Priority System for Enhancements

[Benton, Kevin]

Hi all :-)

> 	During our most recent meeting (you'll see minutes and so
> forth, soon), justdave suggested that we come up with a long-term
> roadmap.

Yeah!

> 	To assist this (or basically implement it), I'm going to be
> prioritizing enhancements.
> 
> 	P1 = We definitely want this. It's a major feature, and it's
> obvious that it would be useful to everybody.
> 
> 	P2 = We want this, but it's not totally clear or extremely
> important.
> 
> 	P3 = This isn't a bad idea, and maybe we'll want to implement
> it at some point in the future, but it's not near-term roadmap
> material. Some core Bugzilla developer may work on it.
> 
> 	P4 = This isn't a terrible idea, but it's not important to our
> long-term plans for Bugzilla. We would review a patch if somebody
> posted it, but a core developer is unlikely to work on it.
> 
> 	P5 = We basically never want this. If somebody implements it
> and asks for review, we *might* look at it.

I'm wondering - there are cases when it might be useful to use
Enhancement_Urgent, Enhancement_Needed, Enhancement_Wanted,
Enhancement_Not_Likely as the severity rather than changing the meaning
of Priority based on the status?  I'm saying this because I know of a
number of Bugzilla users that have service level agreements set up in
such a way so that the customer determines severity and the developer
determines priority.  I'm not suggesting that this override your
suggestion below, however, it is worth considering.  I have felt for a
very long time that "Enhancement" (in and of itself) is inadequate in
describing how badly the "customer" wants something though both sides
agree that it's not a part of the current design (correct or not).

One other possibility is to create Roadmap flags: Plan:ThisMajorRel,
Plan:ThisMinorRel, Plan:ThisFixRel, Plan:NextMajorRel,
Plan:NextMinorRel, Plan:NextBugFixRel, Plan:FutureRel.  It also wouldn't
be difficult to implement those as keywords.  If Plan: soundsl ik

> 	Also, if you're a reviewer, feel free to prioritize
> enhancements like this. Just remember that a P1 should be really
> obviously needed, and we should basically all agree that it's needed.

Could voting play a helpful role in this?

Kevin Benton
Senior Software Developer
MSS Silicon Design Engineering
Advanced Micro Devices
 
The opinions stated in this communication do not necessarily reflect the
view of Advanced Micro Devices and have not been reviewed by management.
This communication may contain sensitive and/or confidential and/or
proprietary information.  Distribution of such information is strictly
prohibited without prior consent of Advanced Micro Devices.  This
communication is for the intended recipient(s) only.  If you have
received this communication in error, please notify the sender, then
destroy any remaining copies of this communication.