Open Stack

Sounds good to start, we can always adjust later if needed. I actually
changed one doc bug priority already using this criteria.

On Fri, Jul 10, 2015 at 5:42 AM Jay Pipes <jaypipes at gmail.com> wrote:

> On 07/09/2015 06:14 PM, Andrew Woodward wrote:
> > We often have bugs which create really poor User eXperience (UX) but our
> > current bug priority criteria prevent nearly all of them from being
> > higher than medium (as they nearly always have workarounds). We need to
> > identify what should qualify as a critical, or high UX defect so that
> > they can receive appropriate attention.
> >
> > We discussed what this may look like on the IRC meeting, the general
> > idea here is that the complexity of effort to work around the UX issue
> > should be related to the priority.
> >
> > Critical: requires massive effort to work around, including [un|under]
> > documented commands and edits to config files
> >
> > High: requires modification of config files, interfaces that users
> > aren't expected to use (ie the API when it's _intended_ to work in the
> > CLI / UI (exclusive of interfaces that are intended to only be available
> > via API) or requires custom node yaml (again except when it should
> > exclusively be available)
> >
> > Medium: Straight forward commands in the CLI
>
> Above criteria look excellent to me, thanks Andrew!
> -jay
>
>
> __________________________________________________________________________
> OpenStack Development Mailing List (not for usage questions)
> Unsubscribe: OpenStack-dev-request at lists.openstack.org?subject:unsubscribe
> http://lists.openstack.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/openstack-dev
>
-- 
Mike Scherbakov
#mihgen
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.openstack.org/pipermail/openstack-dev/attachments/20150714/d6cb396a/attachment.html>