+1 from me.

On Fri, Aug 22, 2008 at 12:08 PM, haleh mahbod <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> Taking a vote at the beginning of each release cycle can be one way of
> handling prioritization.
>
> It really does not matter if there is a  prefect approach  for handling
> this as long as there is an approach that is understood by all. The chosen
> approach can always be improved if it does not work.
>
> So far, one combined approach based on the feedback might be to use JIRA
> priorities and consider including blocking JIRAs for the next release as
> well as the most voted Critical, Major and Minor JIRAS. Voting can be
> done at the end of the release cycle for the start of the next release. I am
> assuming that JIRAs here mean issues as well as feature requests.
>
> Does this seem like a good first try?
>
> On 8/21/08, Vamsavardhana Reddy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>> JIRA itself provides for voting for an issue (look for Voting link under
>> Operations when viewing a JIRA).  Are you suggesting to have a vote after
>> each release on what are the top features and bugs to be addressed in the
>> next release?
>>
>> ++Vamsi
>>
>> On Thu, Aug 21, 2008 at 11:41 PM, Dan Becker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote:
>>
>>> Oh, I agree. I like the idea of a vote to help prioritize issues. I
>>> believe several developer sites have some system like this where each
>>> developer gets to vote for their top 3 bugs or feature requests.
>>>
>>>
>>> haleh mahbod wrote:
>>>
>>>> These are good suggestions.  However, what if my JIRAs are of the major
>>>> or
>>>> minor category. Will I have a chance to provide a weight for the major
>>>> JIRAs
>>>> that I would like
>>>> to have considered. IMO That's where vote can be helpful to decide which
>>>> of
>>>> the Major or Minor JIRAs are wanted by many users. This can also be
>>>> useful
>>>> for making decisions for critical JIRAs.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On 8/21/08, Dan Becker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> I like the idea of adding some release meta-info to the priority
>>>>> levels.
>>>>> However I would slightly clarify your wording on the release  info for
>>>>> the
>>>>> priority levels:
>>>>>
>>>>> *Blocker* - Must have. Release not complete until issue is resolved.
>>>>> *Critical" - Should have. Release not complete until issue is resolved
>>>>> or
>>>>> all parties agree to drop/postpone until next release.
>>>>> *Major* - Likely have. Release is likely to have issue resolved.
>>>>> However
>>>>> due to workload or other major blocking items issue may be postponed.
>>>>> *Minor* - May have. Issue is low priority for this release and will be
>>>>> completed for release time permitting.
>>>>> *Trivial* - May have. Issue is low priority for this release and may be
>>>>> completed for release time permitting.
>>>>>
>>>>> It is a similar idea to yours, and I tried to put a release-related
>>>>> statement next to each level.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Ramkumar R wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>> One way, I could think as a solution to this issue is to re-define the
>>>>>> definitions of the existing priority levels in the JIRA system. An
>>>>>> issue
>>>>>> has
>>>>>> a priority level which indicates its importance.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> The currently defined priorities are shown below.
>>>>>>  *Blocker* Blocks development and/or testing work, production could
>>>>>> not
>>>>>> run
>>>>>> *Critical* Crashes, loss of data, severe memory leak.  *Major* Major
>>>>>> loss
>>>>>> of
>>>>>> function.  *Minor* Minor loss of function, or other problem where easy
>>>>>> workaround is present.  *Trivial* Cosmetic problem like misspelt words
>>>>>> or
>>>>>> misaligned text.
>>>>>> I believe, re-defining what this priority level means for a release as
>>>>>> shown
>>>>>> below would help.
>>>>>>  *Blocker* Release will not be completed until issue is resolved.
>>>>>>  *Critical
>>>>>> * Issue will most likely be resolved for release.  *Major* Issue
>>>>>> should be
>>>>>> resolved for release.  *Minor* Issue may be resolved for release.
>>>>>> *Trivial* Issues
>>>>>> that might be resolved before a release.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> OR another way to achive the same would be to add additional priprity
>>>>>> levels
>>>>>> (other the default levels) at the admistration section of the JIRA
>>>>>> system.
>>>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> --
>>>>> Thanks, Dan Becker
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Thanks, Dan Becker
>>>
>>
>>
>


-- 
Thanks & Regards,
Ramkumar Ramalingam

Reply via email to