Yes, I think also that the Type (bug, enh, feature, cleanup) of the issue must be orthogonal to the tool/app/subsystem in question :) On Tue, Jun 26, 2012 at 8:48 PM, Sean P. DeNigris <sean@clipperadams.com>wrote:
Someone had suggested to remove the "Pharo 1.4 Enhancement" template, since we're not accepting any. That makes sense.
Also, the Nautilus template labels the issue "Nautilus", but the label in the list is "Type-Nautilus". Which brings me to my next question...
The other Types are Bug, Enhancement, Cleanup, Feature [1]. Nautilus and Jenkins [2] really don't fit into this framework. Maybe because there will be many fewer issues, we don't need the level of granularity of [1] for [2]. But when we get close to a release, it'd be nice to know that there is 1 Nautilus bug and 10 Enhancements pending (i.e. probably only one critical thing) vs. 11 Type-Nautilus.
So, now that I said all that, it seems the most powerful/flexible approach would be to leave the "nautilus" tag, remove the leading "Type-" from "Type-[Jenkins|Spec|Seed]", and then to make templates for Jenkins/Spec/Seed like the one for Nautilus.
What do you think?
Sean
-- View this message in context: http://forum.world.st/Google-Code-labels-templates-tp4636767.html Sent from the Pharo Smalltalk mailing list archive at Nabble.com.