Allow end-users to set priority depending on a filter

[hmpf]

Some problems are more important than others. If Very Important Switch has trouble, that needs a higher severity than Not Very Important Switch for the same kind of trouble. The converter inputting incidents cannot know the end-user's priorities, so there needs to be a way to mark some incidents as more important than others. This way, the next time something resembling that incident happens, it is automatically flagged correctly.

[hmpf]

I've been reading up on severity vs. priority in ITIL. They are separate concerns. Severity is how bad a problem is for a specific system (boxDown vs. linkDown say), and should be possible to be generated by the input converter. Priority is how important something is to fix, and is set by a person. So we could have a system to auto-set priority, while severity is handled by the converter.

[lunkwill42]

I've been reading up on severity vs. priority in ITIL. They are separate concerns. Severity is how bad a problem is for a specific system (boxDown vs. linkDown say), and should be possible to be generated by the input converter. Priority is how important something is to fix, and is set by a person. So we could have a system to auto-set priority, while severity is handled by the converter.

So, this issue also says: We need a priority attribute on Incidents as well?

If Argus should concern itself with priorities at all, I think external agents would be the way to go to assign priorities, since I'm guessing priority policies would be entirely dependent on the organization using Argus

[hmpf]

I think we're back to the definition of severity vs. priority again, what can be set automatically and what must be decided on by a human. If a human gives something a pri/sev of x, an agent could look for similar incidents that match and also mark them.

[katsel]

Priority may not be needed, as it is 'saksbehandling' and therefore not in Argus' scope of responsibility.