Weight field in issues too fine grained?

[Simon Peyton Jones]

Moreover, then we don't need "Needs triage".  Anything without a P: label needs triage!  Triage = assign a P: label.   Nice

Simon

| -----Original Message-----
| From: Ben Gamari <ben at smart-cactus.org>
| Sent: 02 July 2019 18:03
| To: Simon Peyton Jones <simonpj at microsoft.com>; Matthew Pickering
| <matthewtpickering at gmail.com>
| Cc: ghc-devs <ghc-devs at haskell.org>
| Subject: RE: Weight field in issues too fine grained?
| 
| 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.
| 
| Cheers,
| 
| - Ben