David Crossley wrote:
David Crossley wrote:
Ross Gardler wrote:
David Crossley wrote:
One trouble is that many issues will get hidden in the
"Unscheduled" bag. I don't see how we will know what
issues have priority.
Yes, I agree. I almost started to move issues from 0.8 into the
unscheduled bag yesterday. But I stopped myself because of this very
thought. I think we can make better use of the priority field as well.
Lets try that.
Something like:
Trivial: if this issue botthers you - then fix it because it'll take us
a while
Minor: OK so this is a recognised issue, but we don't think it affects
too may users - don't hold you breath for a fix
Major: We consider this important, it will be scheduled into a release
as soon as we find a developer with interest and time in this area
Critical: This is likely to be fixed reasonably soon, probably in one of
the next two releases
Blocker: This is an issue that affects many users or is a key new
feature, will be fixed in the next release
I started to refine your definitions and add it to:
http://forrest.apache.org/issues.html
However, i hit some snags.
I reckon that Jira has the wrong values or using the
wrong field name. Those definitions are actually referring
to "Severity". The "Priority" is something different.
The ASF Bugzilla does this.
http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/page.cgi?id=fields.html#bug_severity
http://issues.apache.org/bugzilla/page.cgi?id=fields.html#priority
I wonder if we can/should over-ride the default
"Priority" field and call it Severity and add a
new field "DevPriority".
+1
I'm a great believer in (some aspects of) Extreme Programing where you
have two priority fields like this. You then use these (coupled with a
"risk" field which tells you how likely a time estimate is to be wrong)
to automatically calculate what should be done next.
I'm not proposing we use Jira to "instruct" us this way. This is Open
Source and as we all know individual devs need to be free to scratch
their own itches. However, individual devs may choose to use it this way.
We don't need the "risk" field at this stage.
Another problem with Jira is that the quick listings
of Priority on the right-hand side of our front page
give a misleading view of the state of the project.
For example in the Blocker listing, there is one for
the new "voice" plugin. Sure it is a blocker for the
plugin, as it prevents developers from helping with it.
However it is not a blocker for the project as a whole.
Do we have control over what appears on the home page, I'll take a look
in half an hour or so and see if I can make any suggestions.
Ross
