<br><br><div><span class="gmail_quote">On 11/14/06, <b class="gmail_sendername">Stefan Seefeld</b> <<a href="mailto:seefeld@sympatico.ca">seefeld@sympatico.ca</a>> wrote:</span><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; padding-left: 1ex;">
Paul Dubois wrote:<br>> a. I do not favor a 'severity'. Without some big long discussion, let me<br>> lose all the nuance and summarize it as 'useful for user indicating how<br>> mad they are, and letting off steam, but not useful to us' and
<br>> 'experience with sf tracker'.<br><br>OK, so do you agree that the priority attribute is removed, or at least,<br>made unavailable to users ?</blockquote><div><br>I see nothing wrong with letting only developers (or some other designated set of persons) set priority. However, users might still see the priorities so that they can tell what will be fixed soonest.
<br><br>I am guilty I just realized of not looking at the prototype; I've been entirely thinking 'native' roundup, not of whatever changes were made for the prototype. <br><br>To remove the priority attribute means you want to handle rfe (wishes) some other way? That is, this issue class is only for bugs, period? I think that is the source of my confusion. The problem is people will submit wishes and commentary disguised as bug reports. ("Clearly a dict should remember the order of its keys.") We have also found bug reports that are 'user error' frequently turn into FAQ entries or 'feature' descriptions, so we have found it useful to use the original Roundup priorities - done + FAQ. We didn't find it useful to have two forms of closure.
<br><br></div><br></div><br>