On 18/06/2010, at 1:52 AM, Robert Buchholz wrote:

Hey Janiv,

On Monday 14 June 2010, janiv wrote:
Are you planning to add this feature soon?

I'm not sure I understand you correctly. The feature has been removed
during the backlog switch from form based to JavaScript/ajax. We're not
currently planning to re-add it.


I have been following the various threads about the removal of backlog sorting, 
and I also feel that you should consider re-adding some ability to 
automatically sort the backlogs. As it stands the product backlog is much 
harder to use. Previously it was easy for the product owner to prioritise and 
reprioritise requirements by changing their business value. Now the business 
value is somewhat useless as they have to manually drag the requirements into 
the order they desire anyway. On a large backlog this is quite a hassle, 
especially for new requirements that are added at the bottom of the backlog. 
There may well be a better way of doing things, than the old way, that gels 
better the new backlog (as I do quite like the ability to manually sort tasks 
in the sprint backlog), but I do feel that something needs to done to get the 
best of both worlds, and make requirement prioritisation less manual.

Aside from this one change I very much like the changes that were made in 1.3. 
I especially like the new burndown chart.

Chris Manning
Integrated POS Solutions

-- 
Follow Agilo on Twitter: http://twitter.com/agiloforscrum
Please support us by reviewing and voting on: 
http://userstories.com/products/8-agilo-for-scrum 
http://ohloh.net/p/agilo-scrum 
http://freshmeat.net/projects/agiloforscrum

You have received this message because you are subscribed to
the "Agilo for Scrum" Google Group. This group is focused on
supporting Agilo for Scrum users and is moderated by
agile42 GmbH <http://www.agile42.com>.

To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to
[email protected]
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/agilo

Reply via email to