Roadmap updates #3119

codebien · 2023-06-12T09:40:15Z

The current Roadmap is out of date after just one cycle, so we decided it was more convenient to have it as an interactive GitHub project.

codecov-commenter · 2023-06-12T09:49:14Z

Codecov Report

Merging #3119 (211ce4f) into master (9254ce7) will increase coverage by 0.05%.
The diff coverage is 89.47%.

❗ Current head 211ce4f differs from pull request most recent head 28c7603. Consider uploading reports for the commit 28c7603 to get more accurate results

@@            Coverage Diff             @@
##           master    #3119      +/-   ##
==========================================
+ Coverage   73.80%   73.85%   +0.05%     
==========================================
  Files         243      243              
  Lines       18474    18492      +18     
==========================================
+ Hits        13634    13658      +24     
+ Misses       3969     3965       -4     
+ Partials      871      869       -2

Flag	Coverage Δ
ubuntu	`73.79% <89.47%> (+0.06%)`	⬆️
windows	`73.69% <89.47%> (+0.04%)`	⬆️

Flags with carried forward coverage won't be shown. Click here to find out more.

Impacted Files	Coverage Δ
output/cloud/output.go	`74.14% <33.33%> (ø)`
output/cloud/expv2/metrics_client.go	`55.55% <80.00%> (-2.45%)`	⬇️
output/cloud/expv2/output.go	`86.84% <95.12%> (+2.50%)`	⬆️
cloudapi/client.go	`73.46% <100.00%> (+1.30%)`	⬆️
output/cloud/expv2/flush.go	`84.61% <100.00%> (ø)`

... and 1 file with indirect coverage changes

olegbespalov

Looks good to me 👍 Thanks for taking care of it 🙇

However, it's probably worth requesting a review from @dgzlopes @markjmeier

codebien · 2023-06-12T12:10:06Z

However, it's probably worth requesting a review from @dgzlopes @markjmeier

Before pinging them directly, I think @andrewslotin knows if it is aligned with their vision, asking for a review.

codebien · 2023-06-12T12:14:15Z

ROADMAP.md

+
+*see*: [#2974](https://github.com/grafana/k6/issues/2974)
+
+### HTTP API redesign


@imiric Having it as one of the next short-term is it realistic for you?

Definitely not 😅

While we'll be delivering it in phases, making it actually usable as an improvement over the current HTTP API will take a few development cycles.

So I would leave it as a long-term project, as we still don't have a clear timeline of when it will actually be delivered.

olegbespalov · 2023-06-13T06:43:26Z

ROADMAP.md

@@ -6,21 +6,37 @@ This roadmap covers user-oriented features, UX improvements, JavaScript support,

 We hope this updated roadmap provides a clear overview of our plans for k6's future development. As always, we welcome feedback, corrections, and suggestions to make this roadmap more comprehensive, accessible, and valuable for the k6 community.

-## Short-term goals
+## Recently completed


One thing in my mind is to maybe not switch the title from Short-term goals to Recently completed because we released the modules as experimental. Maybe the goal itself is changed a bit. E.g. for the GRPC extension the next milestone is extension stabilization and merging it back to the core.

Also, we have no listed here, but maybe we should share here some plans about merging to core other experimental extensions that we have, like the xk6-timers and xk6-websockets.

WDYT?

Maybe the goal itself is changed a bit. E.g. for the GRPC extension the next milestone is extension stabilization and merging it back to the core.

Also, we have no listed here, but maybe we should share here some plans about merging to core other experimental extensions that we have, like the xk6-timers and xk6-websockets.

I would avoid it because I don't think they are short-term so having them make this roadmap unrealistic. Based on our historical data they seem to be mid/long term. I would prefer setting the fact we provided a solution to the main problem as delivered, otherwise, most of the items here will be stuck because they are huge features that never will be implemented in one step (and they could require over years improvements).

I would prefer setting the fact we provided a solution to the main problem as delivered, otherwise, most of the items here will be stuck because they are huge features that never will be implemented in one step (and they could require over years improvements).

