I believe that is the current prioritization scheme as well (allowing for an outlier here and there when a potentially significant issue without tests is determined by the committers to be significant enough to move up in the queue of course).
The existing descriptions in JIRA are almost entirely the defaults that one gets OOB w JIRA and it would probably be worth changing them to reflect how they are really used so that people don't ask this very (reasonable) question when trying to correlate the values they see applied w their descriptions. There's a whole second decision here to make in re: whether we permit reporters to select priority at creation time or not. What do people think about making that change too --? -Steve B. -----Original Message----- From: Ramon Smits <[email protected]> Sender: [email protected] Date: Mon, 18 Jul 2011 17:53:40 To: <[email protected]> Reply-To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [nhibernate-development] Re: Jira issue priorities On Mon, Jul 18, 2011 at 5:38 PM, Fabio Maulo <[email protected]> wrote: > Sure, > as you said there are lot of always-subjective variables involved, so much > that the time to explain and then justify and talk about them is so long > that, in the same lapse, we can fix around 40 opened issues. > I don't like to talk about taste and "fried air", instead I prefer > effective fixes/fix-proposals. > +10 for that :-) but then again, why let the submitter set a priority as for a submitter the priority will likely always be high. Maybe just say the usual workflow it that bugs/patches/whatever are fixed based on number of votes and having reproducable unittests and not look at the priority at all as my guess that is already the current workflow. Ramon
