The "postponed" issue status
Here's a question for the group: The "postponed" issue status, per http://drupal.org/node/156119, seems to be either: "We plan (maybe) to work on this later" or "We can't work on this yet because it's blocked by another issue" To demonstrate this ambiguity, a search of "open issues<http://drupal.org/project/issues/search/drupal?text=&assigned=&submitted=&participant=&status[]=Open&priorities[]=1&categories[]=bug&categories[]=task&version[]=156281&issue_tags_op=or&issue_tags=>" does include "postponed". However, the "D7 critical issues<http://drupal.org/project/issues/search/drupal?version[0]=156281&status[0]=1&status[1]=8&status[2]=13&status[3]=14&priorities[0]=1&categories[0]=bug&categories[1]=task>" search does *not* include postponed issues. Further, the "templates for issue transitions<http://drupal.org/node/467548>" page (mostlly oriented toward module maintainers) clearly takes the former "maybe we'll work on this later" attitude. My questions: 1. Which of these interpretations of "postponed" is "correct"? 2. Should we add a "blocked" status that is quite clear? -Randy -- Randy Fay Drupal Module and Site Development randy@randyfay.com +1 970.462.7450
I think a blocked issue status would be helpful, especially if the ability to build block relationships was available. This would allow for the display of all blocking and blocked by issues to be listed for each issue. Everett Zufelt http://zufelt.ca Follow me on Twitter http://twitter.com/ezufelt View my LinkedIn Profile http://www.linkedin.com/in/ezufelt On 2010-06-03, at 5:49 PM, Randy Fay wrote:
Here's a question for the group:
The "postponed" issue status, per http://drupal.org/node/156119, seems to be either:
"We plan (maybe) to work on this later"
or
"We can't work on this yet because it's blocked by another issue"
To demonstrate this ambiguity, a search of "open issues" does include "postponed". However, the "D7 critical issues" search does *not* include postponed issues.
Further, the "templates for issue transitions" page (mostlly oriented toward module maintainers) clearly takes the former "maybe we'll work on this later" attitude.
My questions:
1. Which of these interpretations of "postponed" is "correct"? 2. Should we add a "blocked" status that is quite clear?
-Randy
-- Randy Fay Drupal Module and Site Development randy@randyfay.com +1 970.462.7450
On Jun 3, 2010, at 3:09 PM, E.J. Zufelt wrote:
I think a blocked issue status would be helpful,
Perhaps, although I'm concerned about the overwhelming number of choices we already have and ask users to navigate and understand. There have been multiple bikeshed-of-doom threads about the whole question of issue status names and meanings, for example: "Reorganise project issue statuses" http://drupal.org/node/171350
especially if the ability to build block relationships was available. This would allow for the display of all blocking and blocked by issues to be listed for each issue.
Right. This would be slick, but would require some new plumbing: "relationships between issues integrated with the status field" http://drupal.org/node/44162 http://groups.drupal.org/node/555 Other related topics: "Provide a mechanism for issue meta discussions" http://drupal.org/node/569552 "Enable CCK and node_reference" http://drupal.org/node/651484 Enjoy, -Derek (dww)
I'd be ok with either one of these options: 1) Don't add "blocked". Treat "postponed" as a superset of "blocked". So, something can either be "postponed" because another issue needs to be resolved first, or it can be postponed for other reasons, like the person who feels responsible for the issue wishes to convey that they're putting it off their radar for a while, until they feel like picking it up again some day. Although these are very different concepts, I don't think it's so bad to bundle them into a single status as we do now. But, if "postponed" includes "this issue is very much alive, but is stuck until another issue is resolved", then we must change the "79 critical issues (D7)" link in the "Contributor links" block to include "postponed". Otherwise, we have the wrong count and lose awareness of issues that still must be solved. 2) Add "blocked" and include those, but not "postponed" issues in the count of critical issues remaining. My preference is for the second, but I think the first is acceptable. What I think is a problem right now is that we have some critical issues marked as "postponed" thinking that's the correct status for blocked, but those issues not showing up in that link that people are increasingly paying attention to. Alex. PS: Not sure if this conversation should move to an issue. Perhaps it should if it starts getting more responses, but at least for now, I see some value in continuing it on this email list. Derek Wright wrote:
On Jun 3, 2010, at 3:09 PM, E.J. Zufelt wrote:
I think a blocked issue status would be helpful,
Perhaps, although I'm concerned about the overwhelming number of choices we already have and ask users to navigate and understand. There have been multiple bikeshed-of-doom threads about the whole question of issue status names and meanings, for example:
"Reorganise project issue statuses" http://drupal.org/node/171350
especially if the ability to build block relationships was available. This would allow for the display of all blocking and blocked by issues to be listed for each issue.
