moderated Re: Feature requests/Canny after two weeks
toggle quoted messageShow quoted text
I think that tagging would be good to distinguish between bugs, new features, and other types of email. But less good, I think at enabling progress on reporting on specific bugs and new features.
For example how are features to be accurately identified for progress tracking (e.g. when we have dozens of emails with titles like “improve reporting” or “adding users” or “poll improvements” or “better colours”, some of which are about precisely the same thing, and some of which are not, and each potentially with several replies? And probably some of those emails will have several suggestions in, some of which may get picked up for improvements, and some not.
How will it be possible to search for a list of the currently requested features, any response to them, and a likely priority order?
I run a software development team, and the thought of enabling my users to track progress on the changes they request without a structured bug/feature list, gives me the heebie jeebies. We use Jira, which is fine, but very expensive for any significant number of users (i.e. more than 10), so I’m absolutely not suggesting that. But maybe the groups.io database function could be used to work in conjunction with the emails – whereby emails are used to submit requests for new features, but a database entry is used (maintained by the change manager) as the master status for that feature.
Just a suggestion. I do like a list.
From: firstname.lastname@example.org <email@example.com> On Behalf Of RCardona
Sent: Thursday, December 26, 2019 6:54 PM
Subject: Re: [beta] Feature requests/Canny after two weeks
I concur, consolidating all functions to the beta group and "canning" Canny makes the most sense.
On 12/26/19 12:02 PM, Mark Fletcher wrote: