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 >
