Sorry for the confusion,
Michael Am 06.09.16 um 12:55 schrieb Michael Brohl:
+1 on the Wiki page effort, it's great!Not sure about the issue importance: for me, this is more an indicator of how much this issue affects the project instead of a priority to deal with it. I would leave it as that and maybe introduce a new field for priority (if we do not already have one, haven't checked).Maybe better use a sequence diagram (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sequence_diagram) instead of a flow chart for the issue status?Michael Am 06.09.16 um 12:37 schrieb Taher Alkhateeb:Hi Sharan, Everyone, Great work on the JIRA ->https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/OFBIZ/Guidelines+for+Using+JiraI like the fact that you denote all issues for trunk as being either minor or trivial. This does not mean they are not important or do not contain alot of hard work. Instead it means they are not urgent, which is exactly the case for trunk (unstable)!One thing we can do to further improve the situation is to have a default value of "Trivial" to all newly created JIRAs so that people intentionally change it to whatever is more suitable. Another thing I note in the wiki is that the workflow (chart with arrows) is currently confusing. They need to be broken apart because too many lines intersect and you don't know whichline goes where. Is this document a good start for adherence for all future JIRAs? Can westart guiding others towards the link for adherence to our requirements? Ordo we need to finalize it first? Cheers, Taher Alkhateeb On 2016-09-05 14:06 ( 0300), "Sharan [email protected]> wrote:Hi Taher> 1 > You have raised some good actionable points here. I think you are rightthat the Jira guidelines need be completely separated out into something that is clear and can be used as an easy reference.>I will create a wiki page to start pulling the information together.> Thanks> Sharan> On 2016-09-03 07:56 ( 0200), Taher Alkhateeb <[email protected]> wrote: >Hi Everyone,> As of this writing, we have 3 blocker, 6 critical 733 major, 521 minorand>50 trivial open JIRAs and I note:> - I think none of the blocker and critical JIRAs belong in thatcategory.>- It is also unrealistic to have 733 major issues. it is like sayingwe>have that many serious problems> - I think a realistic distribution would have a pyramid count with amax>(pyramid base) being trivial JIRAs.> - A substantial number of jiras is old and no longer applicable.> - A substantial number of jiras is vague and not understandable,poorly>written, without enough details to work on.> - A substantial amount of jiras are placeholders for something to do>without proper thinking and planning, which would make them unrealisticor>not applicable.> - Some JIRAs are extremely granular. For example a task broken tosubtasks>each for a tiny amount of work that is not worth the time and effortof>making so many tasks.> So I think our issue tracking system is not properly used and we havemany>JIRAs that are not useful and distracting. I propose the followingactions:>- Add a wiki page (if one does not exist) documenting:> - Guidelines for writing JIRA mentioning clarity, provision ofsolution.>- A clear definition of priorities (blocker, critical, major, minor,>trivial) with some examples.> - A description of meaning of assignee and how to use it>- A description of other metadata and how to properly use it (tags,>components, affects version, etc...)> - we need to close all old, not applicable, vague and poorly writtenJIRAs>as per wiki guidelines. Alternatively authors can rewrite JIRAs tocomply>with guidelines.> - We need to fix priorities of all remaining JIRAs as per wikiguidelines>This would give us a realistic view of the _real_ issues in OFBizinstead>of drowning in so many JIRAs many of which are hindering rather than> helping.> What do you think?> Taher Alkhateeb>
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
