Kanban "board" naming is misleading, Column is a better name

[remram44]

• Gitea version (or commit ref): 1.13.0
• Git version: all
• Operating system: all
• Database: all
• Can you reproduce the bug at https://try.gitea.io:
  • Yes (provide example URL)
  • No
• Log gist:

Description

The "board" naming is inconsistent with the rest of the world. Basically everywhere else (original Kanban method, Trello, GitHub, GitLab, ...) the "board" refers to the whole wall. A "project" in Gitea (or GitHub) is a single "board". A column in the board is referred to as "list" (Trello, GitLab), "column" (GitHub), "step" (original method), never "board".

Having used many of those systems, Gitea's interface had me very confused and it took me minutes of starring at my single-column board to figure out how to add new columns. It was just so obvious to me that the "new project board" button at the top right would create a board, and not add a column to the current board.

Additionally, referring to a Kanban view (e.g. board) as a "project" is also confusing, since one would assume that "project" = "repository" (e.g. my software project, which has a repo and bug tracker). This is what GitLab calls them (since it is possible in GitLab to disable the Git repository feature, to use only the bug tracker or package storage features for example). However I understand GitHub called them "project" first and I'm sure that's why you did this.

See also

• Issue SCRUM backlog/sprint backlog per project  #3476 "SCRUM backlog/sprint backlog per project "
• PR Kanban board #8346 "Kanban board"

Screenshots

Trello

GitLab

GitHub

[lafriks]

Yeah, I just only now tried and had the same confusing associations myself. I would propose to rename "Projects" to "Boards" and "Board" to "Column"

[zaha]

Just fell into the same trap 😂

[wolftune]

I would propose to rename "Projects" to "Boards" and "Board" to "Column"

I'm skeptical about renaming "Projects" to be called "Boards" because projects are useful organizing of issues whether or not we use the board view really, particularly if this is done #15553

But I do see an issue with "projects" as a name since often an entire um, project is the whole user/myproject space, which includes the repo, issues, PRs, etc. and I think that's how GitHub and GitLab etc use the term. That said, GTD uses "project" the way Gitea does. Gitea calls the whole set of stuff "repository", and then calls the git-tracked content (not issues etc) "code" which is unfortunate for all the various non-code projects such as markdown-based text for human reading (although markup like markdown is arguably "code" I guess).

Anyway, "board" referring to a particular view of a project makes sense, so I support the request here. Use "column" to refer to each column of a board. Just don't use "board" to refer to the project overall.

[lonix1]

Agree with OP, respectfully disagree with wolftune. There is a standard nomenclature, and right now gitea gets it wrong.

The word "project" means different things to different people at different times. Whether that page represents part of a project, an entire project, multiple projects, or whatever, is up to the user.

But, that page that has columns and swimlanes and tasks - that's a kanban board.

[wolftune]

@lonix1 you are not disagreeing with me. I am not saying (and did not say) that the view of columns-and-lanes-and-tasks should be called anything other than a "board". That view is a board, that's what it is.

I'm saying that it's not ideal (though it might be the practical trade-off if the term "project" should be reserved for something else for some reason) to use "board" to refer to projects. Projects are (using GTD speak, and as GItea uses the term now) a collection of issues where once all those issues are done, the project has been completed. Milestones work like that too, but the difference is that milestones are like "we agree to do all these things by Friday" or "we will include all this in v1.4" regardless of any relationships among that set of issues. Projects are strictly-related issues that all go together to accomplish some larger project, and it makes sense to be able to group issues that way whether or not you use the board view (which is me agreeing with your use of "board").

Projects could in principle be eventually viewed with a different style than kanban and the set of these-issues-all-need-to-be-done-to-accomplish-this-project remains.

Again, I agree that the thing you see in Gitea today when you click the title of a project, that whole 2-dimensional layout is a "board".

[lonix1]

@wolftune I'm sorry if I misunderstood you, but to be frank, I still don't understand. You said that you agree it should be called a board, not a project, but you also said it's "not ideal".

The feature was introduced as a "kanban board" by PR #8346. So it should be named a "board". Anything else is not kanban.

If we agree, then there's no point in arguing because we'll just derail this thread. 😉

[eeyrjmr]

The project tab can hold multiple boards

[anbraten]

Just for completeness there are two parts which could be renamed as far as I got this issue:

• Gitea "board" => column / list
• Gitea "project" => board / ..., or leave it as is

The first one is way more important IMO.

[wolftune]

The project tab can hold multiple boards

The tab is "projects" plural, so the implication is that each item on that tab is a "project".

Just now, verifying this, I got confused with the "New project board" button because I thought for a moment it meant I could make a whole new view with multiple columns (i.e. imagine a project with specific issues included and multiple kanban boards where for example, person-A and person-B could view the same set of issues in different column arrangements).

I 100% support the renaming of "board" to "column"

I think all the misunderstandings are that I am imagining a potential future where projects have additional features and uses besides kanban board. Right now, projects have no other feature, the only thing they do is present a kanban board, and that's why others here think they could be renamed "boards". We all agree on the meaning of the word "board" here.

Consider how GitLab uses "epics" (proprietary EE feature, boo) https://docs.gitlab.com/ee/user/group/epics/index.html they are like higher level ways of grouping issues that are different from milestones. I actually think it is bad and confusing how they have boards, epics, milestones… too many different distinct ways of organizing. But I can imagine Gitea "projects" being like epics and containing board(s) (plural perhaps). So, that's why I'm hesitant to just rename "projects" to "boards".

An alternative idea: go ahead renaming projects to boards, don't expand the function of "projects", but allow issues to be nested instead of just flat (just allow any issue to have parent- and sub-issues).

All I'm saying boils down to: consider the potential or plans for future features of "projects" before deciding that they are just boards.