Yeah, but that fact is recorded in the release notes, right? The roadmap always will contain something just because it's a roadmap. It's our plan.

Just in case, I'm not saying that these (webcrypto and GRPC) modules should remain in the short-term goals, but I'm trying to say that they should be presented somehow in our roadmap. Otherwise, at some point, they could look abandoned. 😢

I partly agree with Oleg. The roadmap is not the place to list anything that already happened. It's by definition a plan of what will happen in the future. If some goals were completed and shipped, they should just be removed from the roadmap, and new items should take their place.

@olegbespalov They wouldn't look abandoned, just done. As you say, users would be aware of them from our release notes, documentation, etc.

So I vote against changing the title of this section, and for removing the gRPC streaming support and WebCrypto projects. Even if there are still some things to iron out in both, they're probably not worth mentioning here.

They wouldn't look abandoned, just done. As you say, users would be aware of them from our release notes, documentation, etc.

That's the point they aren't just done while they are prefixed as k6/experimental/. They are somewhere in their lifecycle (hopefully in the middle), so only if they become just a k6/ or removed could they be considered done.

However, I believe that we should close the #2020 and open a new one about making the k6/experimental/grpc stable. And that new task could be presented in a roadmap in mid/long term.

I guess this boils down to the "definition of done", but I see it as the feature being ready to use, i.e. generally available. Experimental modules are subject to change, but they're still considered stable and usable.

The support for gRPC streaming and WebCrypto is "done" in that sense, and we can track the minor leftover changes outside of the roadmap. As we discussed on Slack, we don't need to mention minor tasks on the roadmap.

👍 for closing #2020.

The support for gRPC streaming and WebCrypto is "done" in that sense

I also second this idea. The main issue is to us providing a solution to the problem. The experimental lifecycle should be tracked separately and I see it as a minor issue from the User's point of view (I judge it as minor based on the fact no one opened an issue for asking us to push out a specific module from the experimental phase).

Replace the static text with an interactive GitHub project.

codebien · 2023-06-15T13:01:39Z

I replaced the static text with the link to the new GitHub project.

codebien · 2023-06-15T13:05:25Z

I think it's a bit difficult to discover the ROADMAP.md file or the project itself. Should we add a link from the README too?

olegbespalov · 2023-06-15T13:17:39Z

I think it's a bit difficult to discover the ROADMAP.md file or the project itself. Should we add a link from the README too?

I believe we should add a link to the ROADMAP from the readme.

One minor thing (and I'm not solid on that), keep in mind the current content of the ROADMAP.MD, maybe it could be summarized as a few sentences and turned into the section in README.md where it is more discoverable and has fewer jumps for our customers.

imiric · 2023-06-15T16:43:34Z

I think it's a bit difficult to discover the ROADMAP.md file or the project itself. Should we add a link from the README too?

I would drop the ROADMAP.md file entirely, and just have a link in the README to the GH board, now that we have one. We don't need a separate document, or a link to that document that then links to the board itself.

olegbespalov · 2023-06-16T07:25:16Z

I still prefer a few more sentences that give some context to the roadmap instead of just linking to the board. For example, this one:

Remember that timeframes and priorities may shift, but we believe it's important to share our vision and allow users to plan accordingly.

from the ROADMAP.md, I believe it is essential to have, simply because of transparency.

So haven't something like:

Our team is dedicated to continuously improving k6 and providing the best user experience possible. The roadmap covers user-oriented features, UX improvements, JavaScript support, and k6 internals that our team will focus on. Remember that timeframes and priorities may shift, but we believe it's important to share our vision and allow users to plan accordingly.

