dcsil / csc491 Goto Github PK

This repo has workflows that have no defined timeouts and/or are not using self-hosted.

We use self hosted runners to avoid overage costs associated with GitHub Actions. However, we don't have a lot of workers to handle all of the load.
To ensure a single build doesn't spend hours and monopolize our workers, we limit each job to 20 minutes.
Please add a timeout to your jobs. We will disable your actions until you add them.

Your build may also be missing self-hosted in the runs-on field.

Docs: https://docs.github.com/en/actions/learn-github-actions/workflow-syntax-for-github-actions#jobsjob_idtimeout-minutes
Example:

jobs:
  build:
    runs-on: self-hosted # This is required
    timeout-minutes: 20 # Add this line here

Affected Workflows:

• Update A4 to include myself as one of the two inteviewees
• Add more links to UX resources on A4
• UX Presentation
• Create A6 Rubric and assignment page
• Participation, add in requirement for a written paragraph or 2
• Use Cases should be recorded in A3, and updated. Finalized in Software
• A4 should have a paragraph explaining how the roadmap changed
• A5 should explain the changes to the roadmap since A3
• Redo the software rubric to take into account quality of application/product/use cases better

Describe the concern
If a member of the team deletes a Stack Decision on stackshare.io, the decision still shows up on the Stack & Decisions under Team Decisions.
The Student Decisions number updates correctly.

Why is this important?
The data is not reflected properly, so team members or instructors looking for stack decisions may be mislead.

Ideal solution
Team Decisions removes a stack decision when the stack decision is deleted on stackshare.io and the sync button is pressed.

Describe the concern
So 491 and 454 assignments tend to overlap on a lot of topics especially A2 454 (part 2 market research section) and A3 491 (Product & Research folders section) and we tend to have the same answers for many of the requirements in both assignment sections.
For example, A2-454 asks us to describe the market, target market, etc and A3-491 sort of does the same...
Do we restate the same content or should we be tackling the 491 assignment in a different lens?

Why is this important?
I would like to make sure that I understood the assignment requirement correctly :)

Ideal solution
It would be nice to re-use the content we created in the 454 assignment assuming they're both asking for the same thing.

Just looking at our group's problem space and the way that we're looking to solve it, would it be possible to use a pre-existing ML model that's already out there that already does what we're trying to analyze?

(I.E we're trying to perform sentiment analysis on text, but there's already tons of models out there, that's not including APIs such as Microsoft's Cognitive API, Google's Natural Language API and Grammarly's own implementation of sentiment analysis)

I'm just trying to avoid going down the black hole that is creating a ML model that is going to yield decent results, whereas we could be implementing other features for the MVP.

I used Microsoft's Accessibility insights to check our app's accessibility and used its suggestions to fix those bugs.

Describe the concern

Our team was unaware of the dates of any in-class demos, until otherwise stated on Slack. While there is an assignment that explains the demos (https://csc491.dcsil.ca/assignments/a6/), the dates of the 4 demos are not displayed onto our source of truth for all assignments and their deadlines https://csc491.dcsil.ca/assignments/.

Why is this important?

If discoverability of a deadline is low, then people are less prepared.

For example, my team took an extension on A3 - not realizing this demo is coming up. We thankfully were notified about the demo 2 days before. However, this means we will have <48h to create a Hello World app.

Ideal solution

TABLE CHANGES:
From the assignments page https://csc491.dcsil.ca/assignments/, display all 4 demos in the table. Call them "Demo 1", "Demo 2", etc each with a weight of 2.5% and their respective due dates. On-click of "Demo X", navigate to the exact same webpage: https://csc491.dcsil.ca/assignments/a6/.

A6 PAGE CHANGES:
Adjust the title to not say "Assignment 6".

Additional context
None

Note: This does not guarantee the concern will be addressed, or the ideal solution you presented will be used. Ultimately, the course content needs to be approved by the instructor and, in some cases, a quorum of students after the term has started.

dcsil/CSC491 has workflows that have no defined timeouts.

GitHub Actions gives the DCSIL organization up to 3000 minutes per month. To ensure a single build doesn't spend hours eating up those minutes, we limit each job to 20 minutes.
Please add a timeout to your jobs. We will disable your actions until you add them.

