Repository navigation
Define Epic, PBI, Task, and Bug issue bodies #87
Description
The native issue types represent different planning altitudes and cannot share one undifferentiated three-section body. Aggregators need outcome and decomposition guidance; delivery leaves need implementation-ready detail.
Request
Add one concise Types page for Epic, PBI, Task, and Bug, and reduce Hierarchy to the shared taxonomy, promotion/demotion, and containment overview.
Acceptance criteria
- Epic defines strategic outcome, Initiative/OKR relationship, Why/How/What framing, success measures, scope, decomposition decisions, readiness, and aggregate closure
- PBI defines a bounded body-of-work outcome, aggregate acceptance criteria, interface/decomposition decisions, readiness, nested-PBI rules, and aggregate closure
- Task defines one deliverable, implementation-ready acceptance criteria and decisions, test-first checklist, one-PR repository delivery, and an audited operational completion path when no repository artifact exists
- Bug is a Task-level delivery subtype with observed/expected behavior, reproduction, environment, regression, workaround, root-cause boundary, and regression-test-first plan
- A defect requiring multiple pull requests becomes a PBI with Bug/Task children rather than an oversized Bug
- Feature is described as temporary live metadata pending migration, not a hierarchy level
- Type guidance treats Bug as a native delivery type and Feature as temporary metadata, never as hierarchy labels
- Hierarchy remains concise and links to type pages instead of repeating their bodies
- Types index, links, lint, clean build, CI, and Copilot review are green
Technical decisions
Single type slot: Epic, PBI, Task, and Bug use native issue types. Feature describes work kind rather than planning altitude and is retired only after migration.
Leaf delivery: Task and Bug are the only issue types that directly own implementation branches and closing pull requests. Operational Tasks without a repository artifact close through explicit, verified evidence recorded in the issue.
Aggregate delivery: Epic and PBI progress comes from native sub-issues. They close only when children and aggregate acceptance criteria are complete.
File ownership: This Task owns only the Types subtree and Types/Hierarchy.md. Process Task #88 exclusively owns Process/Format.md, including removal of legacy Bug/Feature label wording.
Implementation plan
Type pages
- Add the Epic body and lifecycle page
- Add the PBI body and lifecycle page
- Add the Task body and lifecycle page
- Add the Bug body and lifecycle page
- Reduce Hierarchy to shared taxonomy and routing
Validation
- Verify Types index and cross-type links
- Run documentation checks, CI, and the Copilot review loop
Activity
MariusStorhaug commentedon Jul 25, 2026
Scope correction before implementation: Process Task #88 already owns the canonical Format page, so this Task now owns only
Issues/Types/andTypes/Hierarchy.md. The duplicated Format acceptance line was replaced with a Types-only rule. This preserves true parallel execution and avoids a shared-file conflict; #88 still explicitly removes the legacy label wording from Format.MariusStorhaug commentedon Jul 25, 2026
Implementation is published in draft PR #93 from commit
26c217a.origin/main(39411c5) and contains blocker squash3e04c260MariusStorhaug commentedon Jul 25, 2026
The owned implementation is complete through commit
c4e9d24and local validation is green.#how-to-express-the-hierarchyanchor without editing any Process or cross-document pageUpdate-DocumentationIndex.ps1update and-CheckpassedTest-DocumentationLink.ps1passed: all documentation links resolveIssues/Types/and the Types subsection ofsrc/zensical.toml; pinned Super-Linter and the other PR jobs are running in CIMariusStorhaug commentedon Jul 25, 2026
All pull request CI jobs are green on PR #93.
MariusStorhaug commentedon Jul 25, 2026
The first explicit Copilot review round found one valid terminology mismatch in
Epic.md.6c48e9bMariusStorhaug commentedon Jul 25, 2026
The automated review loop has converged on commit
6c48e9b.COMMENTED, zero inline comments, and a clean resultorigin/mainremains39411c5and is fully included in the branchMariusStorhaug commentedon Jul 25, 2026
PR #93 is ready for independent review and squash auto-merge is enabled.
BLOCKED; it has not merged6c48e9bMariusStorhaugand the only label isNoReleaseMariusStorhaug commentedon Jul 25, 2026
A valid ambiguity found while reviewing combined PR #94 has been propagated to #87.
348e58eMariusStorhaug commentedon Jul 25, 2026
The propagated Hierarchy clarification has passed every refreshed gate on head
348e58e.COMMENTED, zero new inline comments, and a clean resultMariusStorhaug commentedon Jul 25, 2026
Three additional valid Types grammar findings from combined PR #94 have been propagated to #87 in commit
6d48368.MariusStorhaug commentedon Jul 25, 2026
The propagated Types grammar fixes have passed every refreshed gate on final head
6d48368.COMMENTED, zero new inline comments, and a clean resultMariusStorhaug commentedon Jul 25, 2026
PR #93 was returned to ready state and squash auto-merge was re-enabled after the final
6d48368gates completed. It remains open andBLOCKEDonly on independent approval; #87 is scope-frozen again.MariusStorhaug commentedon Jul 25, 2026
Live-default closure audit found
origin/mainadvanced tof3aede8through PR #95, which changed only PR description guidance.ea94f00with the required trailerMariusStorhaug commentedon Jul 25, 2026
Delivery has been consolidated into combined PR #94 at the user's direction.
Issues/Types/is identical between final PR 📖 [Docs]: Native issue types now have dedicated guidance #93 and PR 📖 [Docs]: Issue planning, types, and relationships are defined #94src/zensical.tomldifference is 📖 [Docs]: Issue planning, types, and relationships are defined #94's owned Process navigation entriesFixes MSXOrg/docs#87to 📖 [Docs]: Issue planning, types, and relationships are defined #94 under the current required PR ending-block format📖 [Docs]: Issue planning and relationships are defined (#94)