Weight field in issues too fine grained?

Ben Gamari ben at smart-cactus.org
Tue Jul 2 17:03:27 UTC 2019

Simon Peyton Jones via ghc-devs <ghc-devs at haskell.org> writes:

> Hang on.
> | >  * P::High would be category (1)
> | >  * P::Low would be category (2)
> | >  * No P::* label would imply categoy (3)
> Let's have P:High, P:Medium, P:Low, with no "P:" label meaning "no one
> has assigned it a priority yet".
> It's very important to be able to distinguish "no one has assigned a
> priority" from "priority has been assigned as low".
The initial thought was that a ticket without the "needs triage" label
would have a valid priority. Consequently a ticket without "needs
triage" and no "P::*" label would have medium priority.

However, while writing this it does seem that this is a non-trivial
invariant that leaves a bit too much implicit. Perhaps an explicit
P::normal label is best. I'll update the script.


- Ben
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: signature.asc
Type: application/pgp-signature
Size: 487 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://mail.haskell.org/pipermail/ghc-devs/attachments/20190702/2e18ae85/attachment.sig>

More information about the ghc-devs mailing list