Priority System for Enhancements

[Gervase Markham]

Benton, Kevin wrote:
> 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?  

What does this gain us? I don't think that using Priority in this way is 
a semantic stretch. It's just that priorities are now "priorities for 
the project" rather than "priorities for the individual, assigned 
developer".

> One other possibility is to create Roadmap flags: Plan:ThisMajorRel,
> Plan:ThisMinorRel, Plan:ThisFixRel, Plan:NextMajorRel,
> Plan:NextMinorRel, Plan:NextBugFixRel, Plan:FutureRel.  

This is what Target Milestone is for, isn't it? If you think we need 
non-numeric target milestones (like "Future" is) then we should set them up.

>> 	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?

Probably not, as it's hard to give the correct amount of weight to 
votes. (Votes from a core developer should weigh more than votes from a 
random individual IMO.)

The voting system was originally implemented to deal with a time in 
Mozilla's life where we were trying to manage vociferous yet unhelpful 
community elements. I now consider it to be a bit of a wart. Does any 
project use it seriously any more?

Gerv