Topics

moderated Feature requests/Canny after two weeks


KWKloeber
 

>>>On Wed, Jan 1, 2020 at 04:37 PM, J_Catlady wrote:
useful only if bugs are easily identifiable there by subject lines, and there again you fall prey to possible widespread misuse in not identifying bugs properly, etc.<<<
Ok I can buy into the benefit of a bug-specific forum. (BUT good luck with the above caveat.)  Arrrgh. 


 

Hashtag, email address, whatever. It’s the qualifier “potential” that’s the problem. 


On Jan 2, 2020, at 1:32 AM, Ken Kloeber via Groups.Io <KWKloeber@...> wrote:

>>>
potential-bug@“ could differentiate general support vs bug reporting.
I don't think a hashtag like that will be effective.<<<

In response to Sandi’s comment about both bugs and support questions addressed to <support@>, <potential-bug@> (or whatever@) would be an address specifically for bugs. 
i.e., @ being common for an email address, not for a (#) hashtag. 
Focus LOL. 



--
J

Messages are the sole opinion of the author, especially the fishy ones.
My humanity is bound up in yours, for we can only be human together. - Desmond Tutu


 

Bug reports in the bug forum could be required to be tagged from a set of defined hashtags that relate to specific features, plus an #other tag. That would help.


On Jan 2, 2020, at 1:38 AM, Ken Kloeber via Groups.Io <KWKloeber@...> wrote:

>>>On Wed, Jan 1, 2020 at 04:37 PM, J_Catlady wrote:
useful only if bugs are easily identifiable there by subject lines, and there again you fall prey to possible widespread misuse in not identifying bugs properly, etc.<<<
Ok I can buy into the benefit of a bug-specific forum. (BUT good luck with the above caveat.)  Arrrgh. 

--
J

Messages are the sole opinion of the author, especially the fishy ones.
My humanity is bound up in yours, for we can only be human together. - Desmond Tutu


 

For an email address, you could use the term bugreport.


On Jan 2, 2020, at 4:51 AM, J_Catlady via Groups.Io <j.olivia.catlady@...> wrote:

Hashtag, email address, whatever. It’s the qualifier “potential” that’s the problem. 


On Jan 2, 2020, at 1:32 AM, Ken Kloeber via Groups.Io <KWKloeber@...> wrote:

>>>
potential-bug@“ could differentiate general support vs bug reporting.
I don't think a hashtag like that will be effective.<<<

In response to Sandi’s comment about both bugs and support questions addressed to <support@>, <potential-bug@> (or whatever@) would be an address specifically for bugs. 
i.e., @ being common for an email address, not for a (#) hashtag. 
Focus LOL. 



--
J

Messages are the sole opinion of the author, especially the fishy ones.
My humanity is bound up in yours, for we can only be human together. - Desmond Tutu


--
J

Messages are the sole opinion of the author, especially the fishy ones.
My humanity is bound up in yours, for we can only be human together. - Desmond Tutu


KWKloeber
 

>>>On Thu, Jan 2, 2020 at 07:51 AM, J_Catlady wrote:
“potential”<<<
LOL, I’m not that presumptuous to be certain enough that a “potential” bug, is an “actual” bug. 


 

Exactly, so the adjective is either superfluous or confusing, depending on who is using it. It serves no purpose. 😊


On Jan 2, 2020, at 11:21 AM, Ken Kloeber via Groups.Io <KWKloeber@...> wrote:

>>>On Thu, Jan 2, 2020 at 07:51 AM, J_Catlady wrote:
“potential”<<<
LOL, I’m not that presumptuous to be certain enough that a “potential” bug, is an “actual” bug. 

--
J

Messages are the sole opinion of the author, especially the fishy ones.
My humanity is bound up in yours, for we can only be human together. - Desmond Tutu


Jeremy H
 

My thought - for what it's worth - is that the beta group is where I can raise an issue of Groups.io not doing what I expect/think it should/would like it to - which maybe due to a bug, a not yet requested or implemented feature, or just me not understanding things - without having to work out/guess which; and where this can be discussed to come up with a consensus of what 'correct' behaviour is (or should be). Resulting in bug report, feature request or explanation. And that Canny (or Trello before) is then essentially a (publicly visible/editable) 'to-do' list of feature requests. 

Jeremy

 


Chris Jones
 

On Fri, Dec 27, 2019 at 06:23 AM, Mark Fletcher wrote:
Please, let's limit this thread to only discussing the possibility of switching off Canny and using hashtags instead,

Mark; May I be so bold as to offer a few suggestions about this?

