> none of the child issues to the Groovy 3.0 umbrella issue seems to have any > votes Yep, I should’ve clarified this earlier and invited users to vote.
> in the end I myself would just upvote every child issue And this is good. It’s much better than to upvote parent task and forget about it. At least you will get a notification when each task is closed contrary to umbrella task that may remain open for a long time. > I would just do the ones that are quicker to do first That’s what I’m now doing with 3.0 tasks. But upvotes do matter. — Daniil Ovchinnikov JetBrains > On 2 Jun 2018, at 02:30, MG <mg...@arscreat.com> wrote: > > I just checked, and none of the child issues to the Groovy 3.0 umbrella issue > (https://youtrack.jetbrains.com/issue/IDEA-188050 > <https://youtrack.jetbrains.com/issue/IDEA-188050>) seems to have any votes. > I find that not surprising: As a developer that uses Groovy in place of Java > to develop a larger framework using IntelliJ IDE, I can only use a Groovy > feature once it has gotten proper IntelliJ support. I can toy around with it > before that, of course, but to e.g. to finally be able to get rid of using > the new-keyword in my project, IntelliJ support is tantamount. Other new > features will be useful in different ways, other again I will have to check > out further, to find where I can use them best. That makes a meaningful > pioritization hard - in the end I myself would just upvote every child > issue... > > Others may see this differently of course, but I need support for all > features, as fast as possible ;-) > > To prioritize, I would just do the ones that are quicker to do first. > (Or once you have create the technicl child issues in the way you need them > structured, you can ask people to vote between 2 or 3 issues here / the > Groovy Slack... (unless Paul/Jochen/Guillaume/... object, of course).) > > It would be interesting to learn a little bit about the effort that goes into > certain features, btw, > Cheers, > mg > > > On 01.06.2018 23:51, mg wrote: >> Hi Daniil, >> >> I am a bit confused here: For Groovy 3.0 someone created a similar issue, >> people voted on it to show that Groovy 3.0 feature support was important to >> them, you created a handful of child issues, and everything seemed well & >> fine :-) >> How is this different then ? >> >> Cheers, >> mg >> >> >> -------- Ursprüngliche Nachricht -------- >> Von: Daniil Ovchinnikov <daniil.ovchinni...@jetbrains.com> >> <mailto:daniil.ovchinni...@jetbrains.com> >> Datum: 01.06.18 22:42 (GMT+01:00) >> An: users@groovy.apache.org <mailto:users@groovy.apache.org> >> Betreff: Re: IntelliJ: Full Groovy 2.5.0 Support >> >> Hi mg, >> >> First of all thank you for caring. >> >> I just want to let you know that such abstract tickets have almost zero >> meaning other than serving as a parent for other smaller tasks. >> It would be much more helpful to prioritize if you create a ticket for some >> particular feature and let others vote for it. >> >> — >> >> Daniil Ovchinnikov >> JetBrains >> >> >>> On 1 Jun 2018, at 21:09, MG <mg...@arscreat.com >>> <mailto:mg...@arscreat.com>> wrote: >>> >>> Hi, >>> >>> I have created a Jetbrains issue you can vote on for IntelliJ to fully >>> support Groovy 2.5 as soon as possible :-) >>> >>> https://youtrack.jetbrains.com/issue/IDEA-193168 >>> <https://youtrack.jetbrains.com/issue/IDEA-193168> >>> >>> Cheers, >>> mg >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >> >