Docs: https://docs.github.com/en/actions/learn-github-actions/workflow-syntax-for-github-actions#jobsjob_idtimeout-minutes
Example:

jobs:
  build:
    runs-on: ubuntu-latest
    timeout-minutes: 20 # Add this line here

Affected Workflows:

• .github/workflows/changelog.yml, job: build
• .github/workflows/pdf.yml, job: build
• .github/workflows/rubrics.yml, job: build

This thread describes some ideas. Main concepts include:

1. Design & UX
2. Ethics & Accessibility
3. Tech. Writing and docs
4. Inclusivity, diversity, people management
5. Data
6. Developer tooling
7. Product
8. Best practices, languages, technology reviews, & service comms
9. SRE

We have about 6.5 class periods (or about 19.5 hours) to fit the content. What story can we put together here? What makes sense to talk about and skip?

The course schedule includes dates from March:

- You should have demoable content by the first week of March
- You should have significant demoable content by March 11 (Assignment 6 deadline)
- You should be at the point of adding no new major features in the last week of March. This should be reserved for polish and bug fixes

Describe the concern
The drop-down detail menu on A5 doesn't format properly on the website. Specifically the "examples" part

Why is this important?
Very hard to read

Ideal solution
The formatting looks like the formatting on dscil/491 repo

Additional context
Add any other context about the problem here.

Note: This does not guarantee the concern will be addressed, or the ideal solution you presented will be used. Ultimately, the course content needs to be approved by the instructor and, in some cases, a quorum of students after the term has started.

Describe the concern
I'm a bit confused about how team collaboration will work on CSC491 assignments. In particular, the second assignment is implying that we will be working with our CSC454 team members to develop the document.

Your second assignment will be to identify areas where your team has expertise and where it may lack expertise.
You will be expected to work together and submit this assignment as a team.

So my question is: will our CSC454 members be expected to be also working on CSC491 assignments with us? Secondly, is this fair for them? To essentially be required to do the work of two courses despite not being enrolled in one?

Why is this important?
This is important because it affects what the distribution of work will be among our team. And people exclusively enrolled in CSC454 may not have been expecting to be involved in the CSC491 course work.

Ideal solution
I'm not sure what the ideal solution would be. I mostly just wanted to bring up the question, but perhaps CSC454 students should be able to choose their level of involvement in CSC491 assignments. However, assignments like Assignment 2 seem to implicitly require their involvement by the nature of the task.

This repo has workflows that have no defined timeouts and/or are not using self-hosted.

We use self hosted runners to avoid overage costs associated with GitHub Actions. However, we don't have a lot of workers to handle all of the load.
To ensure a single build doesn't spend hours and monopolize our workers, we limit each job to 20 minutes.
Please add a timeout to your jobs. We will disable your actions until you add them.

Your build may also be missing self-hosted in the runs-on field.

Docs: https://docs.github.com/en/actions/learn-github-actions/workflow-syntax-for-github-actions#jobsjob_idtimeout-minutes
Example:

jobs:
  build:
    runs-on: self-hosted # This is required
    timeout-minutes: 20 # Add this line here

Affected Workflows:

Describe the concern
In A1.md, it says The body of the release must include a list of Pull Requests (at least one from every member) that has reviews.

What does it mean by "has reviews"? How do we know that there are reviews

Why is this important?
Its part of A1 requirement

Note: This does not guarantee the concern will be addressed, or the ideal solution you presented will be used. Ultimately, the course content needs to be approved by the instructor and, in some cases, a quorum of students after the term has started.

Describe the concern

In user research, it says "User Research
Given the mockup in (2) and the persona you described in (3), find at least 2 "real" users* to test the product"

since our mockup is not actually a product, how would we test it? would it be purely conceptual where the user imagines the product via the mockup?

Why is this important?
its part of a4!

Ideal solution

Additional context
Add any other context about the problem here.

Note: This does not guarantee the concern will be addressed, or the ideal solution you presented will be used. Ultimately, the course content needs to be approved by the instructor and, in some cases, a quorum of students after the term has started.