Skip Navigation
58 comments
  • I don't know when this meme was originally made, but my boss unironically has this taped to his office door, and it's glorious

  • Backlogs are great. Sometimes while working on prioritized tasks the depriorized backlog tasks are made irrelevant and thus you never have to do them and you don't waste effort. Call it strategic deprioritization or perhaps even tactical laziness.

  • IMO it's good to have a "shadow backlog" for stuff like this. Keep the actual backlog for prioritised product work, "ideas" and tech debt can be kept in GitHub Issues or even just a wiki page somewhere.

    • I have two levels of backlog. The first level is my curated list of tickets that are highly worth doing in the near future and is limited in size. It's currently larger than I'd like at 30-something (for a team of a little under 10), but I'm trying to get the team to focus on it more after historically neglecting it.

      The second level is literally just everything else. Hundreds upon hundreds of tickets, ranging from restructuring unit tests (which will frankly never happen unless the structure of the tests somehow became a major barrier) to cool features that just aren't important enough yet (or would take too long). Plus all the super low risk bugs, often in edge cases that nobody really cares about yet or aren't worth the time to fix yet. And then there's all the automation style tickets about improving the handling of something (commonly edge cases of things already automated for the happy path), but often that something just isn't common enough to be worth it.

      Tickets in the second level sometimes do get done. Usually because some issue becomes more common, enough people ask for it, or we simply finally have time for a new feature (can only do so many of those at a time). A common theme I have is I'll encounter a problem, file a ticket, then eventually encounter the problem enough times that I go, "fuck it, I'll do it myself".

    • Meh, I prefer to call it trash. What's the point of a backlog nobody works on, and so hopelessly irrelevant that the issues themselves may no longer exist or are otherwise outdated?

  • In our case, tossing stuff in the backlog to never get done is just part of trying to get through life.

    We have an... eccentric colleague who demands the craziest stuff that no one else wants. Now in a sane world, we explain that his requests are either extremely costly for a minor thing no one cares about, or, like 90% of his requests, run explicitly counter to what our customers want even if we could trivially do it. He is not a customer nor is he in contact with customers or marketing or sales, he's in a different technical team but has an "armchair enthusiast" interest in my teams product.

    We used to try to have that discussion to reject items to make it clear they will never ever get worked on. However whenever we did that he would demand hour after hour after hour of meeting to discuss each request that we want to reject and convince us why his requirement is the most awesome thing in the planet, and with enough meetings maybe we'd stop being so clueless and come around to recognize the brilliance.

    So now we toss it in the backlog, and there's always a point of comparison like "Customer giving us $40M asks for feature X", and he has to rationally accept why X jumps ahead of his backlog items, even if he is displeased. One new project manager made the mistake of trying to close out the backlog items and the meeting invites flew about us daring to ignore his awesome requests.

    So we have a chunk of backlog that every one knows will never happen, and in fact if our backlog ever dried up, then we'd have a big problem because then we'd actually have to have that tough conversation about why his ideas are bad. At this point some of his wacky stories have been on the backlog for over five years.

58 comments