Thanks for the responses, I think the summary so far is: committers and
reviewers are positive on reviewing the community tickets mentioned in this
email except for a couple of them that Joshua mentioned, with the caution of
not disrupting the current testing efforts.
Thank you, Ariel, for underst
Thanks. I’ll respond inline with the thinking around the original proposal.
> On 5 Dec 2018, at 20:26, Stefan Podkowinski wrote:
>
> Thanks Benedict and everyone involved putting up the proposal! It really
> deserves some more feedback and I realize that I'm a bit late for that
> and probably m
Thanks Benedict and everyone involved putting up the proposal! It really
deserves some more feedback and I realize that I'm a bit late for that
and probably missed a good deal of the conversation so far. I'd still
like to share some of my notes that I've taken while reading through it,
for the sake
> Summary:
>
> 1: Component. (A) Multi-select; (B) Cascading-select
> 2: Labels: leave alone +1/-1
> 3: No workflow changes for first/second review: +1/-1
> 4: Priorities: Including High +1/-1
> 5: Mandatory Platform and Feature: +1/-1
> 6: Remove Environment field: +1/-1
>
1: A
2: +1
3: +1
4: +1
1: A
2: +1
3: +1
4: +1
5: Meh. +0
6: +1
On Wed, Dec 5, 2018 at 2:57 PM Jonathan Haddad wrote:
> My personal preference is to remove labels, but I don't see it as a huge
> issue if they stay.
>
> 1. A
> 2. prefer to remove (I suppose I'm a -.1?)
> 3. +1
> 4. +1
> 5. No preference
> 6. +1
>
>
>
>
My personal preference is to remove labels, but I don't see it as a huge
issue if they stay.
1. A
2. prefer to remove (I suppose I'm a -.1?)
3. +1
4. +1
5. No preference
6. +1
On Wed, Dec 5, 2018 at 11:43 AM jay.zhu...@yahoo.com.INVALID
wrote:
> 1: Component. (A) Multi-select
> 2: Labels: le
1: Component. (A) Multi-select
2: Labels: leave alone +1
3: No workflow changes for first/second review: +1
4: Priorities Including High: -1
5: Mandatory Platform and Feature: +1
6: Remove Environment field: +1
On Wednesday, December 5, 2018, 2:58:21 AM PST, Benedict Elliott Smith
wrote:
Thanks for the feedback and further questions. I’m sure there will be more,
particularly around permissions and roles, so it’s good to get some of these
other discussions moving.
No doubt we’ll do a second poll once the first one concludes. Please,
everyone, keep your first poll answers comin
Thanks for all those that contributed to the proposal, and specifically to
Benedict for leading the discussion.
On the general proposal, I suspect there is a few details we may have to
tweak going forward, but hard to be sure before trying and as I do think
it's progress, I'm personally happy to m
