Hi Michael Responses inline.
On 2016-09-06 12:55 (+0200), Michael Brohl <[email protected]> wrote: > +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). > I think 'Priority' is generally about the urgency of an issue and impact is about the effect it has. Perhaps we need a field or flag for the issue impact. (I will take a look to see if one already exists that we could add to our form) > Maybe better use a sequence diagram > (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sequence_diagram) instead of a flow chart > for the issue status? The diagram I pulled out came directly out of Jira itself so if people think its a good idea to have something simpler then that's doable too. > > Michael > Thanks Sharan > > 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+Jira > > > > I 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 a > > lot 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 which > > line goes where. > > > > Is this document a good start for adherence for all future JIRAs? Can we > > start guiding others towards the link for adherence to our requirements? Or > > do 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 right > > that 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 minor > > and> > >>> 50 trivial open JIRAs and I note:> > >>> - I think none of the blocker and critical JIRAs belong in that > > category.> > >>> - It is also unrealistic to have 733 major issues. it is like saying > > we> > >>> have that many serious problems> > >>> - I think a realistic distribution would have a pyramid count with a > > max> > >>> (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 unrealistic > > or> > >>> not applicable.> > >>> - Some JIRAs are extremely granular. For example a task broken to > > subtasks> > >>> each for a tiny amount of work that is not worth the time and effort > > of> > >>> making so many tasks.> > >>> So I think our issue tracking system is not properly used and we have > > many> > >>> JIRAs that are not useful and distracting. I propose the following > > actions:> > >>> - Add a wiki page (if one does not exist) documenting:> > >>> - Guidelines for writing JIRA mentioning clarity, provision of > > solution.> > >>> - 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 written > > JIRAs> > >>> as per wiki guidelines. Alternatively authors can rewrite JIRAs to > > comply> > >>> with guidelines.> > >>> - We need to fix priorities of all remaining JIRAs as per wiki > > guidelines> > >>> This would give us a realistic view of the _real_ issues in OFBiz > > instead> > >>> of drowning in so many JIRAs many of which are hindering rather than> > >>> helping.> > >>> What do you think?> > >>> Taher Alkhateeb> > > >