Right. This would be slick, but would require some new plumbing:
"relationships between issues integrated with the status field" http://drupal.org/node/44162 http://groups.drupal.org/node/555
Other related topics:
"Provide a mechanism for issue meta discussions" http://drupal.org/node/569552
"Enable CCK and node_reference" http://drupal.org/node/651484
Enjoy, -Derek (dww)
Derek, your opinion is informed and has lots of history. Technically, is it just a tweak to add "blocked"? Just a config item? Socially/workflow-wise, do you object to adding blocked, or think it would add to much to people's confusion? -Randy On Thu, Jun 3, 2010 at 6:09 PM, Alex Bronstein <alex@craftyspace.com> wrote:
I'd be ok with either one of these options:
1) Don't add "blocked". Treat "postponed" as a superset of "blocked". So, something can either be "postponed" because another issue needs to be resolved first, or it can be postponed for other reasons, like the person who feels responsible for the issue wishes to convey that they're putting it off their radar for a while, until they feel like picking it up again some day. Although these are very different concepts, I don't think it's so bad to bundle them into a single status as we do now. But, if "postponed" includes "this issue is very much alive, but is stuck until another issue is resolved", then we must change the "79 critical issues (D7)" link in the "Contributor links" block to include "postponed". Otherwise, we have the wrong count and lose awareness of issues that still must be solved.
2) Add "blocked" and include those, but not "postponed" issues in the count of critical issues remaining.
My preference is for the second, but I think the first is acceptable. What I think is a problem right now is that we have some critical issues marked as "postponed" thinking that's the correct status for blocked, but those issues not showing up in that link that people are increasingly paying attention to.
Alex.
PS: Not sure if this conversation should move to an issue. Perhaps it should if it starts getting more responses, but at least for now, I see some value in continuing it on this email list.
Derek Wright wrote:
On Jun 3, 2010, at 3:09 PM, E.J. Zufelt wrote:
I think a blocked issue status would be helpful,
Perhaps, although I'm concerned about the overwhelming number of choices we already have and ask users to navigate and understand. There have been multiple bikeshed-of-doom threads about the whole question of issue status names and meanings, for example:
"Reorganise project issue statuses" http://drupal.org/node/171350
especially if the ability to build block relationships was available. This would allow for the display of all blocking and blocked by issues to be listed for each issue.
Right. This would be slick, but would require some new plumbing:
"relationships between issues integrated with the status field" http://drupal.org/node/44162 http://groups.drupal.org/node/555
Other related topics:
"Provide a mechanism for issue meta discussions" http://drupal.org/node/569552
"Enable CCK and node_reference" http://drupal.org/node/651484
Enjoy, -Derek (dww)
-- Randy Fay Drupal Module and Site Development randy@randyfay.com +1 970.462.7450
Derek Wright wrote:
On Jun 3, 2010, at 3:09 PM, E.J. Zufelt wrote:
I think a blocked issue status would be helpful,
Perhaps, although I'm concerned about the overwhelming number of choices we already have and ask users to navigate and understand. There have been multiple bikeshed-of-doom threads about the whole question of issue status names and meanings, for example:
"Reorganise project issue statuses" http://drupal.org/node/171350
Correct. Don't add another one, just make better use of "postponed".
especially if the ability to build block relationships was available. This would allow for the display of all blocking and blocked by issues to be listed for each issue.
Right. This would be slick, but would require some new plumbing:
But we have the ability already with a tag. Just add the issue node number prefixed with a # and surrounded with brackets [] that is blocking the fix when marking it postponed. The new plumbing that can be added later would do some markup magic by providing the node title in the display of the tag similar to the way it does for the node body. -- Earnie -- http://progw.com -- http://www.for-my-kids.com
OK I'm going out on a limb here, but based on this conversation I just made the following change to the "postponed" status on the Status settings for an issue <http://drupal.org/node/156119> page: Old on the left, new on the right - The issue seems like a good idea, but other (often related) issues need to be dealt with first. The intention is to come back to these issues at a later date. + May mean either 1) that the issue is valid and should be fixed, but other related issues (blockers) need to be dealt with first, or 2) that the issue is removed from current active work but the intent remains to return to it. In the first case, please tag the issue "blocked" and say what issue(s) it's blocked on in a comment. If there are objections or improvements, we can revert this or improve it. -Randy On Fri, Jun 4, 2010 at 8:08 AM, Earnie Boyd <earnie@users.sourceforge.net>wrote:
Derek Wright wrote:
On Jun 3, 2010, at 3:09 PM, E.J. Zufelt wrote:
I think a blocked issue status would be helpful,
Perhaps, although I'm concerned about the overwhelming number of choices we already have and ask users to navigate and understand. There have been multiple bikeshed-of-doom threads about the whole question of issue status names and meanings, for example:
"Reorganise project issue statuses" http://drupal.org/node/171350
Correct. Don't add another one, just make better use of "postponed".
especially if the ability to build block relationships was available.
This would allow for the display of all blocking and blocked by issues to be listed for each issue.
Right. This would be slick, but would require some new plumbing:
But we have the ability already with a tag. Just add the issue node number prefixed with a # and surrounded with brackets [] that is blocking the fix when marking it postponed.
The new plumbing that can be added later would do some markup magic by providing the node title in the display of the tag similar to the way it does for the node body.
-- Earnie -- http://progw.com -- http://www.for-my-kids.com
-- Randy Fay Drupal Module and Site Development randy@randyfay.com +1 970.462.7450
participants (5)
-
Alex Bronstein -
Derek Wright -
E.J. Zufelt -
Earnie Boyd -
Randy Fay