This PR contains the same modifications of #5324 but applied to the current code

Reset priority according to documented levels https://docs.joomla.org/Bug_and_Issue_Tracker_Priority

Reset priority according to documented levels https://docs.joomla.org/Bug_and_Issue_Tracker_Priority

Sorry it was my mistake... Thanks

Except for the capitalisation, all looks OK here.

Reset priority according to documented levels https://docs.joomla.org/Bug_and_Issue_Tracker_Priority

Sorry but I disagree, and not because this is a PR of mine (and I wasn't the one who had assigned this to "Urgent"), but because IMHO we are simply not using the priority system.

At the time of this writing we have 117 open issues, so distributed:

(BTW, the only "Urgent" issue we have is one I opened and should have already been closed!)

Those numbers speak for themselves: there is no "gaussian distribution" as one would expect. Almost the totality of issues are set at priority medium. This means only one thing: at this time the priority field cannot be used to screen for "things to be done" as no triage is performed.

Now tell me that this issue/PR (and I'm talking of this only because it is the one "at hand") is at the same level of urgency/importance as the one titled "Wrap long (crazy idiotic long strings) as Article Titles" (no offense to the coder of that PR is intended).

There are other anomalies: anyone can come here and file an issue with "Priority" Critical or Urgent. Since I'm here I think I've seen this used properly only a couple of times. In most other cases the meaning of "Priority: Urgent" was: "Hi, I'm new here, and I have a problem I don't know how to solve. My boss/client is very upset and I risk being fired if I don't fix this by yesterday!"

To the contrary if I file a new PR (who knows, maybe one I really think is important) I have no means to set (or propose) its priority.

Don't you think something is wrong here?

Simple answer No

On 29 December 2014 at 17:08, Sergio Manzi notifications@github.com wrote:

Reset priority according to documented levels
https://docs.joomla.org/Bug_and_Issue_Tracker_Priority

Sorry but I disagree, and not because this is a PR of mine (and I wasn't
the one who had assigned this to "Urgent"), but because IMHO we are simply not
using the priority system.

At the time of this writing we have 117 open issues, so distributed:
Priority Issues Critical 0 Urgent 1 Medium 105 Low 11 Very Low
0

(BTW, the only "Urgent" issue we have is one I opened and should have
already been closed!)

Those numbers speak for themselves: there is no "gaussian distribution" as
one would expect. Almost the totality of issues are set at priority medium.
This means only one thing: at this time the priority field cannot be
used to screen for "things to be done" as no triage is performed.

Now tell me that this issue/PR (and I'm talking of this only because it
is the one "at hand") is at the same level of urgency/importance as the
one titled "Wrap long (crazy idiotic long strings) as Article Titles"
(no offense to the coder of that PR is intended).

There are other anomalies: anyone can come here and file an issue with
"Priority" Critical or Urgent. Since I'm here I think I've seen this used
properly only a couple of times. In most other cases the meaning of
"Priority: Urgent" was: "Hi, I'm new here, and I have a problem I don't
know how to solve. My boss/client is very upset and I risk being fired if I
don't fix this by yesterday!"

To the contrary if I file a new PR (who knows, maybe one I really think
is important) I have no means to set (or propose) its priority.

Don't you think something is wrong here?

—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub
#5547 (comment).

Brian Teeman
Co-founder Joomla! and OpenSourceMatters Inc.
http://brian.teeman.net/

That's obvious: a different answer had implied a disconnection between your thoughts and your actions.

This is Off Topic.
Please stop using the issue tracker as a general discussion forum. If you
have an issue then please raise it in the developer mailing list

On 29 December 2014 at 17:31, Sergio Manzi notifications@github.com wrote:

That's obvious: a different answer had implied a disconnection between
your thoughts and your actions.

—
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub
#5547 (comment).

Brian Teeman
Co-founder Joomla! and OpenSourceMatters Inc.
http://brian.teeman.net/

I just answered to your actions on this PR: an elaborate answer, I agree, but nothing more than that...

We just need another test OK and merge if no opposition.

@Test: all good except one minor textual change as pointed out on GitHub.

Merged. Thanks.