On Sep 19, 2009, at 11:13 PM, Ecaterina Valica wrote:
On Sat, Sep 19, 2009 at 23:09, Vincent Massol <[email protected]> wrote:
On Sep 19, 2009, at 11:00 PM, Ecaterina Valica wrote:
Hi,
I think this initiative is great and will help improved our UX. The paper cut issues could be great for anyone wanting to start participating in open source and want a small bug to fix (like GSOC students :p )
Related jira issues could be just linked to this jira task.
Instead of linking them we could tag them with paperCut, maybe we like this approach better.
User could tag the issues with paperCut and developers should rate the issue's difficulty and priority.
I don't see the difference between a "papercut" tag and the "trivial" difficulty. Could you explain?
The idea is that if it's a user submitted issue, the user might not know the difficulty of the issue and he will just mark it with the tag.
How can he tag with papercut if he doesn't know if it's a trivial issue (since the definition of a paper cut is that it's a trivial issue)! :)
If the developer comes and marks it difficult, we still know that the user though that the issue needed attention and raises an usability problem.
I don't think papercut == usability issue. For usability issues we should tag them with "usability" IMO since the need is more general than just for papercuts. Thanks -Vincent
Regarding
Trivial:
http://jira.xwiki.org/jira/secure/IssueNavigator.jspa?mode=hide&requestId=10...
we are targeting just the issues in the CORE? there are lots of trivial issues in other components.
See my previous mail. I mentioned the need to have the difficulty custom field in other jira projects too...
Thanks -Vincent