l3ocho
11b6be87c8
✅ Task 1.1 - Project Foundation Setup: - Repository structure with Python packaging (setup.py, pyproject.toml) - Development dependencies and requirements - Contributing guidelines and MIT license - GitHub workflows for CI/CD (test.yml, release.yml) - Issue and PR templates for community contributions - Comprehensive project documentation ✅ Task 1.2 - Core Client Structure: - wikijs package with proper module organization - Core client class foundation in client.py - Exception hierarchy for error handling - Base model classes and page models - Type checking support (py.typed) - Utility modules and helper functions 📊 Progress: Phase 1 MVP Development now 40% complete 🎯 Next: Task 1.3 - Authentication System implementation 🤖 Generated with [Claude Code](https://claude.ai/code) Co-Authored-By: Claude <noreply@anthropic.com>
7.6 KiB
Wiki.js Python SDK - Risk Management
Project: wikijs-python-sdk
Stage: MVP Development
Version: 1.0
Last Updated: July 2025
🎯 Overview
This document identifies and addresses key risks for the MVP development phase. As an AI-assisted project in early development, we focus on the most critical risks that could impact successful delivery.
Risk Management Approach
- Proactive Identification: Anticipate issues before they occur
- Practical Mitigation: Focus on actionable solutions
- Regular Review: Assess risks weekly during development
- Continuous Learning: Update strategies based on experience
🔴 High Priority Risks
R1: Development Timeline Delays
Risk: MVP development takes longer than 2-week target
Probability: Medium | Impact: High | Level: 🔴 HIGH
Causes:
- Underestimated task complexity
- Scope creep during development
- Technical challenges with Wiki.js API integration
- AI session limitations affecting development flow
Mitigation Strategies:
- ✅ Strict Scope Control: No feature additions during MVP development
- ✅ Daily Progress Tracking: Update completion status in CLAUDE.md
- ✅ Buffer Time: Built-in 20% buffer for unexpected issues
- ✅ Fallback Plan: Reduce MVP scope if timeline at risk
Monitoring:
- Track actual vs. estimated time for each task
- Weekly milestone reviews
- Early warning if >20% behind schedule
R2: Wiki.js API Compatibility Issues
Risk: Changes in Wiki.js API break SDK functionality
Probability: Medium | Impact: High | Level: 🔴 HIGH
Causes:
- Wiki.js API changes without notice
- Undocumented API behavior
- Version compatibility issues
- Authentication method changes
Mitigation Strategies:
- ✅ Version Pinning: Test against specific Wiki.js versions
- ✅ Graceful Degradation: Handle API errors without complete failure
- ✅ Documentation: Clear supported version requirements
- ✅ Testing: Comprehensive integration tests with real Wiki.js instance
Monitoring:
- Test against latest Wiki.js releases
- Monitor Wiki.js changelog and releases
- Community feedback on compatibility issues
R3: Quality Standards Not Met
Risk: Code quality falls below professional standards
Probability: Low | Impact: High | Level: 🔴 HIGH
Causes:
- Rushing to meet timeline
- Skipping tests or documentation
- Inconsistent code style
- Insufficient error handling
Mitigation Strategies:
- ✅ Automated Checks: CI/CD pipeline with quality gates
- ✅ Test Coverage: Maintain >85% coverage requirement
- ✅ Code Review: All changes reviewed before merge
- ✅ Documentation: API docs required for all public methods
Quality Gates:
- Tests: 100% pass rate
- Coverage: >85% line coverage
- Types: 100% mypy compliance
- Lint: 0 flake8 errors
- Format: 100% black compliance
🟡 Medium Priority Risks
R4: Package Distribution Issues
Risk: Problems publishing to PyPI or package installation
Probability: Medium | Impact: Medium | Level: 🟡 MEDIUM
Mitigation:
- Test packaging and installation locally
- Use automated publishing workflow
- Validate package metadata and dependencies
R5: Documentation Gaps
Risk: Incomplete or unclear documentation affects adoption
Probability: High | Impact: Medium | Level: 🟡 MEDIUM
Mitigation:
- Write documentation alongside code
- Include practical examples for all features
- Test documentation with fresh install
R6: Community Reception Issues
Risk: Negative feedback or low adoption
Probability: Low | Impact: Medium | Level: 🟡 MEDIUM
Mitigation:
- Focus on solving real developer problems
- Engage with Wiki.js community early
- Gather feedback and iterate quickly
🟢 Low Priority Risks
R7: Performance Issues
Risk: SDK performance doesn't meet expectations
Probability: Low | Impact: Low | Level: 🟢 LOW
Note: Performance optimization planned for Phase 3, not critical for MVP
R8: Security Vulnerabilities
Risk: Security issues in dependencies or code
Probability: Low | Impact: Medium | Level: 🟢 LOW
Mitigation: Automated security scanning in CI/CD pipeline
📊 Risk Monitoring
Weekly Risk Review
Every week during MVP development:
- Assess Current Risks: Review probability and impact
- Check Mitigation Status: Ensure strategies are working
- Identify New Risks: Add emerging risks to list
- Update Action Plans: Adjust strategies as needed
Risk Indicators
Red Flags (Immediate attention required):
-
1 day behind schedule on critical path
- Test coverage drops below 80%
- Major Wiki.js compatibility issue discovered
- Critical bug discovered in core functionality
Yellow Flags (Monitor closely):
- Minor delays in non-critical tasks
- Documentation feedback indicates confusion
- Community engagement lower than expected
Escalation Process
- 🟢 Low Risk: Handle in normal development process
- 🟡 Medium Risk: Discuss in weekly reviews
- 🔴 High Risk: Immediate mitigation action required
- 🚨 Critical Risk: Consider scope reduction or timeline adjustment
🔄 Contingency Plans
Timeline Recovery Plan
If >20% behind schedule:
- Assess: Identify specific blockers and time needed
- Prioritize: Focus only on core MVP features
- Reduce Scope: Remove non-essential features
- Communicate: Update timeline expectations
Minimum Viable Features (Cannot be removed):
- Basic HTTP client with Wiki.js integration
- API key authentication
- Pages CRUD operations (list, get, create)
- Basic error handling
- Package installation via pip
API Compatibility Failure Plan
If Wiki.js API breaks compatibility:
- Document: Clearly specify supported Wiki.js versions
- Workaround: Implement fallback behavior where possible
- Communicate: Notify users of compatibility limitations
- Update: Plan fix for next release
Quality Failure Plan
If quality standards not met:
- Stop: Halt new feature development
- Fix: Address quality issues first
- Review: Identify process improvements
- Resume: Continue with improved practices
📈 Risk Learning & Improvement
Post-MVP Risk Review
After MVP completion, conduct comprehensive review:
- What Risks Materialized: Which predictions were accurate
- What We Missed: Risks that weren't anticipated
- Mitigation Effectiveness: Which strategies worked best
- Process Improvements: How to improve risk management
Future Phase Risk Planning
Use MVP experience to improve risk management for:
- Phase 2: Essential features and community feedback
- Phase 3: Production readiness and performance
- Phase 4: Enterprise features and scaling
🎯 Success Criteria
MVP Risk Management Success:
- MVP delivered within 2-week timeline (±20%)
- All quality gates passed before release
- No critical bugs discovered in first week after release
- Package successfully installed by early users
- Documentation sufficient for basic usage
Risk Management Process Success:
- All high-priority risks actively monitored
- Mitigation strategies effectively implemented
- Early warning systems prevented major issues
- Lessons learned documented for future phases
This risk management plan focuses on MVP development. A comprehensive risk framework will be developed for later phases based on lessons learned and project growth.