Hacktoberfest 2026: the issues maintainers tagged for October, open and beginner-friendly. Browse Hacktoberfest issues

User journeys J1–J14: catalog and criterion-level evidence tracking

Open
  • Is something wrong?
#95 0 comments 0 reactions 0 assignees View on GitHub

Maintainers usually reply within 1 day

Nobody has claimed this yet.

Assessment

Difficulty
5/5
Estimated time
Over a week
Newbie friendliness
25/100
Issue type
Feature
Clarity
Mostly clear
Activity status
Active
Tech stack
python, yaml
Domain
data, testing

Research direction

Read dokimi/docs/user-journeys/journeys.md for the J1–J14 catalog and dokimi/tests/outcomes/journeys.yaml for the criterion evidence registry; compare their IDs with the outcome marker and plugin in tests/outcomes/plugin.py. Start by running pytest --outcomes and inspect how CI produces the journey reports. Done when the 25 specified criteria have offline evidence, other criteria remain unverified without failing, and the open ownership and completion questions are resolved.

Written by the indexing model from the issue text.

Description

Tracking issue for the customer-journey catalog in dokimi/docs/user-journeys/ and the criterion-level evidence trace checked by pytest --outcomes.

Scope

  • Fourteen journeys, J1–J14, with stable ids. Use cases are UC-Jnn-nnn and acceptance criteria are AC-Jnn-nnn. The catalog is dokimi/docs/user-journeys/journeys.md.
  • The trace registry is dokimi/tests/outcomes/journeys.yaml. It reuses the outcome marker and plugin from tests/outcomes/plugin.py. CI uploads the coverage report as journeys-result.json and journeys-result.md, alongside outcomes-result.json.
  • In the initial PR, 25 criteria are enforced across J2, J3, J4, J7, J10, J11 and J14. Each one has offline evidence with its stubs named. Every other documented criterion is reported as unverified and fails nothing.

Not in scope

  • A CLI redesign. No target command grouping has been accepted, and the journeys do not depend on any particular spelling.
  • Enforcing CJM in external repositories.
  • New research metrics, multi-agent orchestration, and building the proposed capabilities.

Open questions

  • Who declares a whole journey complete? Undecided. The check only says whether a criterion's evidence passed, within that evidence's scope. Reviewing an issue or PR records a review; it does not certify the journey.
  • Ownership of each journey: not assigned.

Child work items

  • #96: J4 adherence and task-impact evidence (AC-J04-005, AC-J04-006)
  • #97: J7 task drafting, negative controls, coverage gaps (AC-J07-004, AC-J07-006, AC-J07-007)
  • #98: J2 join novelty diagnosis to a task-level effect (AC-J02-004, AC-J02-005)
  • #99: J11/J12 distinct inconclusive verdicts and a blocking policy (AC-J11-002, AC-J12-002)
  • #100: bind available-but-untraced criteria to tests (AC-J03-002, AC-J03-005, AC-J12-001, AC-J14-005)
Dominant language
Python
Stars
8
Forks
7
Avg merge
1d 4h
Merged PRs (30d)
199

Getting set up

First steps

  1. Read the whole issue, then the project's contributing guide.
  2. Comment on the issue to say you are picking it up — it saves two people doing the same work.
  3. Fork the repository and make your change on a branch.
  4. Open a pull request that references the issue number.

More from intel/dokimi

All issues in intel/dokimi

Similar issues

More Python issues

Get new issues in your inbox

A short digest of beginner-friendly GitHub issues.