Eli Carter wrote: > ... > At that point, I'll merge this back into the main workflow branch. > > Comments and feedback more than welcome,
I looked at the changes and tested the branch. It all looks good to me. I have some minor nits about the Status filter, which reads like this when using the opensource workflow: accepted, assigned, closed, infoneeded, infoneeded_new, new, started. - the alphabetical ordering doesn't look that interesting; it'd be better to at least start with 'new' and end with 'closed' - then the presence of two infoneeded status will be for sure surprising for the end user; I know why there are two such states, but we should find some way to make the interface friendlier. I'm +1 for integrating these changes in the main workflow branch. Speaking of the main branch, I'm quite OK with it, I still have to test the additional plugins, but the way it already works with, e.g. the opensource workflow is quite satisfying. One minor improvement would be to be able to specify the order of the actions. E.g. on a new ticket, you have: leave, resolve, requestinfo, assign and accept. Having: leave, requestinfo, assign, accept and resolve would be preferable here, and I think it should be possible to achieve this by adding an .order attribute to the actions. -- Christian --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Trac Development" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/trac-dev?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
