Igor Sereda
My feedback
151 results found
-
1 vote
An error occurred while saving the comment -
13 votes
planned after 1.0
An error occurred while saving the comment Tejas, thanks for your comment. Hopefully, with Structure 1.4 editing an issue is not that painful, as you can do it right on the Structure grid (unless you want it to be in another Project, in which case it's a full Move procedure).
Note that when you create a new issue, you can also change the initial values of the editable fields - except for Project and Type. The next step for us would be to add Project/Type selectors whenever a new issue is being created in the Structure to make it completely functionally equal to creating a new issue via the standard JIRA screen.
An error occurred while saving the comment Jo, thanks for your suggestion. We'll add drop-downs for selecting issue type & project when creating a new issue.
We will also have additional "total estimate" column, which will display the sum of the estimates - I guess that is what you need for the issue-A.
-
1 vote
waiting for requirements clarification
An error occurred while saving the comment Thanks for posting this idea, this is an interesting feature request.
Do you have something like that already in place? How do you do it?
Do you use / suggest to use the standard JIRA voting? (Note the limitations - no "vote down", reporter can't vote.) If not, are you suggesting to keep the number of votes within the structure, or is it a more global thing, like a custom field? (Note that if it's a property of a structure, then an issue may have different Vote Count in different structures.)
-
1 vote
An error occurred while saving the comment Helen, thanks for the idea! One possible design we've had in mind when creating the first version of the structure was similar to this -- two panels with identical functionality, each can display structures and/or search results, and the user can move issues from one panel to another. After careful consideration we've dropped this idea for now, but it may be revived. Also, another way to have a similar solution is a Dashboard that has two structure gadgets.
---
I didn't quite get your point (3) - about synchronizers. A synchronizer is applicable to a specific structure and it is not affected by any changes in another structure. On the other hand, the synchronizer "doesn't care" where the changes come from, so if you copy some issues into a sync-ed structure, the synchronizer will do its job with regards to those issues.
-
1 vote
An error occurred while saving the comment This is a good idea and we try to make JIRA as easy to use as a mind mapping tool.
But a feature that makes it possible to delete an issue with a single keyboard shortcut absolutely requires Undo. However, an issue is a lot more heavy-weight object than a mind map node and deleting an issue in JIRA is not undoable. So I guess the best we can do is to collect removed issues in the Trash collection and then let the user Bulk Delete them through the standard JIRA interface.
-
2 votes
waiting for comment reply
An error occurred while saving the comment Mike, thanks for posting this idea. Usually, the web browser prints date/time and page number on every page, and the title of the page - Structure name is in the title. Which browser do you use? Do you need anything else in the header/footer besides what the browser prints?
-
8 votes
An error occurred while saving the comment Walter, thanks for the great ideas! Here are my comments:
1: Agree
2: I can see the value in this, however the good implementation would require not only limiting the structure per-type, but also per-project-per-type, which increases administration complexity (already quite high, given the synchronizers feature). I suppose we will come to implementing this, but probably not soon - unless we have more feedback about this.
3. Oh... In (2), did you mean define available issue types on the per-structure level, or as a global configuration? "*this* structure is available to: <list of types>" or "Structure plugin is available for: <list of types>"?
4: How would this work? Right now you have your "current" structure, remembered as a cookie in the browser, and it is selected every time unless you change it.
-
1 vote
-
6 votes
An error occurred while saving the comment Thanks for the idea! We have something like that in mind - assigning <SPACE>, for example, for marking an issue resolved. This would require some additional configuration though (there might be different Workflow actions for that).
Would you mind sharing your opinion on the following, related topics:
1. Should the user be able to likewise easily reopen issues?
2. Should one-click Resolve or a keyboard shortcut for it be enabled, if the user will not be able to Reopen later? (Due to permissions or workflow configuration.)
3. When the user resolves a parent issue with one click, should that action also cause sub-issues to be resolved?
Thanks!
Igor -
3 votes
An error occurred while saving the comment Adam, thanks for the clarification! We'll keep all comments in mind when developing this feature.
An error occurred while saving the comment Markus, thanks for your comment!
I think there are two separate cases: a) export structure and print it (or otherwise use visually); b) export structure and process it with some script. In the latter case, the "depth" column is definitely better.
We'll try to address both cases.
An error occurred while saving the comment Adam, thanks for an interesting idea. Right now there's structure backup that produces XML, but it is available to Administrator only and supposed to be, well, backup.
Do you have a specific example, what would you do with this export? Would representing structure with "-" really work? If you're going to parse the exported text in other programs anyway, would a different format be better perhaps?
Igor
-
7 votes
HJ-177
An error occurred while saving the comment Wouldn't you like to view Description in this popup as well?
Kevin, thanks for the idea. Right now those fields displayed in the Structure widget are exported, so you can add Due Date and other fields to the grid and then export.
Are you suggesting to use a separate selection of fields for the export? How would you envision configuring that separate set of fields, including field order?
Thanks!
Igor