On 9/27/18 4:17 AM, Thierry Carrez wrote:
Ben Nemec wrote:
On 9/25/18 3:29 AM, Thierry Carrez wrote:
Absence of priorities was an initial design choice[1] based on the
fact that in an open collaboration every group, team, organization
has their own views on what the priority of a story is,
Ben Nemec wrote:
On 9/25/18 3:29 AM, Thierry Carrez wrote:
Absence of priorities was an initial design choice[1] based on the
fact that in an open collaboration every group, team, organization has
their own views on what the priority of a story is, so worklist and
tags are better ways to
On Wed, Sep 26, 2018 at 9:50 AM Ben Nemec wrote:
>
>
> On 9/25/18 3:29 AM, Thierry Carrez wrote:
> > Doug Hellmann wrote:
> >> I think we need to reconsider that position if it's going to block
> >> adoption. I think Ben's case is an excellent second example of where
> >> having a field to hold
On 9/25/18 3:29 AM, Thierry Carrez wrote:
Doug Hellmann wrote:
I think we need to reconsider that position if it's going to block
adoption. I think Ben's case is an excellent second example of where
having a field to hold some sort of priority value would be useful.
Absence of priorities
On Wed, Sep 26, 2018 at 8:17 AM Adam Coldrick wrote:
> On Tue, 2018-09-25 at 18:40 +, CARVER, PAUL wrote:
> [...]
> > There is certainly room for additional means of juggling and
> > discussing/negotiating priorities in the stages before work really gets
> > under way, but if it doesn't
On Tue, 2018-09-25 at 18:40 +, CARVER, PAUL wrote:
[...]
> There is certainly room for additional means of juggling and
> discussing/negotiating priorities in the stages before work really gets
> under way, but if it doesn't eventually become clear
>
> 1) who's doing the work
> 2) when are
On Tue, 2018-09-25 at 13:41 -0400, Doug Hellmann wrote:
> Adam Coldrick writes:
> > For tasks I am less concerned in that aspect since cross-project
> > support
> > isn't hurt, but remain of the opinion that a global field is the wrong
> > approach since it means that only one person (or group of
Doug Hellmann wrote:
>If we're just throwing data into it without trying to use it to communicate,
>then I can see us having lots of different views of priority with
>the same level of "official-ness". I don't think that's what we're doing
>though. I think we're trying to help teams track
Adam Coldrick writes:
> On Mon, 2018-09-24 at 22:47 +, Jeremy Stanley wrote:
>> On 2018-09-24 18:35:04 -0400 (-0400), Doug Hellmann wrote:
>> [...]
>> > At the PTG there was feedback from at least one team that
>> > consumers of the data in storyboard want a priority setting on
>> > each
On Mon, 2018-09-24 at 22:47 +, Jeremy Stanley wrote:
> On 2018-09-24 18:35:04 -0400 (-0400), Doug Hellmann wrote:
> [...]
> > At the PTG there was feedback from at least one team that
> > consumers of the data in storyboard want a priority setting on
> > each story. Historically the response
Doug Hellmann wrote:
I think we need to reconsider that position if it's going to block
adoption. I think Ben's case is an excellent second example of where
having a field to hold some sort of priority value would be useful.
Absence of priorities was an initial design choice[1] based on the
On 2018-09-24 19:31:17 -0400 (-0400), Doug Hellmann wrote:
> That came up as a suggestion, too. The challenge there is that we
> cannot (as far as I know) sort on tags. So even if we have tags,
> we can't create a list of stories that is ordered automatically
> based on the priority. Maybe there's
Jeremy Stanley writes:
> On 2018-09-24 18:35:04 -0400 (-0400), Doug Hellmann wrote:
> [...]
>> At the PTG there was feedback from at least one team that
>> consumers of the data in storyboard want a priority setting on
>> each story. Historically the response to that has been that
>> different
On 2018-09-24 18:35:04 -0400 (-0400), Doug Hellmann wrote:
[...]
> At the PTG there was feedback from at least one team that
> consumers of the data in storyboard want a priority setting on
> each story. Historically the response to that has been that
> different users will have different
Ben Nemec writes:
> Hi,
>
> This came up in the Oslo meeting as a result of my initial look at the
> test Storyboard import. It appears all of the priority data from
> launchpad gets lost in the migration, which is going to make organizing
> hundreds of bugs somewhat difficult. I'm
Hi,
This came up in the Oslo meeting as a result of my initial look at the
test Storyboard import. It appears all of the priority data from
launchpad gets lost in the migration, which is going to make organizing
hundreds of bugs somewhat difficult. I'm particularly not fond of it
after
16 matches
Mail list logo
