10,591
edits
Homepage | Activities | Events | Lists | Development | Translate | Contact
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 55:
Line 55: − Certainly areas of potential improvement is in regard to defining appropriate tags for Milestones and Components, and coming up with a list of keywords that we can agree to the meaning of.+ − ==Questions== − Would it make sense to have a Sugar '''milestone''' (e.g., Sugar 0.82) that is distinct from the OLPC milestones? Or would it make more sense to have a Sugar '''version''' that maps to an OLPC milestone? − Would it make sense to consistently add '''keywords''' that map to the Sugar modules or should these be '''components'''? − * sugar − * sugar-base − * sugar-datastore − * sugar-presence-service − * sugar-toolkit − * sugar-artwork − * sugar-activity − ** journal-activity − ** chat-activity − ** ''et alia'' − − The assignment of '''priorities''' is the difficult one. We need to come up with definitions and a process. A first pass: − − :Blocker: catastrophic failure—Sugar will not run or user experience severely impaired (new features would rarely, if ever, fall into this category) − − :High: important to Sugar user experience—either in terms of performance or usability (these would typically be coupled with the "task" ticket type) − − :Med: enhancements to non-core features (or enhancements that impact individual activities) − − :Low: odds and ends − − Would it be possible to assign teams to each ticket, where we identify up front someone who agrees to '''verify''' a ticket, and someone who agrees to test a fix? Maybe we can accumulate a list of volunteers who'd be willing to be assigned in a work-wheel-like system?
moving discussion to discussion page
** accept
** accept
Please see the [[Talk:Triage|discussion page]] for ideas about how to improve the Triage process.
[[Category:Developer]]
[[Category:Developer]]