So would “critical” be used to address “show / release stopper” level issues or just the severity in general?
And semantics I’m sure but is the for “in next release” does this mean a “coming release” or some “future release”? Is there a “default” for this? Should there be some sort of “New” or “None” to imply it has not been determine yet? Given the change many might always assumes it “critical” ;-). Although suppose this would potentially result in a lot of un-defined severities, ------------------------------ *From:* Michael Bien <mbie...@gmail.com> *Sent:* Thursday, January 6, 2022 9:53 AM *To:* dev@netbeans.apache.org; Neil C Smith *Subject:* Re: GitHub issues - initial templates and labels On 06.01.22 16:38, Neil C Smith wrote: > ## Priorities > > priority:critical > priority:high > > I'm only thinking of adding those two for now. With critical reserved > for "must address in next release" issues / PRs. Rather than low > priority, maybe we can add a contribution-welcome or similar? > I think there should be a low priority. There are little annoyances or "quality of life" issues which should not be set to high prio. (which would happen if there is no other choice) contribution-welcome: could this be a label? -michael --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@netbeans.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@netbeans.apache.org For further information about the NetBeans mailing lists, visit: https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/NETBEANS/Mailing+lists -- Eric Bresie ebre...@gmail.com