 

Insofar as any consensus has emerged it would appear to be for a single forum for the “development” of Groups.io. I can see why that in at least some circumstances you might wish or need to distinguish between Basic and Premium / Enterprise Owners but for the moment I am going to assume that you might be able to achieve this from the email addresses of the members of a Development Group; for the moment I will assume that this group will be beta in an ongoing form.

 

I think there are clear benefits to be had from changing the way Hashtags can be used on beta, perhaps to the point where every New Topic has to have at least one hashtag in its subject. However, I think there are major drawbacks to the way hashtags currently operate on beta, and I would suggest the following change.

 

Subscribers should only be able to Use Existing Hashtags. When I started putting this together 3 days ago there were 141 hashtags, which IMHO is simply silly. Now there are 146. Some are clearly near – duplicates of others; others have no obvious meaning and so on. (Some of the duplicates are the result of members misspelling something or using a plural where a singular already existed… or vice versa.) I submit that hashtags could and would be more effective if the list was drastically culled so that subscribers had a list of perhaps a couple of dozen to choose from; hashtags need only be high – level indicators of the subject area – they do not need to dig down into the weeds to pinpoint some precise area of Groups.io operation; if that were the case then every checkbox (etc) would need to have an associated hashtag that had to accompany a topic about it, and that would be absurd. If it were to be found that there was a clear omission from the list of hashtags then it would be the work of seconds to plug the gap, but users would not be able to do it. In addition, as you have already suggested there could be a number of Moderator Only “progress” hashtags that can be retrospectively added to a subject to show its status, ranging from perhaps #SorryButNo to #Done; I think this would be seriously beneficial.

 

I could continue with further suggestions the above is quite enough for now.

 

Chris


 

On Thu, Jan 16, 2020 at 8:47 AM Chris Jones via Groups.Io <chrisjones12=btinternet.com@groups.io> wrote:

 

I think there are clear benefits to be had from changing the way Hashtags can be used on beta, perhaps to the point where every New Topic has to have at least one hashtag in its subject. However, I think there are major drawbacks to the way hashtags currently operate on beta, and I would suggest the following change.

 


Agreed. I'm using the new App subgroup as a kind of test run for how I might change beta. You can read the group charter for App here:


Should that group continue to run well, I'll go through and prune most of the hashtags from Beta and change its' moderation. I agree that fewer hashtags is better.

Thanks,
Mark


Beth Weld
 

Whatever method is used, I think a concise list of changes that in line to be implemented would be extremely helpful.  We all ask for changes, but then we have no idea if the suggestion disappears into space or is actually under consideration for implementation. I would rather know that my change will never be implemented (for whatever reason; I'm not asking for and individual notification) than wonder.
Thanks
Beth Weld


Chris Jones
 

On Fri, Jan 17, 2020 at 12:00 PM, Beth Weld wrote:
I would rather know that my change will never be implemented (for whatever reason; I'm not asking for and individual notification) than wonder.
Obviously I cannot speak for Mark but an earlier post from him suggested the use of hashtags by him to show progress / status, and why I hinted at #SorryButNo and #Done!.

Chris


Bob Bellizzi
 

What I hear is that we all would like not only a system for inputting change requests but a method of tracking them and, when they are complete, a simple way to know they are completed.

That's all good but what's missing from it from my perspective are some other steps;

  • Each issue/bug  that Mark accepts could have the subject modified with a Hashtag of "Bug"  followed by a number that is a unique ID, e.g. "#Bug 5385", that indicates Mark has decided to  work on it.  That would give us simple way to keep track of what's in process and what's not.
  • When Mark considers the Bug/Change/Whatchamacallit complete, one or more authors of the request would be informed by Mark and allowed to perform Testing which would include a review summary of the proposed (changed) documentation
  • When complete the testers would issue a final Signoff reply, adding a #Complete or #Reject reply message.  (or whatever is decided for hashtags)
Documentation of how the change/feature works is desirable and a link to that documentation should become part of the information provided when the item is signed off by the testers.  
This doesn't preclude hashtag use for each  step but assigning a number makes searching/tracking progress much easier.

l'm sure Mark tests his changes but no one person or group can possibly cover every variation.
--

Bob Bellizzi


 

Whoops. Didn't mean to send that blank reply to Bob's message (I completely agree with everything he said).

Mark