We hope the roadmap provides a clear overview of our plans for k6's future development. As always, we welcome feedback, corrections, and suggestions to make this roadmap more comprehensive, accessible, and valuable for the k6 community.

as a section doesn't harm our README

UPD: As discussed internally added a suggestion via commit 3a6da9f

README.md

olegbespalov

Looks great! 👍 Thanks for taking care here & creating a GH project with Roadmap 🙇

Roadmap updates marking completed steps

bba7631

codebien self-assigned this Jun 12, 2023

github-actions bot requested review from imiric and olegbespalov June 12, 2023 09:40

codebien mentioned this pull request Jun 12, 2023

V0.45.0 release notes #3115

Merged

olegbespalov previously approved these changes Jun 12, 2023

View reviewed changes

codebien requested a review from andrewslotin June 12, 2023 12:05

codebien commented Jun 12, 2023

View reviewed changes

olegbespalov reviewed Jun 13, 2023

View reviewed changes

We replace the static text with an interactive roadmap

b692fed

Replace the static text with an interactive GitHub project.

codebien dismissed olegbespalov’s stale review via b692fed June 15, 2023 12:59

olegbespalov previously approved these changes Jun 15, 2023

View reviewed changes

Delete ROADMAP.md

1fccc87

codebien dismissed olegbespalov’s stale review via 1fccc87 June 15, 2023 19:12

Link the roadmap from the README

ac17f21

olegbespalov and others added 2 commits June 16, 2023 10:00

Add ROADMAP section

3a6da9f

readme: Roadmap section updates

8c3f5a9

codebien force-pushed the update-roadmap branch from ad17636 to 8c3f5a9 Compare June 16, 2023 08:18

readme: Drop the roadmap link

5bcc6cf

codebien requested a review from olegbespalov June 16, 2023 08:22

imiric previously approved these changes Jun 16, 2023

View reviewed changes

README.md Outdated Show resolved Hide resolved

olegbespalov previously approved these changes Jun 16, 2023

View reviewed changes

codebien dismissed olegbespalov’s stale review via 28c7603 June 16, 2023 09:02

codebien dismissed imiric’s stale review via 28c7603 June 16, 2023 09:02

Update README.md

28c7603

codebien requested a review from imiric June 16, 2023 09:04

olegbespalov approved these changes Jun 16, 2023

View reviewed changes

imiric approved these changes Jun 16, 2023

View reviewed changes

codebien merged commit 9e48c38 into master Jun 16, 2023

codebien deleted the update-roadmap branch June 16, 2023 09:38

Provide feedback

Saved searches

Use saved searches to filter your results more quickly

Roadmap updates #3119

Roadmap updates #3119

codebien commented Jun 12, 2023 •

edited

Loading

codecov-commenter commented Jun 12, 2023 •

edited

Loading

olegbespalov left a comment

codebien commented Jun 12, 2023 •

edited

Loading

codebien Jun 12, 2023

imiric Jun 15, 2023

olegbespalov Jun 13, 2023

codebien Jun 13, 2023

olegbespalov Jun 13, 2023

imiric Jun 15, 2023

olegbespalov Jun 15, 2023

olegbespalov Jun 15, 2023

imiric Jun 15, 2023

codebien Jun 15, 2023

codebien commented Jun 15, 2023

codebien commented Jun 15, 2023

olegbespalov commented Jun 15, 2023 •

edited

Loading

imiric commented Jun 15, 2023

olegbespalov commented Jun 16, 2023 •

edited

Loading

olegbespalov left a comment


		see: [#2974](https://github.com/grafana/k6/issues/2974)

		### HTTP API redesign

Roadmap updates #3119

Roadmap updates #3119

Conversation

codebien commented Jun 12, 2023 • edited Loading

codecov-commenter commented Jun 12, 2023 • edited Loading

Codecov Report

olegbespalov left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

codebien commented Jun 12, 2023 • edited Loading

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

codebien commented Jun 15, 2023

codebien commented Jun 15, 2023

olegbespalov commented Jun 15, 2023 • edited Loading

imiric commented Jun 15, 2023

olegbespalov commented Jun 16, 2023 • edited Loading

olegbespalov left a comment

Choose a reason for hiding this comment

codebien commented Jun 12, 2023 •

edited

Loading

codecov-commenter commented Jun 12, 2023 •

edited

Loading

codebien commented Jun 12, 2023 •

edited

Loading

olegbespalov commented Jun 15, 2023 •

edited

Loading

olegbespalov commented Jun 16, 2023 •

edited

Loading