Hi Daniil,
I have voted for the Groovy 3.0 Features child issues
(https://youtrack.jetbrains.com/issue/IDEA-188050#tab=Linked%20Issues).
Cheers,
mg
On 02.06.2018 15:52, Daniil Ovchinnikov wrote:
none of the child issues to the Groovy 3.0 umbrella issue seems to
have any votes
Yep, I should’ve clarified this earlier and invited users to vote.
in the end I myself would just upvote every child issue
And this is good. It’s much better than to upvote parent task and
forget about it.
At least you will get a notification when each task is closed contrary
to umbrella task that may remain open for a long time.
I would just do the ones that are quicker to do first
That’s what I’m now doing with 3.0 tasks. But upvotes do matter.
—
Daniil Ovchinnikov
JetBrains
On 2 Jun 2018, at 02:30, MG <mg...@arscreat.com
<mailto:mg...@arscreat.com>> wrote:
I just checked, and none of the child issues to the Groovy 3.0
umbrella issue (https://youtrack.jetbrains.com/issue/IDEA-188050)
seems to have any votes. I find that not surprising: As a developer
that uses Groovy in place of Java to develop a larger framework using
IntelliJ IDE, I can only use a Groovy feature once it has gotten
proper IntelliJ support. I can toy around with it before that, of
course, but to e.g. to finally be able to get rid of using the
new-keyword in my project, IntelliJ support is tantamount. Other new
features will be useful in different ways, other again I will have to
check out further, to find where I can use them best. That makes a
meaningful pioritization hard - in the end I myself would just upvote
every child issue...
Others may see this differently of course, but I need support for all
features, as fast as possible ;-)
To prioritize, I would just do the ones that are quicker to do first.
(Or once you have create the technicl child issues in the way you
need them structured, you can ask people to vote between 2 or 3
issues here / the Groovy Slack... (unless Paul/Jochen/Guillaume/...
object, of course).)
It would be interesting to learn a little bit about the effort that
goes into certain features, btw,
Cheers,
mg
On 01.06.2018 23:51, mg wrote:
Hi Daniil,
I am a bit confused here: For Groovy 3.0 someone created a similar
issue, people voted on it to show that Groovy 3.0 feature support
was important to them, you created a handful of child issues, and
everything seemed well & fine :-)
How is this different then ?
Cheers,
mg
-------- Ursprüngliche Nachricht --------
Von: Daniil Ovchinnikov <daniil.ovchinni...@jetbrains.com>
Datum: 01.06.18 22:42 (GMT+01:00)
An: users@groovy.apache.org
Betreff: Re: IntelliJ: Full Groovy 2.5.0 Support
Hi mg,
First of all thank you for caring.
I just want to let you know that such abstract tickets have almost
zero meaning other than serving as a parent for other smaller tasks.
It would be much more helpful to prioritize if you create a ticket
for some particular feature and let others vote for it.
—
Daniil Ovchinnikov
JetBrains
On 1 Jun 2018, at 21:09, MG <mg...@arscreat.com
<mailto:mg...@arscreat.com>> wrote:
Hi,
I have created a Jetbrains issue you can vote on for IntelliJ to
fully support Groovy 2.5 as soon as possible :-)
https://youtrack.jetbrains.com/issue/IDEA-193168
Cheers,
mg
