should we order results by priority ? On 9/21/12, Gary Martin <[email protected]> wrote: > I've adjusted the query on > https://issues.apache.org/bloodhound/wiki/BloodhoundContributing - I'm > happy to adjust it again if necessary. The two enhancements are: > > * specify that owner should be nobody > o this appears to be the simplest and most reliable way to make > sure that the set is only unclaimed tickets although it does > require that we don't assign to a blank owner > * change count=5 to max=5 > o the count argument appears to be for something else (although I > am not convinced that functionality works) > > > This is implemented through the following change: > > -[[TicketQuery(table, ?status=!closed&keywords=~starter, count=5)]] > +[[TicketQuery(table, ?status=!closed&keywords=~starter&owner=nobody, > max=5)]] > > I would try to offer the result with no further judgement but I don't > think the pagination is quite what we are after here. > > Cheers, > Gary > > > On 09/19/2012 02:23 PM, Joachim Dreimann wrote: >> I went ahead and tagged the #119, #18, #95, #154 and #123 as starter >> tickets. I've also added a table dynamically displaying 5 starter tickets >> to the top of the BloodhoundContributing page: >> https://issues.apache.org/bloodhound/wiki/BloodhoundContributing >> >> Hope that helps as a starting point. Happy for others to extend it. Gary >> for example suggested off-list to me that tickets that are assigned to >> someone other than 'nobody' or accepted should be excluded, certainly a >> valid suggestion. >> >> Joe >> >> On 18 Sep 2012, at 23:45, Olemis Lang <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> Well , I already added «starter» keyword in #203 ... feel free to >>> change it if appropriate . In the end any word is fine to me , as long >>> as its use becomes well-known and consistent across all the project . >>> ;) >>> >>> On 9/18/12, Branko Čibej <[email protected]> wrote: >>>> Subversion uses a keyword ("bitesize") to mark small and/or simple >>>> tasks >>>> in the issue tracker. Sadly, that issue tracker doesn't allow workflow >>>> customization. >>>> >>>> -- Brane >>>> >>>> On 18.09.2012 22:26, Olemis Lang wrote: >>>>> oh ! >>>>> ok . I recall we also had another previous conversation about this too >>>>> , that's why I suggested doing so . >>>>> >>>>> Definitely workflow states are much more needed , so I think I prefer >>>>> keyword + workflow approach too . >>>>> >>>>> On 9/18/12, Joachim Dreimann <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>>> This overlaps with two conversations we've had recently on the >>>>>> mailing >>>>>> list: >>>>>> >>>>>> 1. Adding an appropriate tag to 'starter' tickets >>>>>> 2. Providing appropriate ticket states, like 'awaiting review / to be >>>>>> reviewed' rather than 'open' for the tickets you refer to in your PS. >>>>>> >>>>>> I prefer those two approaches personally. >>>>>> >>>>>> - Joe >>>>>> >>>>>> On 18 Sep 2012, at 18:14, Olemis Lang <[email protected]> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> I've been reviewing All Tickets By Milestone [1]_ and maybe these >>>>>>> tickets are also good targets just to start . >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> #119 Implement theme extensions code dashboard new >>>>>>> enhancement >>>>>>> major nobody Jun 28, 2012 >>>>>>> -- >>>>>>> #18 Change message for self registration plugins assigned >>>>>>> enhancement major nobody Aug 30, 2012 >>>>>>> -- >>>>>>> #95 Display of owner in dashboard views should depend on the >>>>>>> availability of the field dashboard new >>>>>>> enhancement major >>>>>>> nobody Jun 29, 2012 >>>>>>> -- >>>>>>> #154 Installer fails when providing repository type without a path >>>>>>> and vice versa installer new defect major >>>>>>> gjm Aug 6, 2012 >>>>>>> -- >>>>>>> #123 Check functionality of all screens with missing >>>>>>> Products/Versions/Milestones/Components dashboard new >>>>>>> task >>>>>>> major >>>>>>> nobody Jul 13, 2012 >>>>>>> -- >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> and maybe this one (not scheduled for release 2 but definitely >>>>>>> important >>>>>>> ;) >>>>>>> >>>>>>> #162 Convert version control user interface to Bootstrap ui >>>>>>> design >>>>>>> assigned enhancement major >>>>>>> Sep 3, 2012 >>>>>>> -- >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> It's just a suggestion . What do you think ? >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Towards a more generic discussion I'd point out that maybe we should >>>>>>> have a custom field like «difficulty» highlighting prior >>>>>>> expectations >>>>>>> of the skills needed to complete a task / close a ticket . A query >>>>>>> like difficulty=low|moderate could be used to find all such tickets >>>>>>> ... and maybe even a link could be added in BloodhoundContribute as >>>>>>> well ;) >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Of course , that should be setup starting from release 3 ... release >>>>>>> 2 >>>>>>> is almost done ;) >>>>>>> >>>>>>> PS: Many things can be learned by reviewing patches submitted to the >>>>>>> isssue tracker as well . Most of the tickets assigned to user olemis >>>>>>> will have some . Those scheduled for Release 2 have been baked >>>>>>> «recently» ;) >>>>>>> >>>>>>> .. [1] All Tickets By Milestone - report 6 >>>>>>> (https://issues.apache.org/bloodhound/report/6) >>>> >>>> -- >>>> Certified & Supported Apache Subversion Downloads: >>>> http://www.wandisco.com/subversion/download >>>> >>>> >>> >>> -- >>> Regards, >>> >>> Olemis. >>> >>> Blog ES: http://simelo-es.blogspot.com/ >>> Blog EN: http://simelo-en.blogspot.com/ >>> >>> Featured article: >> > >
-- Regards, Olemis. Blog ES: http://simelo-es.blogspot.com/ Blog EN: http://simelo-en.blogspot.com/ Featured article:
