You should also ask @stap-m, @l-emele and @jannahastings who have more experienced the workflow than I :)

[jannahastings]

I agree it would be useful. We could even have open -> in discussion -> in progress (i.e. only when someone is working on the changes in a branch) -> review in progress (when PR has been created) -> reviewer approved -> done.

[akleinau]

yes, that sounds even better, then I'll implement it that way.

[akleinau]

should both the PR and the related issue be in the "review in progress" tab or general in the project? This looks a bit redundant.

[jannahastings]

I guess, even though it looks redundant, the PR has to have some status, right? So I say yes.