matthias-ronge
commented
2 years ago For the same reason, I once started keeping a list in the wiki to organize the issues better. I made up the following categories, in order of decreasing priority:
- Dangerous A risk of life or limb, property damage, security issue or the risk of loss of work. This is basically equal to the security label that we already have.
- Unusable An essential functionality of the application is not given. There is no work-around. This is basically equal to the blocking label that we already have.
- Faulty A target functionality is not given or behaves wrong. This is what a bug describes best.
- Fragile An error is badly intercepted. A tiny incorrect operation leads to incredibly bad things.
- Unsightly Slipped layout, typographical errors, …
- Inconvenient A target functionality is not available, but there is a work-around. Likewise: A target functionality can only be achieved with an unnecessarily high operating effort.
- At a loss Poor operator guidance, the meaning of input elements is not revealed, nothing seems to happen when a function is triggered (if the function actually works). Likewise: No error message in the event of an error, it gives the impression that the function has worked where it did not.
- Opaque program code Confusing program code, cleaning up necessary.
- Non-interoperable software solution An in-house solution is used where a standard solution could be used.
- New feature A completely new type of functionality is desired. This exists as feature label
- Conception Discussion with an open outcome, no clear goal yet. These should be moved to discussions
Aside from that, I came up with the following subject keywords:
- administrability
- business objects
- calendar hierarchies
- documentation
- export
- hierarchical processes
- import
- layout
- list view
- metadata editor
- migration
- multitenancy
- performance
- process creation
- search
- security
- statistics
- tasks
- text
- workflow editor
- workflow engine
andre-hohmann
henning-gerhardt
Problem
I had a look on several issues to think about helpful improvements with regard on the development fund 2022. This is very time consuming, because nearly every issue has to be assessed on its own regarding the concerned subject areas and thus its relevance for an improvement.
Solution
From my point of view, the Labels should be extended to some more broad subject-categories as for example:
On the first glance, it might seem unnecessary, but with 470 open issues, it is from my point of view an opportunity to assess quickly the issues and to bundle them. Especially regarding the development fund but also for other development-initiatives, it would be helpful to enable a quick overview of related issues.
It would be OK, if these labels have always be to combined with the improvement-label or with the feature-label. It just would be helpful not to assess each of the 470 issues by content.