|
Thanks. That solves the immediate problem nicely. If anything, I suppose this issue belongs to the -infra agenda for one of their upcoming meetings. Sadly, I won't be able to participate in the usual 03:00 CET (unless it's on a friday or a saturday).
Duh. Found the preview feature.
As part of working with the Package Request workflow during this weekends cleanup, tforsman, afranke, pscott and I had a discussion about how the Package Request workflow currently is poorly worded and how we could describe how it relates to the Package Lifecycle.
Note that the current workflow only really covers points 1-4, while 5 has no formal process at present and 6-8 are part of the Package Lifecycle which needs a high degree of automation to actually work in practice (if at all): 1. [User:] File Package Request (action) Instead of using 'Close Request' without relevant context in several places, we propose that the workflow transitions be renamed to 'Accept', 'Reject', 'Ready', 'Validated', 'Included' and 'Promoted' with contextually relevant descriptions. Ok, tweaked the v4 workflow and applied it to FL Package Requests. It covers points 1 to 4 in the above.
Tweaked v4 workflow as per tforsmans comments, so that transitions should be easier to distinguish and faster to read at a glance.
Added 'Reporter' to the following issue rights to improve the user experience:
I did this because I feel that a reporter should at least be able to close their own issues as resolved/closed. I'm as yet undecided on the Link issues, because I think that ideally, users should be able to get on board on bug-zapper weekends and feel like they can actually do stuff. To paraphrase pscott, "What shouldn't a user be able to do?" The issue system seems to work with a minimum of friction for most users now.
|
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
 |
|
Improvement
Closed
Normal
Overhaul of the JIRA groups and permissions
the other things should be discussed more broadly maybe.