Hi!
I think we are misusing the term "priority"
here. Priority for whom?
For whoever is responsible for the planning. Which in most cases is the
WMF team that is tagged, though if it's a project that belongs to
another team (or person), then it's this team's (or person's) planning.
Setting something to "lowest" priority
implies that users do not care about
the item.
No, I don't think this is what it means. It should mean the planning
team does not have any immediate plans or resources to dedicate to it.
That's the consequence of using Phabricator as development tracking
tool. It's developer's priorities - which are supposed to mirror users'
ones, to a reasonable degree, but are not the same thing.
I suggest we use dashboard columns for the planning
activities, while
keeping the tasks themselves fully under "requester's" control. E.g. let
I don't think it would help developers' work. If we need a mechanism to
track user's priorities in Phabricator, we should create one, but I
don't think breaking existing and used mechanism for tracking
development priorities is a good way to achieve that. Columns *are* used
for planning, but in a different way.
the community decide what is more important, but use
dashboards for team
work planning. This way, if a volunteer developer wants to contribute,
they would look for the highest-demanded bugs that don't have active status
in any teams.
I recognize that highlighting issues that volunteers should concentrate
on is a valid need. But I don't think reusing the same mechanism as
ongoing development tracking is using now is going to be good. It may
get very confusing. We should try to find other way to specify that.
--
Stas Malyshev
smalyshev(a)wikimedia.org